#203 The 7 Shades of Greenwashing

The rampant rise of greenwashing threatens to undermine genuine sustainability efforts and mislead consumers, with over 900 businesses in Europe being accused of the practice in 2024. 

Greenwashing can come in many different forms, and the tactics used aren’t always easy to spot.

In this episode, Mel dives into the 7 shades of greenwashing and explains the common greenwashing tactics you should be on the lookout for.

You’ll learn

·      What is Greencrowding?

·      What is Greenlighting?

·      What is Greenshifting?

·      What is Greenlabelling?

·      What is Greenrinsing?

·      What is Greenhushing?

·      What is Greenmasking?

 

Resources

·      Carbonology

·      7 Shades of Greenwashing Guide

 

In this episode, we talk about:

[02:05] Episode Summary – In the 2^nd part of this 3-part series on greenwashing, we dive into the various methods and tactics used by businesses to avoid their sustainability obligations.

[03:05] What is greencrowding?: This tactic relies on safety in numbers and occurs when different groups (like governments, organisations and companies) join forces to create the impression of making significant environmental changes.

For example, 8 of the world’s biggest 20 plastic polluters including companies such as Royal Dutch Shell, Coca-Cola, and BP are part of the Alliance to End Plastic Waste, however the group moves at the speed of the slowest member and sets low environmental targets to stall action as it is often costly and involves a lot of the companies resources and time

[03:55] What is greenlighting? – This is when companies spotlight a particularly ‘green’ product or operation which helps to draw attention away from tis otherwise environmentally damaging activities.

Commonly seen in the car industry, recent BMW campaigning highlights the company’s electric vehicles, despite being heavily invested in combustion engine vehicles therefore not addressing their major source of emissions.

Another example is Exxonmobil, who heavily advertised its “advanced biofuels” made from algae, however didn’t mention the fact that the biofuels made up a miniscule part of production. Since coming under scrutiny Exxonmobil have rescinded this project altogether and haven’t looked to practical alternatives.

[05:15] What is greenshifting? - This is where the blame gets shifted onto consumers. BP’s “Know your carbon footprint” campaign is a key example, it invited customers to share pledges for reducing their individual emissions yet BP’s core business continue to partake and scheme hugely polluting oil and gas projects.

Another example include H&M who urged consumers to recycle their old clothes yet, the company continues to be a prime culprit in fast-fashion and have a significant part to plat in over-consumerism leading to environmental degradation.

[06:10] The growing need for comprehensive carbon reporting – This occurs when companies use words like ‘eco’, ‘sustainable’ or related wording or symbols conveying green messaging with no evidence to support it.

Kohl’s and Walmart were sued for labelling toxic rayon textiles as eco-friendly bamboo.

Another more recent example is McDonald's Paper Straws where In 2019 a paper straws to introduced to replace plastic ones, claiming it was an eco-friendly move. However, it was later revealed that these paper straws were not recyclable, leading to criticism that the company was misleading consumers about the environmental benefits.

[07:15] What is greenrinsing? - This is where companies change their sustainability commitments or targets before actually achieving them.

Repeatedly, Coca-cola has missed and moved its recycling targets. Between 2020 – 2022, the company dropped its targets for using recycled packaging from 50% by 2030 to 25% proving these targets were not sufficiently made.

BP and ExxonMobil are two more examples of being criticized for frequently updating their climate targets without substantial progress. Various ambitious goals were announced over the years, but critics argue that these targets are often revised or postponed making it hard to assess real achievements and also trust between consumers, investors and legal frameworks are lost.

So the takeaway here is, make sure you’re targets are realistic!

[08:45] What is greenhushing? – This occurs when companies deliberately underreport or hide green credentials to evade scrutiny, which is a rising practice found in larger firms who struggle to successfully hit their targets/ aims.

Commonly found with firms that make distant net zero targets but do not report on progress. It allows them to hide the fact that they are not taking meaningful steps. Companies often avoid reporting positive environmental measures they may be taking to prevent greenwashing accusations which can be argued as counter-productive in the efforts to help drive systemic and industrial change in the most polluting industries.

H&M and ExxonMobil are key examples of greenhushing and no-longer actively promote their sustainability practices as they have faced criticism over false / limited actions in the past. 

This one is rather damaging, especially to those who are taking meaningful sustainable action, but may not be keeping up with their targets. This is why it’s so crucial to make those targets obtainable.

If this practice continues, then there is less pressure overall for businesses to do their part for sustainability. It’s important to celebrate the victories, no matter how small, as it all adds up to the bigger picture.

[10:55] What is greenmasking? - Greenmasking (a term coined by Carbonology®) is used to describe the practice where organisations self-certify their environmental impact without independent verification. This means they claim their green credentials are accurate while avoiding transparency about their methodology and data.

Essentially, they are "marking their own homework," which can lead to misleading claims about their sustainability efforts. Some companies offer ISO 14064 consulting and verification services that may not always adhere to the rigorous standards required for genuine verification.

This can result in poor practices and undermine the credibility of the certification. For example, some consulting firms might offer ISO 14064 verification as part of their services but fail to conduct thorough and independent audits. Instead, they may ‘verify’ the data is correct in-house. This can lead to situations where companies are able to self-label their environmental impact as compliant with ISO 14064 without truly meeting the standard's requirements.

This results in a vast amount of unreliable and untrustworthy data that is purportedly verified. Furthermore, with some consultancy companies asserting that offering both consultancy and verification within the same firm is a viable option, it paves the way for poor reporting standards to be accepted, only worsening the problem in the long run.

Greenmasking can have significant implications for stakeholders, including investors, customers, and regulators, who rely on accurate and transparent environmental reporting. To combat greenmasking, it is crucial for organisations to seek independent and accredited verification of their GHG emissions ensuring that their sustainability claims are credible and based upon the rigorous standards stated in ISO14064-3.

Download a copy of The 7 Shades of Greenwashing from Carbonology’s website here.

If you would like some assistance with carbon Standards and reporting, simply get in touch with the team over at Carbonology.  

We’d love to hear your views and comments about the ISO Show, here’s how:

●     Share the ISO Show on Twitter or Linkedin

●     Leave an honest review on iTunes or Soundcloud. Your ratings and reviews really help and we read each one.

Subscribe to keep up-to-date with our latest episodes:

Stitcher | Spotify | YouTube |iTunes | Soundcloud | Mailing List