History
How did the concept of Compass-to-Balanced-Ecology evolve?
At the beginning, the question was: Why are customers so reluctant to buy products that are proven to be good for the environment? Such as food with a ‘Bio certificate’ or solar systems (solar thermal or photovoltaic) that reduce CO2 emissions.
Next question: Why is it so difficult to sort waste correctly into recyclables and residual waste?
Possible answers: because there is a lack of information about which category the individual materials belong to. Because there are hardly any standardized disposal systems at the state and federal level. Why should there not be similar concepts throughout Europe / America / Asia / Africa? The products are also sold worldwide. Why then is the disposal worldwide so unsystematic, differentiated and partial? How much potential recyclable material is lost here? Why is plastic waste exported by containers in order to end up in uncontrolled landfills with the associated environmental damage and is not recycled as implied by the ‘Green Dot’?
If we consider the dimension of the problems (extent: worldwide; financial need: unknown, but immense; know-how and innovation: worldwide and ongoing), the question arises to what extent politics, companies or consumers can cope with these challenges in the way they have done so far. UN Secretary General António Guterres confirms: “Climate change is out of control” despite the 27 UN conferences since 1995 (ABC Seville, 8th July 2023). One thing at least seems plausible: if everyone joins forces, a critical mass will be reached more quickly to ACHIEVE ecological improvements. But this requires a method that is able to bring together different interests (such as CO2 reduction, resource efficiency, support for SDG’s goals), while supporting diversity and variety of approaches and innovations.
From these considerations and with its requirements, CtoBEE (“COMPASS to Balanced Ecology on Earth”) has emerged. This method is based on the product as the lowest common denominator. All players who come into touch with it during its existence are involved and continuously tuned to ecological sustainability.
CtoBEE orients the manufacturer about his technical and organizational possibilities to produce more ecologically, as well as the distributor. The consumer has a double role: on the one hand, CtoBEE offers ecologically oriented information about the product, for an appropriate purchase decision. On the other hand, the consumer gives direct feedback to those involved in the product cycle (production, trade, disposal/recycling) by his purchase. In addition, he is invited to give his evaluation and / or comments on the product. Thus, we close the information loop: the end consumer can control the production. A system in this form covering all ecologically relevant products does not yet exist. The following table compares the best-known systems with CtoBEE.
Focus on an ideal product cycle with cero waste and cero emission.*
CtoBEE – distinguishing features, comparison
Similar approach to CtoBEE. Missing among others:
a) Communication of product quality to consumers.
b) Concept to reach ‘critical mass’.
c) Feed-back loop to be able to improve continuously.
Characteristics, Definition
Emissions trading is a market-based instrument of environmental policy for reducing CO2 emissions. It involves the creation of economic incentives to reduce pollutant emissions. Emissions trading systems for CO2 and other greenhouse gases as a form of CO2 pricing are used in the European Union, China and other countries as an important instrument to curb climate change.*
Ultimately, the manufacturer obligated by law to purchase the certificates must pass on the additional costs to the product and thus to the consumer
CtoBEE – distinguishing features, comparison
CtoBEE is not only focused on reducing CO2 emissions, generally ‘climate change’. Among other things, there is a lack of a) standardized forms of communication from companies to customers about CO2 reduction measures, b) simple payment flows c) earmarking of CO2 levies for climate protection d) no system consistency, as too many exceptions are approved e) competitive disadvantages due to regulatory, non-homogeneous market intervention on international level.
Characteristics, Definition
CO2 footprint, is a measure of the total amount of carbon dioxide emissions or other greenhouse gases caused directly and indirectly by activities or generated during the life stages of a product.
The term carbon footprint gained general awareness through an advertising campaign by the oil and gas company BP in 2004 to shift the perception of responsibility for global warming from the fossil fuel industry to the individual consumer.*
CtoBEE – distinguishing features, comparison
Just like CtoBEE, this approach incorporates individual responsibility as a key aspect. However, CtoBEE is not limited to the carbon footprint. Nevertheless, this approach is used in categories 1, 2 and 3 (production, trade, consumer), among others.
Characteristics, Definition
An eco-label is a seal of quality and verification that is used to identify products from ecological agriculture.
