NAVIGATING SUSTAINABILITY REGULATIONS: REDUCING THE IMPACT OF PPE

As global awareness of environmental issues grows, businesses are increasingly confronted with the dual challenge of achieving their sustainability goals while ensuring compliance with an ever-evolving regulatory landscape. One sector in which this is felt acutely is personal protective equipment (PPE) – how do you reduce environmental impact and maintain product efficacy?

We spoke to three sustainability opinion leaders to find out how we can all navigate and exceed increasingly stringent sustainability regulations, while also responding to market demands and keeping a big-picture view of Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) regulations and best practices.

Meet our experts

Note from the editor:
Most of the policies discussed here are focused on EU sustainability regulations. This is due to the EU’s role as a benchmark in setting rigorous environmental standards that often influence similar policies globally. While we use the EU framework as a foundational guide, we are equally attentive to sustainability regulations in other regions to ensure we’re aligned with the latest developments worldwide.

Integrating Regulatory Compliance with Sustainability Strategy to Meet Stakeholder Demands

In many industries, sustainability and regulatory compliance are often viewed as two sides of the same coin. While regulatory compliance serves as a foundational requirement for businesses, sustainability is increasingly becoming a competitive differentiator. As Guido puts it:

“When we talk about sustainability, there are a lot of initiatives being taken outside of the regulatory landscape. Take Ansell – for example – there are a lot of actions we’re taking related to reduction of packaging, energy recovery, etc. which are not yet governed under specific regulations.”

He also believes that customer demands add pressure to ensure companies drive their sustainability strategy further. In his view, regulations are difficult to enforce, and therefore not effective without the additional pressure from market and customers. It’s a perspective Indiana shares, as she describes two main drivers:

“One is governance and legislative – a few regulations are already in the pipeline or have been adopted – and we’re particularly looking at what’s happening in the EU. The other is market demand. The convergence between these two drivers means a better knowledge of what goes into our products.”

Nalise, who has worked with a number of businesses to understand, co-ordinate and enhance their sustainability strategies, believes there are further positive motivations for organisations to accelerate progress.

“I think many forward-thinking businesses are seeking to take action, because they've recognised there are so many competitive advantages to doing that. For some businesses that means responding to customer demand. For others it means recognising efficiencies and for some it’s all about brand – really strengthening or adapting that to meet market or investor demand.”

So it’s clear there are many reasons to accelerate sustainability strategy, but what does this action look like in practice? And how can businesses share their progress without falling into the greenwashing trap?

Taking action in environmental regulation - beyond carbon emissions

While actions to reduce carbon emissions are a significant aim of environmental regulations, they represent just one facet of a broader regulatory framework. Compliance encompasses various issues, including the use of hazardous chemicals in products, extended producer responsibility and accuracy of green claims.

All experts agree that greenwashing is a big problem in the industry – and the wider business landscape – welcoming the Green Claims Directive that will make businesses liable for greenwashing and misleading sustainability claims.

The rise in false or misleading environmental claims has prompted regulatory bodies to act decisively. In France, for instance, specific terms like ‘biodegradable’ and ‘environmentally friendly’ are discouraged as they’re considered vague and confusing. For businesses, this creates clearer guidelines, but brings its own set of challenges – especially for those operating across international markets.

Guido believes transparency and accountability are the real benefits of creating a unified greenwashing regulation, matching the stringent, evidence-based model France has adopted:

“It adds credibility to the company, and it also allows companies to feel very comfortable with disclosing their positioning transparently, based on an understanding that this is not about punishing companies.”

Additionally, emerging regulations such as the European Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) impose stringent traceability requirements on certain commodities, compelling businesses to ensure that their supply chains adhere to ESG regulations and best practice. Indiana explains what that means in the real world:

“[The EUDR] is a text that requires that, for commodities that are within the scope, we know exactly when and where this was produced, and whether any deforestation, or forest degradation activities, have taken place to produce that commodity. We need to have full traceability and make sure that our suppliers – or their suppliers – have met all the requirements of local legislation."

“It obliges EU operators to look at what's happening outside the boundaries of the EU, make sure that everything is in conformity – not only with environmental requirements, but also human rights, labour rights, the rights over the land and indigenous population rights.”

The EU has recently introduced an extra 12-month phasing-in period so now medium and large companies like Ansell must be EUDR-compliant by 30 December 2025 at the latest.

