Green-score: make eco-friendly choices easier

The Eco-score was developed by a French consortium and used in several European countries. Because the term ‘eco’ can cause confusion with ‘organic’ (‘bio’) in some of those countries, the consortium changed the name from Eco-score to Green-score.

Starting 1 November 2025, the Green-score will be introduced in the Xtra app, on the websites of our store brands, and in in-store communications. We expect the transition from Eco-score to Green-score to go smoothly, as the label's appearance remains the same.

The calculation method remains the same, but along with the name change, a new scale has been introduced. The 7-point scale (from A+ to F) is designed to better differentiate products based on their environmental impact.

Yes, this is a possibility. If suppliers provide information about additional pluses and minuses (e.g. origin of the ingredients, certification, packaging, ...), the Green-score becomes more accurate and often better.

At Colruyt Group, we actively want to further reduce the environmental impact of our private label products. Together with our suppliers, we want to take the right actions that will have the greatest impact on the environment.

Possibly. The method consists of various parameters such as the life cycle analysis and additional pluses and minuses.

• The life cycle analysis is retrieved from a database (Agribalyse) that was developed by order of the French government. The life cycle analyses in this database are performed using product category averages. We convert the value obtained from that database to a score out of 100, in line with the Green-score methodology.
• The possible additional pluses and minuses allow us to make interesting nuances at product level. We can refine that system, taking into account the reality and specificity of the Belgian market. We are looking to adjust the algorithms and are consulting with the French collective in this respect.

We thus adapt the calculation method to the Belgian reality, but at the same time, the life cycle analyses database is also periodically completed and adapted:

• including progressing insight in calculating environmental impact
• adjusting values for the many data points needed
• deleting specific product categories and adding new ones

The life cycle analyses (LCA) of many product categories are available in the French Agribalyse database. At present, there is no database available with specific data for Belgium.

Read more about the results of life cycle analyses here.

A life cycle analysis of a product takes into account the entire journey a product completes before it reaches you. At each stage – from raw materials and agriculture to sales and consumption – 16 different factors or 'impact categories' are evaluated. Climate change, water use, land use, particulate matter and acidification, etc.

The value of the life cycle analysis from the French database Agribalyse is based on product category averages. It is in other words not yet product-specific. This means that the same product from different brands will obtain the same value from this database. Through the use of the bonus-malus system however, part of the Green-score does become specific to each product. Moreover, a life cycle analysis gives limited consideration to the aspect biodiversity. This is also partly compensated by the bonus-malus points.

In all, there are five additional criteria:

• Does the product have certain sustainability labels or certificates?
• What is the origin of the ingredients in the product?
• What is the environmental policy of the producing country?
• What type of packaging does the product use? Is it recyclable?
• What impact does the product have on biodiversity?

Click here to read all about the criteria for the plus and minus points and how these are assessed.

Transport plays a role in the life cycle analysis, but it is also considered for the bonus-malus system, where bonus points can be awarded for the origin of each ingredient in the food product. The product's origin and how it is packed are aspects that are obviously more visible to consumers than, say, the way in which it was processed or what pesticides were used. The added value of the Green-score is that those factors are also given weight in the overall picture.

Agriculture, animal husbandry and processing usually have a greater impact. A product that comes from far away does not necessarily get a lower Green-score than the local variant. That may seem strange because you intuitively assume that transport and packaging have the greatest impact on the environment. That is not always the case.

On the page How do we calculate the Green-score, we have developed a case to demonstrate the impact of all the factors more clearly. By taking all factors into consideration in the Green-score, we get a more complete picture of the total impact. Colruyt Group obviously also continues its efforts to make all factors more sustainable, including transport and packaging.

That is unlikely. The Green-score and the Nutri-Score can easily be distinguished because of their different visual appearance. Due to the accessible design of both scores, the interpretation of both the nutritional values and the environmental impact of food products is quite straightforward. Effortlessly discover whether your products are healthy and ecologically sound, without having to decipher complicated texts and labels.

Because the food sector has a significant impact on the environment. Before your food reaches your plate, it has to be produced, processed, packaged, transported, refrigerated, etc. This requires a lot of energy and raw materials. In total, about one third of all climate impact is caused by producing and eating food. It ranges from climate change and biodiversity loss to disruption of the nitrogen cycle. By choosing sustainable food, we increase the ecological carrying capacity of the earth and deplete the available raw materials less quickly.

You can consult the Green-score of products on the websites of Colruyt, Bio-Planet and Collect&Go and in the Xtra-app.

No, not necessarily. Meat often has a greater CO2 impact than vegetable food because of the feed used in livestock farming, the agricultural area used, the greenhouse gases emitted through the digestive processes of ruminants, the use of pesticides, etc. But there are several criteria by which the Green-score of meat products can be significantly improved. The type of meat for example is a crucial factor, and the production location also has a considerable impact on the Green-score. Poultry for instance has a lower impact than beef. And locally produced meat will generally score better than meat from faraway regions. Local production indeed earns extra bonus points in the bonus-malus system. Although the life-cycle analysis remains the deciding factor of course.