In February of this year, we gave you several diamond discussions regarding the use of the terms “created,” “lab/laboratory grown,” and “synthetic.” (see … and in Diamond News … )
And we are back with an update – from France.
The French governmental department of Competition, Consumer Affairs, and Fraud Prevention (DGCCRF) has just released a response to synthetic diamond manufacturers who have requested a reversal of the declaration pronounced earlier this year that the phrase “lab/laboratory grown” cannot be used to describe and market synthetic gem quality diamond.
Spoiler alert: The French Consumer Affairs agency has said, “No. No reversal.” BUT…. more importantly, they tell us why! And this is definitely worth reading!
Response published on June 3, 2025
After the February announcement, (see … and in Diamond News … ) a synthetic diamond producer formally petitioned the French Consumer Affairs Office to reconsider its rejection of the term “laboratory grown.”
That request was brought into the legislature* by Olivia Grégoire, a member of the French National Assembly with a strong background in business and economic policy. Her written question—published on March 25, 2025 (see below)—was submitted in direct response to concerns raised by the synthetic diamond manufacturer, part of a broader industry effort to “modernize terminology.”
*In France, it is standard parliamentary practice for deputies to submit questions on behalf of constituents or stakeholders, even if they don’t personally endorse the position.
The Question
(We’ve edited so you can read just the important parts.)
Trade and Crafts
Revision of the Terminology for Synthetic Diamonds
No. 5268 – March 25, 2025 – Portions of the question delivered by Ms. Olivia Grégoire…
… Paragraph 4 of Article 4 of the decree [from February this year] requires the use of the adjective “synthetic” to designate stones whose manufacture, wholly or partially caused by human intervention, reproduces the physical, chemical, and crystalline structure of natural stones. This broad definition notably includes diamonds produced in laboratories.
The Directorate General launched a survey to gather opinions on the possible integration of the terminology “laboratory-created diamond,” in contrast to the current term “synthetic diamond.”
In the question: “The latter is perceived by some as devaluing in the eyes of consumers and could disadvantage French stakeholders compared to foreign competitors using the term “laboratory-grown diamond.”
The question goes on to support alternative labels. “Laboratory diamond production, in fact, generates remarkable positive externalities. By drastically reducing the ecological footprint associated with mining, this production method aligns perfectly with France’s ambitions for ecological transition and environmental responsibility.”
“Reopening this debate would not only support a developing industry but also strengthen the competitiveness of French products….”
Ms. Grégoire therefore asks … whether an adaptation allowing the use of the term “laboratory-created diamond” might be considered, in order to better reflect technological progress and meet consumer expectations, while preserving transparency and fairness in commercial transactions.“
Survey Sent
What happened next was to gather written consultations from all professionals and consumer associations, considering 1.) the appropriateness of the official term “synthetic” for gemstones created wholly or partially by human intervention, and 2.) proposing an alternative expression such as “lab-created.”
There were close to forty economic responses, including from representative professional organizations.
The Results – No Change! No to “Lab-Created”
The tally of the survey responses showed that a majority of those questioned favored keeping the mandatory use of “synthetic diamond” unchanged.
Tap here to read the Question – and the public Response – in its entirety in French.
[Find the English translation below]
Not Just Diamond
It should be noted that the decree—mandating the use of the term “synthetic”—applies equally to all gemstones and pearls, without distinction. Diamonds cannot be treated differently from rubies, emeralds, or any other gem material.
With Regards to Environmentally Responsible – Doubtful
“Furthermore, from an environmental perspective, the claim that synthetic diamond production is more virtuous than mined diamond production is disputed, particularly due to the highly energy-intensive processes involved in industrial facilities used to produce synthetic diamonds (which cannot simply be made in “laboratories”). In any case, conducting a comparative analysis of the two supply chains (synthetic vs. natural diamonds) from an environmental standpoint would be extremely complex, as it would require weighing all negative externalities—not just the direct impacts of mineral excavation.
In Conclusion
Finally, since autumn 2023, there have been no significant legal, economic, or technological developments concerning synthetic diamonds. Under these circumstances, it does not seem appropriate to reopen this recent debate or to revisit the decision made at its conclusion.
Please be assured of France’s support for the synthetic diamond industry, which fully deserves its place in the market alongside natural, mined diamonds… just as long as you call them “synthetic diamonds.”
TRANSLATION
Below are the full translations of both the question submitted by Grégoire and the government’s official response.
Trade and Crafts
Revision of the Terminology for Synthetic Diamonds
No. 5268 – March 25, 2025 – Ms. Olivia Grégoire questions the Minister of the Economy, Finance, and Industrial and Digital Sovereignty about the terminology used for synthetic diamonds in Decree No. 2002-65 of January 14, 2002, concerning the trade of gemstones and pearls.
