(1) Background: The Cradle to Cradle Certified™ Products Program (C2C Certified for short) is a scheme for the certification of products that meet the criteria and principles of the Cradle to Cradle^® design approach. The objective of this paper is to characterize C2C Certified as an instrument for external communication in the context of environmental labeling and declarations. (2) Method: An eco-label characterization scheme consisting of 22 attributes was used to analyze C2C Certified. In addition, it was compared with the established standardization labeling typologies, namely Type I and Type III. This was further illustrated in an example within the building and construction sector. (3) Results: C2C Certified can be classified neither as a Type I, nor a Type III label. The main weaknesses of C2C Certified from a labeling perspective are: the generic, but not product-specific focus of the awarding criteria, the lack of a life cycle perspective, and the incompletely transparent stakeholder involvement procedure. Nevertheless, for certain attributes (e.g., the awarding format), C2C Certified provides practical solutions and goes beyond a Type I eco-label. Substantial similarities between Type III declarations and C2C Certified cannot be identified. (4) Conclusions: The main advantages and shortcomings of C2C Certified from a labeling perspective are pointed out. The approach shows similarities to a Type I eco-label, and efforts toward conformance with the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) labelling standards would result in improving its comparability, recognition, and robustness.

Concepts and tools supporting the design of environmentally friendly products (including materials, goods or services) have increased over the last years. The Cradle to Cradle Certified™ Products Program (C2CP) is one of these approaches. In this work, the ability of C2CP to reliably determine the environmental performance of products was analyzed through the application of a criteria-based assessment scheme. Additionally, to compare C2CP with three other already established tools (life cycle assessment, product environmental footprint and material flow analysis), the same criteria-based scheme was applied. Results show that C2CP is not scientifically reliable enough to assure that certified products actually have a good environmental performance. The most relevant shortcoming of C2CP relates to its limited assessment scope, due to the fact that neither the entire life cycle of the product nor all relevant environmental impacts are covered. Based on already established tools and their practical implementation recommendations for increasing the reliability of C2CP are provided.

Background: Anthropogenic impacts on the environment often result in loss of biodiversity. However, the effects of different parameters (such as soil pH) on biodiversity, which can be influenced by human activities, are poorly investigated on a global scale. The paper at hand proposes an approach to examine the relationship between biodiversity and several parameters, which can be anthropogenically influenced, on a major habitat scale. The goal is to describe the relationship of a single parameter and biodiversity by means of a mathematical model within one major habitat. Methods: Geographic information system (GIS) data for the parameters “mean soil pH”, “mean share of cultivated land” and “mean temperature in June” for the whole world were overlaid with GIS data for the ecoregions proposed by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). By means of the software ArcGIS 10.4 (Esri Deutschland GmbH, Kranzberg, Germany), an average parameter value per ecoregion for all considered parameters was determined. Moreover, the index “biodiversity status” was introduced and determined for every ecoregion by means of the indicators “number of species”, “number of endemic species”, and “mean share of grassland and forest” for each ecoregion. As all ecoregions can be assigned to one of the 14 major habitats (as defined by the WWF), a Kruskal–Wallis test was conducted to analyse whether the parameters and the biodiversity status’ differentiate between the 14 major habitats. A mathematical model, which depicts the impact of the parameters on biodiversity, was established by means of curve fitting. Results: The Kruskal–Wallis test reveals that a significant difference (p-value of 0.000) regarding the considered parameter and the biodiversity status exists between the different major habitats. By means of a regression analysis and curve fitting, mathematical models were developed which describe the relation of the biodiversity status and the parameters for 14 major habitats.