The authorization to use an eco-label is regulated by the issuer and is linked to compliance with certain standards and requirements. Compliance with the criteria is to be ensured by a documentation obligation as well as regular taking and examination of product samples. In the European Union (EU), compliance with the regulations for all eco-products is monitored by the respective responsible eco-control body, and if an association seal is used, additionally – or exclusively – by the respective farming association.*
CtoBEE – distinguishing features, comparison
CtoBEE includes these types of certificates in its categories 1 and 3. However, CtoBEE can include other quality attributes and aspirations of the market, society or policy such as the SDGs.
Characteristics, Definition
Nutri-Score is a front-of-package food labeling system that allows consumers to easily and quickly assess nutritional quality by simplifying the interpretation of back-of-package nutrition labeling. Its implementation is expected to encourage manufacturers to improve the nutritional composition of their products. It consists of a 5-color logo associated with letters describing 5 classes of nutritional quality, from dark green for the best quality (letter A) to red (letter E) for the worst.
Nutri-Score applies only to packaged processed products.
As long as the European regulation does not decide on its obligatory nature, the Nutri-Score labeling system is voluntary for manufacturers. In 2020, it has been adopted by many European Union countries, including Spain.*
CtoBEE – distinguishing features, comparison
CtoBEE integrates this systematic approach insofar as it pursues ecological goals. The Nutri-Score is focused on food quality and support for a healthy diet. Here, there is only a certain overlap to balanced ecology. Nevertheless, the information of the Nutri-Score can be provided identically under CtoBEE 3 (consumer). The color coding also corresponds to the initial approach of CtoBEE in 2015.
Characteristics, Definition
With Yuka you can scan the labels of your food and cosmetic products. Yuka analyzes food products, cosmetic and hygiene products and explains the evaluation of each product in a detailed product sheet. It is possible to access product compositioninformation to understand the product evaluation. In case of scanning mediocre or bad products, Yuka independently recommends similar and better products for health. **)
CtoBEE – distinguishing features, comparison
Yuka has solved the way the customer is informed very advantageously and comfortably. Many of the app’s features meet CtoBEE’s objectives in terms of category 3 (consumers). Yuka has succeeded in motivating the individual consumer to get a specific product analysis via the product barcode. If the product is not yet recorded in the database, the customer photographs the barcode and the list of ingredients, uploads them and a short time later the evaluation is available. Currently, Yuka can be seen as a benchmark for certain product groups in Europe.
CtoBEE is open to all products that can contribute to a balanced ecology.
*) Source: Wikipedia
**) Source: https://yuka.io/
Some general remarks on the tasks of CtoBEE:
| Current situation | Approach with CtoBEE |
|---|---|
| No standardized information on the ecological impact of products. Large number of certificates makes it difficult to get an overview. The large number of certificates discourage the client because he/she can hardly summarize the information for his personal purchase decision. | CtoBEE: standardized labeling from 0 – 10, with anything above 5.9 sustainably improving ecology. |
| Companies cannot communicate their investment for activities like CO2 reduction, improvement of ecology, to the customer in a standardized way via the product. The ROI of these investments is uncertain or, in the worst case, incalculable. | CtoBEE certifies the producer under ecological aspects, whereby existing certifications are integrated. The result in the form of a number, enters the final product certification. Via the product code, the customer can obtain information about the details of the certification. The purchase of this product and potential personal feedback from the customer directly to the manufacturer are related to previous investment decisions and impact future ones. They increase planning reliability. |
| Recycling, disposal: this part of the product’s life has not yet been systematically included in a product evaluation. There is a lack of standardized ecological criteria that relate both to the product and to the local disposal companies. | CtoBEE wants to develop criteria under ecological aspects with pilot companies and universities, which aim at a medium and long-term balance at least. This may include e.g. indications for a standardized (Europe-wide) raw material separation, according to the trade routes. |
| Top-down approach: politics is expected to deliver ‘solutions’. It is underestimated that this is now a global problem. Politics acts regionally, nationally and limited to government time. The more extensive the agreements to be made on an international level, the longer the process takes. Especially ‘TIME’ is a critical factor. It is also overlooked that the financial resources of states are more and more limited. If a state goes bankrupt, who still cares about ecology. | Bottom-up approach: CtoBEE is designed to involve as simple as possible many market actors and communicate with each other directly or indirectly.