Paragraph 4 of Article 4 of the decree requires the use of the adjective “synthetic” to designate stones whose manufacture, wholly or partially caused by human intervention, reproduces the physical, chemical, and crystalline structure of natural stones. This broad definition notably includes diamonds produced in laboratories.
The Directorate General for Competition, Consumer Affairs and Fraud Prevention (DGCCRF), in coordination with the Directorate General for Enterprises (DGE) and the Directorate General of Customs and Indirect Taxes (DGDDI), launched a consultation in July 2022 with the relevant professional federations and members of the National Consumer Council (CNC). It aimed in particular to gather opinions on the possible integration of the terminology “laboratory-created diamond,” in contrast to the current term “synthetic diamond.”
The latter is perceived by some as devaluing in the eyes of consumers and could disadvantage French stakeholders compared to foreign competitors using the term “laboratory-grown diamond.” The responses received mostly supported maintaining the decree as is, despite a diversity of opinions within the industry, which must be acknowledged.
In October 2023, the DGCCRF issued its opinion on this consultation, announcing that after reviewing the feedback, the decree would not be amended. Yet in the high jewelry sector, where clients invest significant sums, the term “synthetic” can be seen as a barrier to purchase, thereby influencing consumer decisions.
It therefore seems necessary to re-evaluate this terminology to ensure it faithfully reflects technological advancements and the current expectations of the market. Such a reflection must be undertaken with a clear political vision—one that values the entire French industry, including traditional craftsmanship, while also recognizing the advantages of modern innovations.
Laboratory diamond production, in fact, generates remarkable positive externalities. By drastically reducing the ecological footprint associated with mining, this production method aligns perfectly with France’s ambitions for ecological transition and environmental responsibility.
Reopening this debate would not only support a developing industry but also strengthen the competitiveness of French products in the international market, without in any way devaluing the natural diamond sector.
Ms. Grégoire therefore asks the Minister what the Government’s position is regarding a possible revision of the terminology used for synthetic diamonds in the context of Decree No. 2002-65. She asks whether an adaptation allowing the use of the term “laboratory-created diamond” might be considered, in order to better reflect technological progress and meet consumer expectations, while preserving transparency and fairness in commercial transactions.
Response published on June 3, 2025
Following a request from a company producing synthetic diamonds, the Directorate General for Competition, Consumer Affairs, and Fraud Prevention (DGCCRF) indeed organized in 2022, jointly with the Directorate General for Enterprises (DGE) and the Directorate General of Customs and Indirect Taxes (DGDDI), a written consultation of all professionals and consumer associations regarding a possible revision of Decree No. 2002-65 of January 14, 2002, concerning the trade of gemstones and pearls. More specifically, the appropriateness of the regulatory term “synthetic,” required by paragraph 4 of Article 4 of the aforementioned decree, to designate certain “stones” created wholly or partially by human intervention was reexamined—with the possibility, if deemed appropriate, of proposing an alternative expression such as “lab-created.” Nearly forty economic operators, including representative professional organizations, responded to this consultation.
The analysis of the responses received showed that a majority of stakeholders favored keeping the above-mentioned decree unchanged. As a result—and following subsequent discussions between government departments and industry professionals, whose views were mixed—the Ministry of the Economy and Finance decided, in autumn 2023, in favor of not amending the decree.
As it stands, the content of this decree strikes a balance between the public interest—specifically, ensuring that consumers are provided with useful, transparent, and relevant information about products so they can make informed purchasing decisions free from confusion or deception—and the individual interests of various economic operators (manufacturers, importers, and distributors).
It should be noted that this decree applies equally to all gemstones and pearls, without distinction, and cannot treat diamonds differently from rubies or emeralds, for example.
Furthermore, from an environmental perspective, the claim that synthetic diamond production is more virtuous than mined diamond production is disputed, particularly due to the highly energy-intensive processes involved in industrial facilities used to produce synthetic diamonds (which cannot simply be made in “laboratories”). In any case, conducting a comparative analysis of the two supply chains (synthetic vs. natural diamonds) from an environmental standpoint would be extremely complex, as it would require weighing all negative externalities—not just the direct impacts of mineral excavation.
Finally, since autumn 2023, there have been no significant legal, economic, or technological developments concerning synthetic diamonds. Under these circumstances, it does not seem appropriate to reopen this recent debate or to revisit the decision made at its conclusion.
Please be assured of France’s support for the synthetic diamond industry, which fully deserves its place in the market alongside natural, mined diamonds.
