Greenwashing occurs when a company allocates a disproportionate amount of resources to promote its environmental friendliness through marketing, rather than genuinely reducing its environmental footprint. This deceptive marketing tactic is employed to exaggerate the company's environmentally friendly practices, aiming to mislead consumers who prioritize purchasing from environmentally conscious brands.
Where did the term greenwashing originate?
The term "greenwashing" was coined by environmentalist Jay Westerveld in 1986. Westerveld developed the term in a critical essay, inspired by the irony of the "save the towel" movement in hotels, which, despite its environmental pretense, primarily saved hotels money in laundry costs. During this period, when consumers relied on television, radio, and print media for news without the ability to fact-check as easily as today, the concept of greenwashing emerged. Companies extensively involved in greenwashing have garnered attention over the years. In the mid-1980s, Chevron, an oil company, launched an expensive advertising campaign, known as the "People Do" campaign, highlighting its environmental commitment. However, simultaneously, Chevron was violating the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act and causing oil spills in wildlife refuges. Chevron was not alone in making misleading claims. In 1991, DuPont, a chemical company, promoted its double-hulled oil tankers with advertisements featuring marine animals dancing to Beethoven's "Ode to Joy." Ironically, DuPont turned out to be the largest corporate polluter in the United States that year.
How does greenwashing harm a brand’s reputation?
The impact of greenwashing on a brand's reputation has evolved in the past two decades, persisting despite changes in its nature. Companies are now confronted with heightened legal scrutiny for making deceptive environmental claims in a world increasingly focused on adopting environmentally friendly practices.
An illustration of this issue is evident in the Alliance to End Plastic Waste (AEPW), a Singapore-based nonprofit supported by major oil and chemical companies like Shell, ExxonMobil, and Dow. Despite the AEPW's claim of investing $1.5 billion to address plastic waste in developing nations, it failed to fulfill its commitment to clean up the Ganges River in India. Moreover, member organizations proceeded with plans to increase plastic production.
Even the bottled water industry tends to exaggerate its environmental commitment. Many plastic bottles feature picturesque images of rugged mountains, pristine lakes, and thriving wildlife on their labels.
Philip Beere, vice president of marketing at Sightline Payments, notes that the fundamental issue remains consistent. "The No. 1 violation is embellishing the benefit of the product or service." Beere suggests that, more often than not, greenwashing results from excessive enthusiasm rather than intentional deception.
The enthusiasm of marketers is understandable, given the growing importance consumers place on sustainability. According to GreenPrint's 2021 Business of Sustainability Index, 64% of Gen X consumers and 75% of millennials would be willing to spend more on a product if it comes from a sustainable brand.
How to avoid greenwashing?
To steer clear of greenwashing and align with the growing consumer demand for sustainability, here are ten key strategies to avoid common brand tactics:
Avoid Fluffy Language: Refrain from using vague terms like "eco-friendly" or "natural" without clear meaning.
Consistent Branding: Be cautious of inconsistencies, such as promoting environmentally friendly products while the manufacturing process pollutes.
Caution with Imagery: Be mindful of using images that create a misleading green impression, like flowers blooming from exhaust pipes.
Credibility of Designations: Watch out for attempts to make a hazardous product seem safe by labeling it as "green" or "eco-friendly."
Beware of Imaginary Endorsements: Avoid labels that mimic third-party endorsements but are actually fabricated.
Steer Clear of Outright Lies: Never resort to completely false claims or data.
While instances of outright "pure greenwash" are not widespread, there are numerous examples that come close. Socially responsible businesses are sharing their environmental stories, and even those that aren't should consider doing so. Philip Beere characterizes the commonly used greenwashing buzzwords as a "slippery slope" and advises companies to educate their marketers on the ethical aspects of green branding.
Tips to avoid inadvertent greenwashing
Follow these guidelines to prevent unintentional greenwashing for your company:
Clear and Detailed Claims: Ensure that your environmental claims are explicit and easily comprehensible. Provide specific details, including precise measurements (e.g., "70% organic cotton" instead of "made with organic cotton"). Include certifications and endorsements from reputable third-party eco-organizations like the Sierra Club or Greenpeace.
Data-backed Sustainability Claims: Support your sustainability assertions with verifiable data. Keep updated data readily available on your website and other platforms where sustainability claims are made. Utilize only data that can be validated, and consider third-party certifications from credible sources like the Carbon Trust Standard, Forest Stewardship Council, Rainforest Alliance, or Energy Star.
Apples-to-Apples Comparisons: When highlighting your product's sustainability in comparison to competitors, ensure a fair comparison by matching the same product type. Avoid misleading consumers with comparisons that involve different product categories.
Operational Sustainability: Demonstrate commitment by integrating sustainability into your business model. Implement eco-friendly practices in manufacturing, waste disposal, and distribution operations to align with the image of your products as environmentally friendly.
Transparent Communication: Be forthright about your brand's sustainability practices and future plans. Inform consumers about the environmental impact of individual products and your company's overall sustainability efforts. When discussing future plans, provide specific targets and timelines for accountability.
Avoid Misleading Imagery: Ensure that images in advertisements and packaging accurately represent your products. Refrain from using the color green or nature-related images, such as trees and flowers, to imply eco-friendliness if it does not align with the reality of your products or brand.
Brands accused of greenwashing
Accusations of greenwashing can encompass various practices, ranging from misleading packaging to companies presenting themselves as environmentally responsible while heavily relying on fossil fuels.
Identifying greenwashing in certain industries is often straightforward. For example, the fossil fuel sector frequently promotes clean coal or natural gas as sustainable energy sources to portray itself as environmentally friendly. False or deceptive advertising is a common thread in greenwashing, attempting to address long-term solutions without altering the current situation.
Several well-known companies have faced accusations of greenwashing, including:
Volkswagen: In 2015, Volkswagen admitted to cheating emission tests, using "defeat devices" in vehicles to appear less polluting. Despite marketing environmentally friendly features, the company violated emission standards, leading to lawsuits and substantial fines.
McDonald’s: Despite promoting efforts to reduce single-use plastics, McDonald's replaced plastic straws with non-recyclable paper ones. The company faced criticism for sustainability concerns regarding its paper straws and explored alternative options.
Coca-Cola: Identified as a leading plastic polluter, Coca-Cola faced backlash for promoting its low-sugar drink, Coca-Cola Life, as a "green, healthy alternative." Experts argued it was misleading, leading to the product's removal from UK shelves.
IKEA: An analysis revealed that IKEA's wood approval partner, the Forest Stewardship Council, engaged in greenwashing by not addressing the use of illegal timber. IKEA's extensive use of wood contributed to deforestation and environmental damage.
Nespresso: Nespresso faced transparency issues regarding the recyclability of its single-use coffee pods. While claiming recyclability, specialized processing is required, posing challenges for traditional recycling plants.
Starbucks: Starbucks eliminated plastic straws but introduced sippy lids containing more plastic than the previous straw-lid combination. Critics questioned the sustainability of Starbucks' plastic reduction efforts.
Walmart: Walmart's carbon emission reduction goals were criticized for not addressing emissions from its supply chains. The company faced legal action for marketing textile items as bamboo when they were made of rayon, resulting in a $3 million penalty.
These cases highlight the importance of transparency, credibility, and genuine sustainability efforts to avoid greenwashing accusations.