How to spot false green claims

Common deceptive green claims and how to uncover them.

False claims about products are increasingly common today as businesses fight for consumers who are far more motivated to mitigate the polluting effects of modern consumerism and want to reduce their environmental and social impact. This effectively cripples firms who have no regard for their carbon footprint or waste disposal policy. But rather than genuinely move towards a more sustainable mode of production, many firms try to take a short cut – or greenwash. 

What is greenwashing?

To understand exactly what we mean by greenwashing, let’s look at its definition: ‘Greenwashing is the process of using misleading or false information about a company’s operations or products or services to deceive customers or members of the public about their environmental impact.’

The topic itself is very broad, and there are further sub-sections of greenwashing: 

• Greencrowding – where a company relies on safety in numbers as part of a group of different companies, all moving at the rate of the slowest in terms of their approach to sustainability.

• Greenlighting or greenspotlighting – where a company will draw attention to one specific positive area of its sustainability performance, while ignoring or obscuring other less positive areas.

• Greenshifting – where a company shifts the responsibility for sustainability onto the consumer.

• Greenhushing – where a company underreports its activities to try to evade scrutiny.

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has already identified companies that are making false claims around sustainability in the UK. In September 2024, it issued a letter to 17 well-known fashion brands, advising them to review their green claims. This occured after a CMA investigation into – and securing subsequent commitments from – ASOS, Boohoo and George at Asda.

It’s not just the CMA – the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has also taken direct action against misleading sustainability statements.

“In 2023, the ASA banned a poster advert for airline Lufthansa because it had the slogan ‘Lufthansa Group. Connecting the world. Protecting its future. #MakeChangeFly’,” Steve Lister, a sustainability consultant, says.

“Think of all the time, effort and money that would have gone into that advertising campaign. That was all wasted because, the ASA said, how could an airline actually be protecting the future of the planet?”

A similar situation occurred with Persil’s television advertising campaign that used the slogan ‘Tough on stains, kinder on our planet’. That was banned by the ASA in 2022 because it was deemed to be unsubstantiated. 

And the same happened in 2021 when two adverts from HSBC publicising its role in the green transition were banned for omitting information about its own contribution to carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions.

Looking out for greenwashing

The WWF advises that to work out if a product or business is genuine or greenwashing, you should look for four factors: buzzwords, evidence, verification and sustainability. 

Some buzzwords are used almost automatically and, either as consumers or businesses, we don’t think too deeply about what they mean. Take the word ‘reusable’, for example: technically anything is reusable, if you don’t throw it away. And ‘environmentally friendly’ has no legal definition or set of rules by which we can define how ‘green’ the product is. ‘Compostable’ does not necessarily mean that the product can be composted in the home: it might require industrial composting, which can be misleading to the consumer.

The CMA, in its September letter, said it was concerned with the use of broad terms in fashion, such as ‘sustainable’, which were unclear and so more likely to mislead consumers. It also highlighted the misuse of the word ‘recycled’, which could suggest that the entire product was made of recycled materials –  when this did not appear to be the case.

Firms rarely prove their green claims with evidence. Businesses genuinely attempting to be better should use transparent, auditable and trustworthy data to support their claims. The CMA says: “Claims should be proven with robust, credible and recent evidence.”

Certifications from a body with stringent guidelines are a good way to show that green claims are credible or working towards standards such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. 

A further level of trust can be added with verification. Evidence should be verified by a third party, such as B Corp or the Forestry Standards Council. Only 6,000 businesses are B Corp verified, indicating the high standards firms must reach and the hard work they must carry out to bear the B Corp kitemark. But consumers can then tell immediately that the firm is at the very least serious about its green claims.

Printers should also look at their business’s sustainability as a whole. There are three pillars of sustainability: environmental, social and economic (sometimes also described as the 3 Ps: People, Planet, Profit). Often, firms prioritise the reduction of their waste, plastic or carbon impact and neglect the social and economic effects that their output has. In the social pillar, for example, firms should combat social exclusion and discrimination and contribute to the wellbeing of its workers and customers. And in the economic pillar, firms can keep their values in line with those of society at large while also saving money, such as undertaking honest accounting, efficient waste management and using renewable energy sources. 

Greenwashing isn’t just deceptive to consumers, investors and the public. It could result in large fines, reputational damage and financial risk. Making clear, unambiguous, verified claims is not only better for business, but it promotes and works towards real concrete solutions to the climate crisis.