It intends to reach a ‘critical mass’ of stakeholders as quickly as possible to establish a favorable ecological trend. With CtoBEE, business would have the chance to act proactively and purposefully. It supports efficient resource allocation. Consumers would have the chance to actively contribute to the goals they have so far demanded from politicians with every purchase decision they make themselves. Politicians could limit themselves to subsidiary measures, in line with a successful CtoBEE system. Does not burden the state’s financial arcs. |
| Current situation | Approach with CtoBEE |
|---|---|
| No standardized information on the ecological impact of products. The large number of certificates discourage the client because he/she can hardly summarize the information for his personal purchase decision. | CtoBEE: standardized labeling from 0 – 10, with anything above 5.9 sustainably improving ecology. |
| Companies cannot communicate their investment for activities like CO2 reduction, improvement of ecology, to the customer in a standardized way via the product. The ROI of these investments is uncertain or, in the worst case, incalculable. | CtoBEE certifies the producer under ecological aspects, whereby existing certifications are integrated. The result in the form of a number, enters the final product certification. Via the product code, the customer can obtain information about the details of the certification. The purchase of this product and potential personal feedback from the customer directly to the manufacturer are related to previous investment decisions and impact future ones. They increase planning reliability. |
| Recycling, disposal: this part of the product’s life has not yet been systematically included in a product evaluation. There is a lack of standardized ecological criteria that relate both to the product and to the local disposal companies. | CtoBEE wants to develop criteria under ecological aspects with pilot companies and universities, which aim at a medium and long-term balance at least. This may include e.g. indications for a standardized (Europe-wide) raw material separation, according to the trade routes. |
| Top-down approach: politics is expected to deliver ‘solutions’. It is underestimated that this is now a global problem. Politics acts regionally, nationally and limited to government time. The more extensive the agreements to be made on an international level, the longer the process takes. Especially ‘TIME’ is a critical factor. It is also overlooked that the financial resources of states are more and more limited. If a state goes bankrupt, who still cares about ecology. |
Bottom-up approach: CtoBEE is designed to involve as simple as possible many market actors and communicate with each other directly or indirectly. It intends to reach a ‘critical mass’ of stakeholders as quickly as possible to establish a favorable ecological trend. With CtoBEE, business would have the chance to act proactively and purposefully. It supports efficient resource allocation. Consumers would have the chance to actively contribute to the goals they have so far demanded from politicians with every purchase decision they make themselves. Politicians could limit themselves to subsidiary measures, in line with a successful CtoBEE system. Does not burden the state’s financial arcs. |
Some general remarks on the tasks of CtoBEE:
| Current situation | Approach with CtoBEE |
|---|---|
| No standardized information on the ecological impact of products. Large number of certificates makes it difficult to get an overview. The large number of certificates discourage the client because he/she can hardly summarize the information for his personal purchase decision. | CtoBEE: standardized labeling from 0 – 10, with anything above 5.9 sustainably improving ecology. |
| Companies cannot communicate their investment for activities like CO2 reduction, improvement of ecology, to the customer in a standardized way via the product. The ROI of these investments is uncertain or, in the worst case, incalculable. | CtoBEE certifies the producer under ecological aspects, whereby existing certifications are integrated. The result in the form of a number, enters the final product certification. Via the product code, the customer can obtain information about the details of the certification. The purchase of this product and potential personal feedback from the customer directly to the manufacturer are related to previous investment decisions and impact future ones. They increase planning reliability. |
| Recycling, disposal: this part of the product’s life has not yet been systematically included in a product evaluation. There is a lack of standardized ecological criteria that relate both to the product and to the local disposal companies. | CtoBEE wants to develop criteria under ecological aspects with pilot companies and universities, which aim at a medium and long-term balance at least. This may include e.g. indications for a standardized (Europe-wide) raw material separation, according to the trade routes. |
| Top-down approach: politics is expected to deliver ‘solutions’. It is underestimated that this is now a global problem. Politics acts regionally, nationally and limited to government time. The more extensive the agreements to be made on an international level, the longer the process takes. Especially ‘TIME’ is a critical factor. It is also overlooked that the financial resources of states are more and more limited. If a state goes bankrupt, who still cares about ecology. |