Nalise also makes the case for a more inquisitive view of the supply chain, encouraging businesses to look at the social impact of land use change.

“We need to start thinking about this from a social perspective – there are indigenous people in local communities who live in these areas, who rely on these pieces of land and rely on these ecosystems.”

The role of environmental labels and trusted accreditations

In an increasingly crowded marketplace, eco labels and certifications can provide businesses with a competitive edge. But to what extent can consumers rely on them?

Nalise identifies there are certain trusted certifications to give consumers peace of mind:

“Really having that direct relationship with suppliers and engaging with them directly plays a big part. But then you can also, of course, use certifications that have been around for a very long time. For example, FSC or Forest Stewardship Council. And what these are really doing is helping you to verify that the products you're purchasing are coming from a sustainable source.”

But it’s clear there is no single source of truth here. Again, it’s the lack of uniformity across industries and markets that stands out to Indiana:

“There is not a single, certification or label that we should be looking at that would be applicable across industries, or across the world, or even across EU member states at the moment. There are some indicators like Ecolabel and these kinds of things. But it's partial information and I’m not sure the consumer really understands.”

Perhaps third-party testing could help level the playing field and ensure businesses are meeting the same rigorous standards? Guido suggests it may not be so simple:

“We should also take into consideration that third-party testing could sometimes become more complex. You're going to need to spend money. You’re going to need to spend time. You’ll have to work with third parties to get claims certified.”

“You can’t implement something in a harmonised way at European level, through third party testing, if there is no enforcement, you’re still going to end up in the same situation where you have green claims that do not get substantiated.”

Why, then, does Ansell strive to go above and beyond its requirements? And how can we encourage other businesses to follow suit?

For Indiana, it comes down to our core mission – to protect people:

“We are in the safety business, so our incentive is always to look out for what can preserve the safety of our products or improve the safety of products, or the safety that it brings to the users. It’s certainly a market positioning that obliges us to follow and anticipate the trends.”

Guido adds that building trust and meeting customer expectations also support this ambition:

“As a world leader in PPE, we’re responsible for taking the lead and smaller organisations will always follow. Our consumers have their own objectives and they ask companies like Ansell to follow specific sustainability actions.”

In the wider market, what impact could a more harmonised approach to eco labels have? Nalise is clear that helping businesses and consumers make informed choices is hugely important.

“Creating eco label schemes and product passports is going to make it much easier for consumers, whether that's B2B or B2C, to verify claims. But also, we all want to make informed choices at the end of the day. So that's really where I see a lot of the change happening and where I see the importance of PPE fitting into sustainability practices.”

Maintaining compliance and the importance of continuous improvement

When it comes to PPE and safety we are all very familiar with the idea that compliance is a continuous process. Once a product is certified, you need to ensure that you’re consistently meeting the claims you’re making, and that you’re reviewing at regular intervals.

Nalise suggests gaining clear and strategic oversight prior to proceeding with more ambitious plans.

“Before you try to tick off every single box, just try and identify, in the first instance, what it is that you actually need to do [to remain compliant] – whether that's working with an expert or whether it’s in-house that you're sourcing that information – just try and make sure you understand what it is that you need to monitor.”

Predictions for the near future

Finally, what are the key trends and challenges likely to impact businesses in the near future? Here’s a short summary of their predictions:

Upcoming regulations:

• The European Commission is developing new regulations, including a waste regulation update and a Green Claims directive.
• Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is being expanded to include textiles (which will naturally have an impact on PPE production).

Digital product passports:

A digital product passport could enhance the recyclability, reusability, and repairability of PPE. This initiative aims to improve the environmental impact of PPE through better management of materials.

Substances of Very High Concern (SVHCs):

There is a focus on regulating substances of very high concern (SVHCs) in PPE. Some regions, like Indiana, are moving to restrict specific SVHCs, leading to potential derogations for certain PPE products.

Moving away from paper instructions:

In 2023, the European Commission (EC) removed the requirement that PPE products must be accompanied by printed instructions for use (IFUs), paving the way for manufacturers like Ansell to switch to fully digital IFUs.

Digital IFUs will save paper and reduce waste for everyone. This is important, given that at least 45,000 tonnes of paper are used to make paper IFUs for PPE in Europe each year.