Across industries, companies are facing increasing pressure to manage product data more responsibly. This is being driven not only by shifting consumer expectations but also by a rapidly evolving landscape of regulatory requirements. Governments and regional bodies are introducing rules that demand greater transparency, traceability, and accountability from businesses—especially when it comes to environmental claims.
As sustainability becomes a core expectation rather than a differentiator, organizations must adapt how they collect, manage, and share product information. Failure to do so can lead to reputational damage, legal consequences, and operational disruption. At the same time, there’s growing recognition that traditional approaches to managing product data may not be sufficient to meet today’s regulatory standards.
The Cost of Poor Data Governance
Many companies still manage sustainability and regulatory data through spreadsheets or loosely connected systems. This approach may seem manageable until a regulation demands audit-ready records or a customer requests transparency down to the component level. At that point, organizations often discover gaps they weren’t aware of—missing certifications, inconsistent naming conventions, or outdated sourcing data.
These gaps don’t just present operational challenges. They can become strategic liabilities. A single penalty under the Plastic Packaging Tax or a rejected shipment due to non-compliance with FSMA can disrupt supply chains, trigger public backlash, and erode brand credibility.
More broadly, the disconnect between what companies claim and what they can prove erodes consumer trust. As regulators and watchdogs become more aggressive in rooting out greenwashing, the cost of poor data governance will rise.
Sustainability-Driven Regulations
In recent years, regulators around the world have introduced laws that target misleading claims, unsustainable sourcing, and lack of data transparency. A few notable examples include:
1. EU Green Claims Directive (GCD)
This regulation is designed to address greenwashing—the practice of making unsubstantiated environmental claims. Under the proposed rules, companies will need to provide scientific evidence to support any green claim made in product marketing or labeling. Claims must also be independently verified.
Implication: Businesses must document the basis of their environmental assertions—lifecycle assessments, certifications, or comparative studies—before making them public.
2. EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR)
The EUDR focuses on ensuring that products placed on the EU market are not linked to deforestation or forest degradation. This includes goods like soy, palm oil, cocoa, coffee, rubber, and wood-based products. Companies must collect geolocation data for production plots and conduct due diligence on supply chains.
Implication: Organizations need to maintain granular records of sourcing origins, traceable back to individual farm or forest plots, and ensure their suppliers meet strict environmental criteria.
3. EU Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR) & Digital Product Passport (DPP)
The ESPR aims to improve the environmental sustainability of products throughout their lifecycle. One major component of this regulation is the Digital Product Passport—a standardized digital record that will accompany products and provide information on durability, repairability, environmental impact, and more.
Implication: Companies must prepare to collect and share detailed environmental data in machine-readable formats, often including end-of-life and recyclability information.
4. UK Plastic Packaging Tax (PPT)
This tax applies to plastic packaging that contains less than 30% recycled content. Businesses are required to track and report the composition of their packaging materials to avoid penalties.
Implication: Accurate documentation of material composition, weight, and recycled content becomes essential—not just for reporting but also for design and procurement teams making packaging decisions.
5. U.S. Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA)
Though more focused on food safety than sustainability, FSMA still reinforces the need for accurate, complete, and traceable product information. It requires companies to document sourcing, ingredients, allergens, and supplier compliance as part of preventive controls.
Implication: Any inconsistencies or missing product data could lead to compliance failures, product recalls, or import refusals.
How Product Information Management Systems Factor In
While the specifics of each regulation vary, a common thread is the emphasis on data—its accuracy, traceability, and accessibility. This is where product information management (PIM) systems become relevant.
PIM is not a compliance system by itself, nor is it designed to interpret regulatory mandates. However, it plays a supporting role in helping organizations manage and structure the data that regulations require. Here’s how:
- Centralized Access to Product Data
Many regulations require businesses to maintain consistent, accurate data across different product lines, regions, and channels. A centralized system helps prevent discrepancies between what’s claimed in one place and what’s documented elsewhere. - Governance and Control Over Data Entry
With compliance increasingly tied to the source of truth, uncontrolled or manual entry of product data can become a liability. Structured governance in how product data is collected, enriched, and approved can reduce risk—whether that’s in ingredient lists, packaging specs, or sustainability claims. - Support for Evidence Linking
Whether it’s proof of recycled content or a verified carbon footprint assessment, regulations like the Green Claims Directive require evidence. Having a system that allows linking or attaching supporting documents—such as certificates, test results, or third-party reports—to product entries can simplify the audit process. - Flexibility to Adapt to Evolving Requirements
One challenge with regulations is that they change. A scalable product data system allows businesses to add new fields, enforce new validations, or adjust data workflows without rebuilding their processes from scratch each time. - Better Collaboration Between Departments
Sustainability data rarely comes from a single team. Input might be needed from procurement (material origin), legal (claims review), R&D (product formulation), and marketing (customer communication). Systems that allow collaborative, role-based data management help ensure the final output aligns with both operational and compliance needs.
Preparing for a Compliance-Centric Future
The shift toward regulatory-driven product data is not temporary. It reflects a broader movement toward responsible production, ethical sourcing, and sustainable consumption. As digital product passports, circular economy policies, and ESG frameworks mature, the demands on product data will only grow.
Organizations need to be ready—not just with marketing narratives or policy statements, but with data that stands up to scrutiny. That requires new levels of coordination between legal, technical, operational, and sustainability teams.
While technology platform like PIM systems can help enable this, the real change lies in mindset: recognizing that product data is no longer just a marketing asset—it’s a regulatory asset, a compliance requirement, and, increasingly, a matter of public accountability.
Final Thoughts
In the coming years, regulations will not only ask companies what they claim about their products, but how they know it’s true. This shift demands more than reactive compliance—it calls for proactive governance, system support, and cross-functional ownership of product data.
PIM is one of the enablers in this journey—not a solution to every regulatory challenge, but a critical component in building a product information foundation that is structured, scalable, and ready for a future defined by transparency.