Confused by sustainability claims? Use the Common Materials Framework
Key Takeaways
The Common Materials Framework (CMF) simplifies sustainability information by grouping certifications into five clear impact areas.
The CMF helps architects and designers understand labels, weigh trade-offs, and avoid overreliance on a single certification.
By giving the industry a shared evaluation approach, the CMF supports more consistent and transparent sustainability progress.
Third-party certifications were once a rarity. Today hundreds of certifications, rating systems, and building standards exist across environmental and human health.
Green Label Plus. Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). Cradle to Cradle. Each offers insight into specific aspects of material performance. In just a decade, LEED-certified projects increased by over 100,000. BREEAM, once a single UK‑based assessment, now operates globally across a full portfolio of standards.
The challenge? Increased adoption has made interpreting different sustainability claims more complex. The Common Materials Framework (CMF) offers a practical, shared way to understand this information.
What is the Common Materials Framework?
The CMF – developed by mindful MATERIALS in collaboration with building industry stakeholders including the American Institute of Architects (AIA) – aligns how we categorize, define, and measure material impact by organizing certifications and disclosures across five key impact areas:
- Climate Health
- Human Health
- Ecosystem Health
- Social Health & Equity
- Circular Economy
As Jay Lanier, Interface’s Head of Global Market Sustainability, puts it, “Well‑intentioned efforts to define sustainability have led to confusion rather than clarity. The CMF was created to address this growing complexity.”
In doing so, the CMF supports more consistent, meaningful sustainability efforts across the industry.
The CMF is your secret decoder ring for certifications,” explains Interface Director of Global Market Sustainability, Mikhail Davis. “It helps designers move beyond the assumption that a certified product does everything. No product is perfectly sustainable in every way.
How does the CMF simplify the process for architects and designers?
The impact of the CMF is already evident in how many firms are using it to make material decisions.
Interface Manager of Global Market Sustainability Carol Fudge sees it firsthand in her work supporting specification teams. “A&D firms are now organizing their questionnaires around the CMF,” she says, “because this is how our customers are starting to structure and understand material information.”
In practice, the five key impact areas help designers quickly understand what a certification actually covers. A low‑VOC certification, for example, provides insight into indoor air quality and human health.
- GREENGUARD Gold? Human health.
- Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs)? Climate health.
- FSC? Ecosystem health or circular economy.
“Many designers and specifiers are looking for coverage across at least two categories,” Fudge adds, signifying a more holistic approach to material performance. That clarity becomes even more valuable as programs like LEED v5 align more closely with CMF categories.
Lanier sees this alignment as a signal of broader industry momentum. “It’s creating a standardized global approach for the first time,” he says, “pointing to the importance of consistency across regions and supply chains.”
What about project trade-offs? Can the CMF help improve transparency?
Yes! Projects are nuanced. Priorities vary. And different building types emphasize different outcomes. While the CMF brings clarity to certifications, it also helps design teams understand what each label does and does not address.
As Davis points out, “While embodied carbon is top of mind right now, it doesn’t mean the chemicals you use in your products stopped being important.”
That broader perspective is intentional. As Lanier explains, the “CMF was designed to expand the gaze of people who feel like they’ve already figured out their version of sustainability and recognize that there are other criteria that matter too.”
What kind of progress is the CMF designed to support?
Let’s be clear. The CMF supports a more consistent approach to sustainability progress, but it’s not about finding a perfect product or defining a single “right” answer. “You shouldn’t be looking for the product that meets the CMF as if it’s a set of checkboxes,” says Davis. “It’s really about continuous improvement and avoiding trade-offs between the five impact areas anywhere we can.”
Lanier sees that mindset as central to the framework’s value. In addition to established priorities such as carbon, material health, and circularity, he notes that the CMF will also bring greater focus to social and ecosystem health. “Climate health is incredibly important, but the framework also helps show where other priorities are emerging.”
Why does a shared approach matter for industry-wide change?
For designers, the framework has practical value. “It’s going to make it easier to select the right products,” adds Fudge. As information becomes clearer, trade‑offs are more visible, and decisions are better grounded in context.
The CMF will also help align expectations. In turn, manufacturers can justify greater investment and long‑term change. “If we’re all asking the same questions, change in our supply chains should happen faster,” says Davis.
What does progress look like when sustainability information is easier to use and compare? Clear, meaningful progress toward better building materials.
References
- Green Building Consulting & Engineering, LEED by the Numbers: State of the Projects
- mindful MATERIALS, Common Materials Framework