Greenwashing is terrible for business, bad for the environment, and simply a lie. It’s when a company advertises itself as socially or environmentally responsible while avoiding responsibility or advancing anti-environmental agendas and practices. It often involves discrediting valid environmental concerns and overstating benefits to justify dubious business practices.
Companies use Greenwashing when they claim to be environmentally friendly to attract customers, but the claims are usually unsubstantiated. They can advertise their products as “green” even when it is not.
Why is Greenwashing a problem?
Companies’ Misleading environmental claims is an effort to receive recognition for actions that have little or no environmental benefit. Standard greenwashing labels are organic, all-natural, eco-friendly, non-toxic, certified green, and carbon neutral.
Some specific examples of false advertising are Starbucks coffee cups advertised as compostable, which aren’t once hot liquid touches them; Mark’s Work Wearhouse clothing labeled “FSC approved,” which only means the company purchased the wood, not that it’s deforestation-free; and “carbon offsets” for airline travel which are controversial because they let people feel like they’re doing something about climate change without actually having to change their behavior.
Greenwashing often merges with other marketing techniques such as sponsorship of green events or organizations. For example, many major oil companies support car racing teams that use their product, even though this activity directly contradicts initiatives to address issues related to transportation emissions.
It is common for marketers to switch terms without offering any factual information about what is being advertised. For example, an automobile might be called an SUV even if its fuel efficiency doesn’t meet the definition of a sport utility vehicle at all. It could also have “4WD capability” even if it can’t carry four people, is built for cities and the road, provides little to no off-road advantages, etc.
Another example of greenwashing might be using recycled paper without informing customers that chemicals have been used to bleach the old paperwhite again.
Sometimes, companies may choose a more expensive product with better environmental benefits but pretend to offer better value by not mentioning this fact or explaining its impacts effectively. For example, water purchased in plastic bottles made from virgin petroleum should cost more than tap water, but many consumers are unaware of this fact. They are willing to pay extra for something they think is healthier, while the opposite is true.
Retailers may attempt to evade responsibility for their impact on the environment by purchasing green products, which reduce their operational effects. For example, a company might buy organic cotton to make its clothing but fail to consider the broader impact of its business practices because buying certified organic cotton only addresses direct farm chemicals used in production.
However, this is problematic since consumers are more likely to be concerned with how an organization impacts them directly rather than indirectly. The use of recycled paper may also lead people to believe that other issues related to deforestation have nothing at all to do with the retailer or manufacturer using it.
For this reason, the practice of writing “environmentally friendly” labels without explaining what has been done can be misleading and counterproductive even though it appears like a good idea.
Some companies may include an environmental message only in their advertisements and not on the product itself. They may also claim to be environmentally responsible in one area but not address any other issues. The claims will often use vague phrasing such as “eco-friendly” or “environmentally friendly” without offering clear definitions for these words.
Likewise, terms such as organic can be seen as greenwashing when they are misused. It is common for companies to make discounts available to consumers who bring in recyclable items such as beverage containers even though deposits on recycling were removed years ago. It creates the appearance of concern without actually offering tangible benefits.
Customers may also fail to notice that its overall impact is still negative despite a company’s efforts. For example, organic cotton may have a lower impact on the environment but buying it could cause higher prices for consumers and contribute to poor working conditions in developing countries where natural farming is less expensive.
The following are companies that are known to engage in greenwashing:
The following are the various forms of greenwashing that have been documented to date:
1. Biodegradable Products – Corporations trying to convince consumers that products made out of virtually the same materials as other products but with some minor alterations are biodegradable when in fact, they’re not effective in helping reduce waste or promoting composting and may even harm the environment more than help it if disposed of improperly, especially products that need industrial composters for them to break down effectively.
2. Carbon Offsetting – Corporations that claim they are reducing their negative environmental impact on the environment by investing in programs to reduce emissions but maybe doing it through carbon offsetting instead of direct action.
3. Advertising without Sufficient Evidence – Corporations making claims about products or services said to be environmentally friendly, renewable, or sustainable without sufficient evidence backing up these claims or even basing their claims on irrelevant data (i.e., comparing the emissions of a coal plant with solar panels).
4. Compensating for Harm Done – Corporations claim that there is no harm done to the environment because the company is; therefore, any damage done is good for the environment.
5. Pro-Environment Slogans – Corporations use slogans that make it sound like a pro-environment, but this is not backed up with any action.
6. Green Claims without Supporting Evidence – Corporations making claims about products or services said to be environmentally friendly, renewable, or sustainable without sufficient evidence backing up these claims or even basing their claims off of irrelevant data (i.e., comparing the emissions of a coal plant with solar panels).
7. ‘Natural’ Energy – Corporations claim to provide energy from natural sources when in fact, those sources have been altered by human intervention and development, making them no longer ‘natural.’
8. Eco-Friendly Packaging – Corporations that claim a product is eco-friendly just because they have taken into account the impact of their packaging on the environment.
9. Carbon Offsets for Air Travel – Corporations offsetting their air travel with investments in renewable energy, reforestation projects, and ‘clean energy’ technology such as wind turbines and solar panels.
10. Packaging Claims without Evidence – Packaging makes claims about how environmentally friendly it is when there is no evidence backing up these claims or even basing their claims on irrelevant data (i.e., comparing the emissions of a coal plant with solar panels).
11. Biomass Energy and Biofuels – Corporations claim to provide energy from biomass sources but encourage deforestation, which is harmful to the environment.
12. Carbon Offsets for Shipping – Corporations offsetting their shipping with investments in renewable energy, reforestation projects, and ‘clean energy’ technology such as wind turbines and solar panels.
13. Forestation – Corporations are purchasing a land home to tropical or temperate forests hoping to restore forestation into areas that have been deforested while taking advantage of tax benefits without actually planting new trees.
14. Recycling – Corporations claim they are recycling unwanted products when, in fact, they are just destroying those products and putting them out of sight so they can claim those materials have been recycled.
15. Greenwashing by Association – Companies using environmental organizations to ‘prove’ they are environmentally friendly.
16. Greenwashing Through Supporting Pro-Environment Projects – Corporations create their environmental projects while simultaneously doing things that are harmful to the environment to create a false image of themselves as being pro-environment.
17. 17. Renewable Energy Credits – Corporations claim to go green by purchasing “renewable energy credits.”
18. Ethical Sourcing – Companies claim they source their materials ethically when they do not.
19. Bird-Friendly Energy – Corporations are claiming that energy provided by their company is bird-friendly when in fact, other options could be used that would prove to be more effective and beneficial for birds and the environment while also avoiding the exploitation of these animals regardless of whether or not this has been attempted previously (i.e., wind turbines).
20. Solar Power – Corporations advertising solar power while only providing a tiny amount or after already having covered most of its costs so it can be sold as a renewable energy source at a premium price, but without functioning solar panels, the knowledge of such efforts are hidden from customers.
- Top 10 Biodegradable Materials That Will Save Our Planet - February 22, 2022
- 7 Biodegradable Materials the Construction Industry Needs to Start Using. - February 9, 2022
- Tips For Sustainable Packaging - February 4, 2022
