Green Building Certifications and Eco-Labels Strengthen Municipal Efforts Toward Tox-Free, Circular and Climate-Friendly Construction

A core focus of the NonHazCity3 (NHC3) project has been to help municipalities adopt more ambitious construction standards that go beyond national legislation—particularly regarding hazardous substances, circularity, and climate impacts. One of the key strategic solutions identified across the pilot cases was the use of green building certifications and eco-labels to guide safer material choices and improve overall sustainability in construction.

The project encouraged municipalities to apply certification systems and eco-labels as tools to support chemical safety, lifecycle assessment, and resource efficiency. During the piloting phase, green building certifications were implemented at four different levels, demonstrating flexible ways to integrate sustainability into real projects:

1. Full certification of the building
2. Design or renovation aligned with certification criteria without applying for full certification
3. Selective use of specific certification criteria
4. Use of certified materials

This flexibility allowed municipalities to tailor certification strategies to project size, budget, and priorities.

Tailored Approaches Across Municipalities

Pilot cities applied certification principles in different ways, each gaining valuable insight:

• Helsinki, Riga, and Tallinn explored eco-labels and certification criteria but found full building certification too costly for their budgets. Instead, they focused on using certified materials and adopting criteria inspired by labels such as Nordic Swan, EU Ecolabel, and Type 1 third-party certifications. Helsinki, in particular, proposed new guidelines for designers and contractors prioritizing certified materials and clear requirements linked to EU regulations.
• Holbæk, Denmark conducted an in-depth review of materials used in a DGNB Gold–certified kindergarten project. Although DGNB takes a broad sustainability approach, its chemical requirements are limited. Therefore, all materials were cross-checked using Sweden’s BVB database, ensuring compliance with low-chemical standards. This demonstrated how certification combined with chemical assessments can effectively drive toxin-free, circular, and climate-friendly construction.
• Stockholm, Sweden routinely uses certification systems such as Miljöbyggnad, BREEAM, and Nordic Swan to set ambitious building targets that exceed national and EU regulations. Stockholm emphasized that certifications provide a structured framework for material selection, improving planning and ensuring high environmental standards. Without certification, municipalities must set clear and specific requirements—vague sustainability goals are insufficient to guide suppliers toward truly circular and toxic-free solutions.

Driving Market Change Through Clear, Evidence-Based Requirements

Across all pilot cases, a key takeaway was that clear, justified guidelines grounded in certification criteria help strengthen market dialogue and increase acceptance among stakeholders. Eco-labels and certification standards create transparency, providing credibility and reassurance for both municipalities and suppliers.

By offering practical tools, case studies, and strategic approaches, NonHazCity3 supports municipalities and the construction sector in making informed decisions that reduce hazardous substances and promote a circular, climate-friendly built environment.

More detailed best-practice examples and strategic guidance can be found in NHC3 Output 2.2.

Programme Manual Online

Choose