Bottom-up approach: CtoBEE is designed to involve as simple as possible many market actors and communicate with each other directly or indirectly. It intends to reach a ‘critical mass’ of stakeholders as quickly as possible to establish a favorable ecological trend. With CtoBEE, business would have the chance to act proactively and purposefully. It supports efficient resource allocation. Consumers would have the chance to actively contribute to the goals they have so far demanded from politicians with every purchase decision they make themselves. Politicians could limit themselves to subsidiary measures, in line with a successful CtoBEE system. Does not burden the state’s financial arcs. |
| Current situation | Approach with CtoBEE |
|---|---|
| No standardized information on the ecological impact of products. Large number of certificates makes it difficult to get an overview. The large number of certificates discourage the client because he/she can hardly summarize the information for his personal purchase decision. | CtoBEE: standardized labeling from 0 – 10, with anything above 5.9 sustainably improving ecology. |
| Companies cannot communicate their investment for activities like CO2 reduction, improvement of ecology, to the customer in a standardized way via the product. The ROI of these investments is uncertain or, in the worst case, incalculable. | CtoBEE certifies the producer under ecological aspects, whereby existing certifications are integrated. The result in the form of a number, enters the final product certification. Via the product code, the customer can obtain information about the details of the certification. The purchase of this product and potential personal feedback from the customer directly to the manufacturer are related to previous investment decisions and impact future ones. They increase planning reliability. |
| Recycling, disposal: this part of the product’s life has not yet been systematically included in a product evaluation. There is a lack of standardized ecological criteria that relate both to the product and to the local disposal companies. | CtoBEE wants to develop criteria under ecological aspects with pilot companies and universities, which aim at a medium and long-term balance at least. This may include e.g. indications for a standardized (Europe-wide) raw material separation, according to the trade routes. |
| Top-down approach: politics is expected to deliver ‘solutions’. It is underestimated that this is now a global problem. Politics acts regionally, nationally and limited to government time. The more extensive the agreements to be made on an international level, the longer the process takes. Especially ‘TIME’ is a critical factor. It is also overlooked that the financial resources of states are more and more limited. If a state goes bankrupt, who still cares about ecology. |
Bottom-up approach: CtoBEE is designed to involve as simple as possible many market actors and communicate with each other directly or indirectly. It intends to reach a ‘critical mass’ of stakeholders as quickly as possible to establish a favorable ecological trend. With CtoBEE, business would have the chance to act proactively and purposefully. It supports efficient resource allocation. Consumers would have the chance to actively contribute to the goals they have so far demanded from politicians with every purchase decision they make themselves. Politicians could limit themselves to subsidiary measures, in line with a successful CtoBEE system. Does not burden the state’s financial arcs. |
| Current situation | Approach with CtoBEE |
|---|---|
| No standardized information on the ecological impact of products. Large number of certificates makes it difficult to get an overview. The large number of certificates discourage the client because he/she can hardly summarize the information for his personal purchase decision. | CtoBEE: standardized labeling from 0 – 10, with anything above 5.9 sustainably improving ecology. |
| Companies cannot communicate their investment for activities like CO2 reduction, improvement of ecology, to the customer in a standardized way via the product. The ROI of these investments is uncertain or, in the worst case, incalculable. | CtoBEE certifies the producer under ecological aspects, whereby existing certifications are integrated. The result in the form of a number, enters the final product certification. Via the product code, the customer can obtain information about the details of the certification. The purchase of this product and potential personal feedback from the customer directly to the manufacturer are related to previous investment decisions and impact future ones. They increase planning reliability. |
| Recycling, disposal: this part of the product’s life has not yet been systematically included in a product evaluation. There is a lack of standardized ecological criteria that relate both to the product and to the local disposal companies. | CtoBEE wants to develop criteria under ecological aspects with pilot companies and universities, which aim at a medium and long-term balance at least. This may include e.g. indications for a standardized (Europe-wide) raw material separation, according to the trade routes. |
| Top-down approach: politics is expected to deliver ‘solutions’. It is underestimated that this is now a global problem. Politics acts regionally, nationally and limited to government time. The more extensive the agreements to be made on an international level, the longer the process takes. Especially ‘TIME’ is a critical factor. It is also overlooked that the financial resources of states are more and more limited. If a state goes bankrupt, who still cares about ecology. |
Bottom-up approach: CtoBEE is designed to involve as simple as possible many market actors and communicate with each other directly or indirectly. It intends to reach a ‘critical mass’ of stakeholders as quickly as possible to establish a favorable ecological trend. With CtoBEE, business would have the chance to act proactively and purposefully. It supports efficient resource allocation. Consumers would have the chance to actively contribute to the goals they have so far demanded from politicians with every purchase decision they make themselves. Politicians could limit themselves to subsidiary measures, in line with a successful CtoBEE system. Does not burden the state’s financial arcs. |
