HIP Mark and Green Claims Compliance

Document type: licensee claims guidance.
Owner: Resourcehip Ltd (SC873386), Scotland.
Version: v1.0 — June 2026.
Companion documents: HIP Mark Brand Guidelines, HIP Mark Licence Agreement.

This page explains how the HIP Mark should be used in marketing and product claims under current green claims regulation. It applies to all licensees displaying the HIP Mark and to Resourcehip's own public communications.

Regulatory context

Two frameworks govern environmental claims on products sold to EU and UK consumers:

EU Green Claims Directive (adopted 2024; Member State transposition expected 2026–2027). The Directive requires environmental claims to be substantiated, specific, and backed by recognised scientific evidence. It is specifically sceptical of aggregated single-number environmental scores that obscure the underlying data, and introduces requirements for third-party verification of environmental labels used in business-to-consumer communications.

UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) Green Claims Code (2021). Six principles: claims must be truthful and accurate, clear and unambiguous, must not omit important information, comparisons must be fair, claims must consider the full life cycle, and claims must be substantiated.

Both frameworks target vague, misleading, or unsubstantiated environmental claims — terms like "eco-friendly", "green", or "sustainable" used without clear evidence.

What the HIP Score is — and what it is not

The HIP Score is a material resilience rating. It assesses how scarce, responsibly sourced, repairable, circular, and long-lived a product is from a materials and supply chain perspective, across seven independently assessed dimensions.

What the HIP Score is:

A transparent, multi-criteria assessment of material resilience with seven published dimension scores, each scored against a public rubric.
Built on an openly published methodology (version 1.5, licensed under CC BY-NC 4.0).
ISO 14024-informed in its multi-criteria and transparency approach — but not ISO 14024-certified. Independent governance, third-party audit, and formal periodic reassessment are on the Phase 2 roadmap (2026–2028).
A rating that publishes all underlying dimension breakdowns alongside the headline number, so a consumer or regulator can inspect the basis of the score.

What the HIP Score is not:

A carbon footprint, energy consumption rating, or lifecycle assessment (LCA) under ISO 14040/44.
A comprehensive sustainability certification. It does not cover labour practices beyond the Social and Environmental Impact dimension, transport emissions, or in-use energy consumption.
A guarantee of product performance or future supply conditions.
An endorsement of the manufacturer's wider business practices.

Licensees and Resourcehip must not represent the HIP Score as covering more than it does.

The aggregated-score question

The EU Green Claims Directive is sceptical of single-number environmental scores that obscure the underlying assessment. This is a legitimate concern: a single number can hide poor performance in one area behind strong performance in another.

Resourcehip addresses this directly:

Dimension transparency. Every published rating shows all seven dimension scores, not just the headline HIP Score. A consumer can see that a product scores well on Material Scarcity but poorly on Repairability — the aggregate does not hide this.
Published rubrics. The scoring criteria for each dimension are published as part of the methodology under CC BY-NC 4.0. The basis of the assessment is not proprietary.
Scope honesty. The HIP Score claims to measure material resilience. It does not use "sustainable" as a standalone claim — because material resilience is one input to sustainability, not the whole of it.
Conservative defaults. Category Baseline ratings use conservative assumed data, not optimistic estimates. The headline number is more likely to understate than overstate performance.

Licensees should understand this context. When citing the HIP Mark, the claim is specific: "this product has been independently assessed for material resilience." It is not: "this product is sustainable."

What licensees may say

When displaying the HIP Mark, licensees may make these types of claim:

"Rated [score]/10 for material resilience by Resourcehip."
"This product holds a HIP Mark at the [Standard / Silver / Gold] tier."
"Independently assessed across seven dimensions including material scarcity, supply chain risk, recyclability, repairability, social and environmental impact, product longevity, and regenerative potential."
"Full methodology published at resourcehip.com/methodology."
"Scored [X] on [specific dimension name]" — citing a single dimension score when it is accurate and shown in context.

These claims are specific, substantiated, and linked to a published methodology — consistent with both the EU Green Claims Directive and the UK CMA Green Claims Code.

