EPEAT Criteria

EPEAT Criteria

The EPEAT online Registry is the definitive online resource used by purchasers globally to find technology products that meet the EPEAT ecolabel criteria. The EPEAT ecolabel criteria are developed through a balanced voluntary consensus process.  Standards that the EPEAT Program has historically adopted were created by Standards Development Organizations (SDOs) employing balanced voluntary consensus processes.

GEC seeks to maximize the speed and efficiency of the EPEAT criteria development process while assuring that the resulting criteria are impactful and provide a wide cross-section of sustainable IT product options for purchasers.  To that end, GEC has created an innovative new process for developing criteria for the EPEAT ecolabel – the Dynamic Standards Development Process (DSDP).

EPEAT Criteria Development Process: Dynamic Standards Development Process (DSDP)

GEC has created an innovative new process for developing criteria for the EPEAT ecolabel – the Dynamic Standards Development Process (DSDP).

The DSDP was developed in direct response to multi-stakeholder feedback that the EPEAT criteria development process needed to be faster, address “priority” sustainability impacts and integrate product innovation and purchaser feedback through a “continuous maintenance” process.

The DSDP is focused on:

  • Impact: The DSDP begins with the development of a “State of Sustainability Research Packet” that uses scientific data to identify the current priority environmental and social impacts associated with the product category. This ensures that the process is driven by those impacts
  • Efficiency: From start to finish the DSDP is an 18-month process, significantly reducing the demand on participating organizations and thereby facilitating the participation of a broad base of diverse stakeholders
  • Innovation: By leveraging a continuous maintenance process, criteria are able to be updated to reflect product innovation and purchaser feedback

Dynamic, Iterative Process:   Modular development, experimental criteria and continuous maintenance are all an integral part of the DSDP process.  These are helpful to balance the speed and efficiency of the EPEAT criteria development process while assuring that the resulting criteria are impactful and provide a wide cross-section of sustainable IT product options for purchasers.

The DSDP is built on voluntary consensus processes, a cornerstone of the EPEAT label.

For more information: GEC’s DSDP overview & short explanatory webinar.

Voluntary Consensus Process

GEC works cooperatively with standards development organizations (SDOs) in their implementation of the Dynamic Standard Development Process.

The DSDP contains the five elements of a voluntary consensus process: openness, balance, due process, appeals process and consensus.  In addition, EPEAT criteria development processes must be transparent and seek participation by a broad and global range of stakeholders.

  1. Openness: The procedures or processes used are open to interested parties. Such parties are provided meaningful opportunities to participate in standards development on a non-discriminatory basis. The procedures or processes for participating in standards development and for developing the standard are transparent.
  2. Balance: The standards development process should be balanced. Specifically, there should be meaningful involvement from a broad range of parties, with no single interest dominating the decision-making.
  3. Due process: Due process shall include documented and publicly available policies and procedures, adequate notice of meetings and standards development, sufficient time to review drafts and prepare views and objections, access to views and objections of other participants, and a fair and impartial process for resolving conflicting views.
  4. Appeals process: An appeals process shall be available for the impartial handling of procedural appeals.
  5. Consensus is defined as general agreement, but not necessarily unanimity. During the development of consensus, comments and objections are considered using fair, impartial, open, and transparent processes.

Timing of Criteria Implementation