What is greenwashing?

US environmentalist Jay Westerveld coined the term ‘greenwashing’ in 1986 to describe the practice of overstating the environmental and/or ethical benefits of a product or service. 

What is greenwashing in business?

As discussed below, greenwashing is a key consideration for company directors and their insurers in light of COP26 and the ongoing development of UK regulation, particularly with regard to firms authorised by the FCA and/or listed companies. 

It is also relevant to any company vulnerable to shifts in consumer opinion and may occur inadvertently, given the vagueness of several ‘green’ credentials and associated words and phrases. 

Seven Sins of Greenwashing

The Seven Sins of Greenwashing, as coined by Jay Westerveld, include:

• The Hidden Trade-off — failing to address the full environmental cost of achieving a superficially sustainable outcome
• No proof — reliance on a lack of easily-accessible contradictory evidence
• Vagueness — imprecise language may be technically accurate but environmentally misleading
• Irrelevance — reliance on factors that are generally applicable and do not help consumers to differentiate
• The Lesser of Two Evils — reliance on a narrow comparison with other unsustainable options, rather than the whole market
• Fibbing — simple falsehoods
• Worshipping False Labels — branding that falsely indicates independent environmental accreditation.

The risks of greenwashing for companies and their insurers 

Greenwashing poses an obvious risk of reputational harm. Opinion can quickly turn against those perceived to be misleading consumers, who are more engaged in relation to environmental issues today than they have been ever before. Companies hoping to turn this enthusiasm for the environment to their commercial advantage must therefore ensure that their asserted environmental credentials are accurate and justifiable, or risk losing the trust (and business) of the market. 

Companies making inaccurate environmental disclosures can expect to face intervention. The Competition and Markets Authority (“CMA”) published a Green Claims Code in September 2021 containing guidance for businesses making environmental claims in the UK which is capable of enforcement by the CMA in both civil and criminal proceedings. 

Since then, the FCA has published its ESG Strategy on 3 November 2021, based on the core themes of Transparency, Trust (see above), Tools, Transition and (stretching the alliteration to its limits) Team. Chapter 2 of the ESG Handbook, in force from 1 January 2022 and subject to the FCA's usual enforcement powers, specifically focuses on the disclosure of climate-related financial information, including reports in relation to both business management and products pursuant to the recommendation so the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (“TCFD”). 

Several recent matters reported by the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) have shown that many businesses are getting it wrong when it comes to green advertising. That is also borne out in statistics available from the EU — a 2021 study found that 42% of green claims were false, exaggerated or deceptive.

What is a green claim? 

According to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), an environmental or ‘green’ claim is one that suggest a product, service, process, brand or business is better for the environment. Included are claims that suggest or create the impression that a product or a service:

• has a positive environmental impact or no impact on the environment;
• is less damaging to the environment than a previous version of the same product or service; or
• is less damaging to the environment than competing goods or services.

How to avoid greenwashing claims?

Businesses can avoid the risk of greenwashing claims by: 

• following the guidance above and applying a common sense approach to any environmental claims — if you are not sure and it does not feel right, do not say it; 
• ensuring any claims are properly substantiated — keep a paper trail and maintain any supporting evidence; 
• keeping any claims under constant review — the environmental landscape is constantly changing and an accurate claim one day might not be accurate the next; and 
• seek expert technical and legal advice if you are unsure.  

The general guidance is that any advertising should be legal, decent, honest, truthful and fair. In relation to green claims, more specific guidance provides that:

• the basis for any claim must be clear (so you need evidence/data to support your claim) and should not omit key information;
• it is especially important to be clear as to whether any claims relate to all or just part of a product or services lifecycle. If only part, then this must be set out clearly;
• the meaning of terms used must also be clear (avoid any ambiguity). They should be transparent, straightforward and easily understood — would the person on the street know what you mean?;
• do not exclude or hide any relevant information which is relevant to the decision-making process of the buyer;
• absolute claims are hard to make and must be supported by very clear evidence e.g. ‘greenest’, ‘friendliest’, ‘no environmental impact’, ‘completely recyclable’ or the use of terms ‘most’ or ‘best’;
• businesses need to be especially careful when making comparisons with a competitor’s products — such claims are often very hard to substantiate as the business making such a claim will not have access to all the information they need about a competitor’s product or service to enable them to properly substantiate the claim being made. That is opposed to a business using the terms ‘greener’ or ‘friendlier’ when making comparisons with its own products;
• it is important to be aware of accepted scientific opinion — do not claim that something is universally accepted if the science is not conclusive;
• you cannot suggest that a product against which a comparison is being made was in fact more harmful to the environment than it was to artificially enhance the perception of the new product or service;
• you must be careful when making claims about the benefit of a product or service — for example, product X does not include ingredient Y, when ingredient Y would not normally be present anyway, or if it cannot be used because of a legal obligation that prevents its use; and
• note that there are specific legal requirements that apply to the labelling of certain products, e.g., products that consume energy.

Common descriptive terms which risk falling into the greenwashing trap include:

• ‘Natural’ — can all of it be said to be natural — the product, its packaging?
• ‘Organic’ — is the whole product organic or just part of it?
• ‘compostable’ — can it be composted at home, or does it need to undergo an industrial composting process?
• ‘Recyclable’ — is it the whole product or part of it?
• ‘Eco-friendly’ with no further information — on what basis? In comparison to what?
• ‘Zero-carbon’ — is the product carbon neutral? What is the scope of the statement? Is any offsetting involved?

TCFD reccomendations 

The TCFD, created by the Financial Stability Board, released its TCFD reccomendations for climate-related disclosures in 2017 covering the themes of Governance, Strategy, Risk Management and Metrics & Targets. The organisation is becoming increasingly influential, with the UK requiring that all publicly listed UK companies with a premium listing must “comply or explain” regarding the TCFD’s Recommendations by 2023. Further disclosures will be mandatory in certain sectors by 2025. 

The EU has incorporated the TCFD’s Recommendations into its Guidelines on Reporting Climate-Related Information. In the USA, the SEC launched its Climate and ESG Task Force in March 2021 as part of its Division of Enforcement, looking for gaps and misstatements in disclosures of climate risks. 

The UK Government has also set up a Green Technical Advisory Group to advise it on a green taxonomy, similar to the EU’s Taxonomy Regulation introduced alongside the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (“SFDR”) and Low Carbon Benchmarks Regulation, to drive the standardisation of environmental sustainability in investment. 

Steps that were previously undertaken voluntarily are therefore increasingly becoming obligatory and subject to regulatory sanction. Directors and officers must of course ensure that their businesses comply with current rules to avoid criminal prosecution, civil liability or regulatory action, but there is also a clear argument in favour of seeking to stay ahead of the game with regard to sustainability as regulation continues to advance and market expectations continue to rise. Accurate and well-supported ESG disclosures should help to support and develop relationships with potential investors, business partners, employees, clients and consumers while minimising the risk of reputational harm, regulatory sanction, erosion or shareholder value and potential liabilities which may require notification to D&O or environmental insurers. 

Crucially, careful and proactive management of ESG risks and related disclosures is also necessary to ensure that businesses adapt to the low carbon and/or net-zero economy as quickly as possible for the benefit of the environment as a whole. This is of course the fundamental point of all the environmental regulations and recommendations and such considerations will lie at the heart of any authentic ESG policy.