Are You Being Greenwashed?

BY MADDIE WINTER

Sustainability has become a major buzzword in consumer culture as more consumers are making strides towards a “greener” style of living. As a society, we are becoming more conscious of our consumption habits, making us more likely to select a product with a “green” label over one without it.

A growing number of consumers state their willingness to pay more for products with a more sustainable message, further solidifying the point that sustainability sells. A 2015 poll by the global marketing research firm, Nielsen, found that 66% of global consumers are willing to pay more for environmentally sustainable products, and among millennials, that number jumps to 72%. Shoppers are looking for more than just a quality product, seeking out brands that align with their own personal values. Keywords such as “green” or “recycled” resonate with buyers as having a positive connotation, meaning green equals good. This, though, may not always be the case. This idea of an emerging eco-conscious culture has not gone unnoticed to the marketing industry, as more companies continue to step forward with narratives of their pursuit of “green” business practices. Think about all the times you’ve seen the word “green,” “sustainable” or “eco-friendly” associated with a product or process. Ranging from cleaning products to transportation services, food, energy and the fashion industry, brands have picked up on consumer’s call for a greener future. Companies now tend to “greenwash” products, presenting a product as “eco-friendly” when the company itself may not truly reflect those values in their business practices. Coined in the 1980s by environmentalist Jay Westerveld, greenwashing is generally defined as the corporate practice of diverting sustainable claims to cover a questionable environmental record. Companies and organizations that practice “greenwashing” tend to spend more time and money claiming to be “green” through advertising and marketing than actually applying these principles to their daily business practices. Their intentions fall short on actually minimizing the company’s impact on the environment.

A combination of limited public access to information and seemingly unlimited advertising abilities originally enabled companies to present themselves as caring environmental activists, even as they continuously engage in environmentally

unsustainable practices. Oil companies were originally seen as major culprits of this, as Chevron launched a series of expensive television and print advertisements in the 1980s to convince the public eye of its environmental bonafide. According to an article done by Washington and Lee Journal of Energy, Climate and the Environment, the campaign presented the identity of Chevron as being a “green oil company,” noting the company’s deep care for the environment and the communities in which it operates, even after they faced an $18 billion judgment for polluting the Ecuadorian Amazon.

The fashion industry also acts as a transgressor by these terms. Clothing labels that use callout terms such as “vegan” or “natural” may not be necessarily practicing what they preach. “Natural” materials such as viscose, rayon and bamboo are often promoted to the public as eco-friendly materials, yet that doesn’t mean these materials were sourced ethically. Millions of trees, for instance, are cut down to produce those clothing fibers, resulting in mass deforestation and pollution. The same goes for the thousands of gallons of water used to create a singular pair of jeans.

Other companies choose to project a narrative of sustainability such as Reformation, who’s brand slogan is “Being naked is the #1 most sustainable option. We’re #2.” Though the company is known for its extensive observation of the environmental footprint of its collections, the line becomes blurred with producing and shipping clothing at the scale Reformation does and still labeling it “ethical.” It becomes hard for one to rationalize that the company’s proposition of “looking cute” is an ethical way of protecting the earth.

“Greenwashing” uses deceptive labels that mask the transparency of a company’s actual environmental impact. Sweeping terms such as green, eco-friendly and sustainable are used to attract conscientious clientele, ultimately resulting in well-intended shoppers to support companies that may not be transparent in their eco-practices.

In an interview with Architectural Digest, Perry Wheeler, a spokesperson for Greenpeace USA, noted that, “Greenwashing means that a company puts forward what they deem to be a positive public relations move without actually changing things for the environment … they pretend they’re addressing an issue when in reality, they’re just looking to silence environmental critics.”

Deciphering a brand’s authenticity in its sustainability and “green” practices is ultimately up to the consumer. Responsible shoppers must seek out these “red flags” for themselves, sorting through seemingly sweeping statements that do not provide verifying claims.

So why would a company spend so much time and money spreading a green narrative when it may not be entirely true? Why risk being perceived as insincere? Being, or even simply projecting, the idea of sustainability resonates with customers. The practice tends to be minimally regulated but falls under the Green Guides of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which is responsible for monitoring the truth in advertising practices. A brand’s goal may focus more on consumer perception than an honest commitment to sustainability. Many brands greenwash by ultimately passing off the responsibility of sustainability to the consumer, making the argument that companies play only a small role in the realm of sustainability.

As green business practices grow in popularity, so does the temptation for companies to “greenwash” their business to appear more socially responsible than it actually is. At the end of the day, businesses pursuing the goal of sustainability shouldn’t be looked at as a bad thing. If we hope to achieve a more sustainable future, it’s important that businesses are on board, if not leading the way. The issue boils down to companies using sustainability as more of a market ploy than a mission statement.