I recently met with a mid-sized commercial furniture firm who is confused. While they are highly regarded and have strong margins, they are still trying to figure out what sustainability means to their customers and ultimately to them. So what’s to be done? My research, anecdotal experience and weekly discussions with architects and designers re-enforce the fact that there’s eco-label pollution and the situation isn’t getting any better. In full disclosure, I’ve been working with the level standard (levelcertified.org), so you should know where some of my sentiments lie. But I’m at something of a loss as well. At the end of the day the question ultimately has to be from the client’s perspective. What the majority of folks manufacturing products want to know is, “will the certification standard I choose to adopt help me deliver what my client needs to get his/her job done?”

And currently, there are a host of options, none of which are fully transparent. MBDC is an amazing standard but a costly one. SMART is another. Interestingly its web site no longer indicates that it has followed the ANSI process. It use to, but it wasn’t an approved ANSI standard. That resulted in some confusion and a number of questions from clients I’ve dealt with. Add to that the fact that there are three competing indoor air quality certification labels jockeying for attention and manufacturers business and you quickly realize that the issue is becoming more muddled.

I’m not sure if we're at a stage of complete label fatigue but I think we may be getting close. Recent conversations with two of the top A&D firms directors of sustainability have revealed that they are so tired of the confusion they’re building their own criteria.

The last thing we need in the world of responsible building is more confusion. It's time for a central labeling standard for products that's similar to what LEED has provided the building world.