What licensees must not say

The following claims are prohibited under the HIP Mark Licence Agreement and may create regulatory exposure under green claims legislation.

Vague or unsubstantiated environmental claims

"This product is sustainable" — citing only the HIP Mark. The HIP Score does not assess sustainability comprehensively.
"Eco-friendly" or "green" — based solely on the HIP Mark. These are the type of vague claims both regulatory frameworks specifically target.
"Environmentally certified" or "certified sustainable." The HIP Mark is a rating, not a certification under ISO 14024 or any other accreditation body.

Overstated or misleading claims

Claiming or implying that the HIP Score covers carbon footprint, lifecycle emissions, transport impact, or in-use energy consumption. It does not.
Representing a Standard or Silver tier as equivalent to Gold, or using Gold-tier language or colours without holding a Gold rating.
Claiming the product has been "certified" by Resourcehip. Resourcehip issues ratings under a published methodology — it does not operate a certification scheme.
Implying that the HIP Mark endorses the manufacturer's wider business, ethics, or environmental practices beyond the seven assessed dimensions.

Comparative claims

Comparing a HIP-rated product directly with a named competitor product. The methodology scores against a category baseline, not against other brands. Direct brand comparison is prohibited under the HIP Mark Licence Agreement and raises risk under the CMA Green Claims Code principle that comparisons must be fair and meaningful.

Claims beyond the assessed product

Applying the HIP Mark or citing the HIP Score for products, SKUs, or product lines not covered by the specific verified rating.
Extending the HIP Mark to the manufacturer's corporate identity rather than the assessed product.

Regenerative Index claims

The Regenerative Index (RI) runs from −10 to +10 and uses its own tier system: Depleting, Extractive, Renewable, Restorative, Regenerative. These tier names are canonical and must not be substituted.

A negative RI score is normal for manufactured products relying on finite extracted materials. Licensees must not obscure or omit a negative RI when citing dimension breakdowns.
"Regenerative" has a specific meaning in the HIP methodology (RI ≥ +6.0). It must not be used loosely to describe a product that does not hold a Regenerative RI tier.
Claiming "regenerative" status based on a high overall HIP Score — without the product holding an RI score in the Regenerative tier — is misleading and prohibited.

Practical guidance for licensees

Lead with specifics. "Rated 7.8/10 for material resilience" is compliant. "Sustainable choice" is not.
Link to the full rating. Every claim citing the HIP Mark should direct the reader to the published rating page on resourcehip.com where all seven dimension scores are visible.
Use the attribution line. The Brand Guidelines require an attribution line wherever the Mark appears with explanatory copy. This substantiates the claim.
Do not extrapolate. The rating assesses what is in the methodology. Do not extend the claim beyond the seven dimensions.
Review regularly. Ratings are reviewed annually and fully reassessed at least every two years, or sooner on defined triggers. Claims must reflect the current rating, not a historical one.

Resourcehip's own obligations

Resourcehip holds itself to the same standard. Our website copy, press releases, and public communications:

Do not use "sustainable" as a standalone product descriptor.
Do not compare rated brands against each other.
Publish the full methodology openly.
Acknowledge the scope limitations of the HIP Score.
Acknowledge that HIP is ISO 14024-informed, not ISO 14024-certified, and publish the Phase 2 roadmap toward independent governance.

Reporting concerns

If you believe a licensee or Resourcehip is making a claim that does not comply with this guidance, report it to mark@resourcehip.com with a description of the claim, the location (URL, photograph, or sample), and the date observed.

This page is guidance, not legal advice. Licensees are responsible for ensuring their own claims comply with all applicable laws and regulations in the markets where they operate. Resourcehip recommends that licensees seek independent legal advice on green claims compliance.

HIP Mark and HIP Score are trade marks of Resourcehip Ltd. The HIP Score methodology is published under Creative Commons CC BY-NC 4.0. The HIP Mark is proprietary and may not be used without a current licence.

Resourcehip Ltd · Office 90, Alloa Business Centre, Whins Road, Alloa, FK10 3SA · Company number SC873386 · hello@resourcehip.com