| Current situation | Approach with CtoBEE |
|---|---|
| No standardized information on the ecological impact of products. Large number of certificates makes it difficult to get an overview. The large number of certificates discourage the client because he/she can hardly summarize the information for his personal purchase decision. | CtoBEE: standardized labeling from 0 – 10, with anything above 5.9 sustainably improving ecology. |
| Companies cannot communicate their investment for activities like CO2 reduction, improvement of ecology, to the customer in a standardized way via the product. The ROI of these investments is uncertain or, in the worst case, incalculable. | CtoBEE certifies the producer under ecological aspects, whereby existing certifications are integrated. The result in the form of a number, enters the final product certification. Via the product code, the customer can obtain information about the details of the certification. The purchase of this product and potential personal feedback from the customer directly to the manufacturer are related to previous investment decisions and impact future ones. They increase planning reliability. |
| Recycling, disposal: this part of the product’s life has not yet been systematically included in a product evaluation. There is a lack of standardized ecological criteria that relate both to the product and to the local disposal companies. | CtoBEE wants to develop criteria under ecological aspects with pilot companies and universities, which aim at a medium and long-term balance at least. This may include e.g. indications for a standardized (Europe-wide) raw material separation, according to the trade routes. |
| Top-down approach: politics is expected to deliver ‘solutions’. It is underestimated that this is now a global problem. Politics acts regionally, nationally and limited to government time. The more extensive the agreements to be made on an international level, the longer the process takes. Especially ‘TIME’ is a critical factor. It is also overlooked that the financial resources of states are more and more limited. If a state goes bankrupt, who still cares about ecology. |
Bottom-up approach: CtoBEE is designed to involve as simple as possible many market actors and communicate with each other directly or indirectly. It intends to reach a ‘critical mass’ of stakeholders as quickly as possible to establish a favorable ecological trend. With CtoBEE, business would have the chance to act proactively and purposefully. It supports efficient resource allocation. Consumers would have the chance to actively contribute to the goals they have so far demanded from politicians with every purchase decision they make themselves. Politicians could limit themselves to subsidiary measures, in line with a successful CtoBEE system. Does not burden the state’s financial arcs. |
| Current situation | Approach with CtoBEE |
|---|---|
| No standardized information on the ecological impact of products. Large number of certificates makes it difficult to get an overview. The large number of certificates discourage the client because he/she can hardly summarize the information for his personal purchase decision. | CtoBEE: standardized labeling from 0 – 10, with anything above 5.9 sustainably improving ecology. |
| Companies cannot communicate their investment for activities like CO2 reduction, improvement of ecology, to the customer in a standardized way via the product. The ROI of these investments is uncertain or, in the worst case, incalculable. | CtoBEE certifies the producer under ecological aspects, whereby existing certifications are integrated. The result in the form of a number, enters the final product certification. Via the product code, the customer can obtain information about the details of the certification. The purchase of this product and potential personal feedback from the customer directly to the manufacturer are related to previous investment decisions and impact future ones. They increase planning reliability. |
| Recycling, disposal: this part of the product’s life has not yet been systematically included in a product evaluation. There is a lack of standardized ecological criteria that relate both to the product and to the local disposal companies. | CtoBEE wants to develop criteria under ecological aspects with pilot companies and universities, which aim at a medium and long-term balance at least. This may include e.g. indications for a standardized (Europe-wide) raw material separation, according to the trade routes. |
| Top-down approach: politics is expected to deliver ‘solutions’. It is underestimated that this is now a global problem. Politics acts regionally, nationally and limited to government time. The more extensive the agreements to be made on an international level, the longer the process takes. Especially ‘TIME’ is a critical factor. It is also overlooked that the financial resources of states are more and more limited. If a state goes bankrupt, who still cares about ecology. |
Bottom-up approach: CtoBEE is designed to involve as simple as possible many market actors and communicate with each other directly or indirectly. It intends to reach a ‘critical mass’ of stakeholders as quickly as possible to establish a favorable ecological trend. With CtoBEE, business would have the chance to act proactively and purposefully. It supports efficient resource allocation. Consumers would have the chance to actively contribute to the goals they have so far demanded from politicians with every purchase decision they make themselves. Politicians could limit themselves to subsidiary measures, in line with a successful CtoBEE system. Does not burden the state’s financial arcs. |