Greenwashing is a dirty business

Times have changed and we no longer rely on the television, radio or newsprint for advertising and information. We have smartphones in our pockets, screens available all day and night at work and at home. Many now use social media to follow their favourite brands, get fed updates about new products and find information about services. Social media reaches the masses, but is not a reliable, regulated source of information and should be treated this way.
Companies can post on social media whenever they choose to and many do, with some of the companies in this research posting up to 20 times a week. There are a reduced number of middlemen, increased collaborations, multiway conversations, and a feel that readers can give feedback. Factchecking however is at a minimum, used primarily used in news/political items, and it is often left to readers of the posts on social media to review the provided information.

The average consumer wants to reduce their environmental footprint, and they want to choose the more environmentally friendly option for consumption. Sustainable products and services should be easy to identify by all. When consumers look around on social media, they find some companies pushing their sustainability claims with images of nature and nice words. But are the claims true?

When companies make these sustainability claims that are unproven and without evidence, it is known as greenwashing. Greenwashing is the conflation of “greening” and “whitewashing” and these vague or misleading messages about sustainability can deceive customers. Greenwashing can extend the lifelines of “dirty business” that are inherently incompatible with the goals of the Paris Agreement as companies can misrepresent their contribution to climate change and claim to be doing more than they truly are (Trouwloon, Streck, Chagas, & Martinus, 2023).

In researching the social media posts of 50 companies in Ostrobothnia, Finland, it was found that approximately 26 % contained some sustainability claims. These claims came mainly in the form of text and hashtags but also images and emojis.

Of these posts, only 3.6 % included supporting information, often as hyperlinks that included backup documentation. From this, it can be concluded that the remaining 96.4 % of the posts with sustainability claims did not have sufficient supporting evidence and can therefore be labelled as greenwashed.

Companies in the Energy sector and the Paper/pulp/timber sector were the greatest greenwashers included in this research. Almost half (47.6%) of all the social media posts made by companies in these industries were greenwashed. These companies are of great importance in Ostrobothnia and they hold a lot of influence.Culture, Hopitality/food, Education, Software and Earthworks and Marine manufacturing made sustainability claims the least.

There are ways in which companies can avoid greenwashing, whilst still presenting their sustainability claims. Companies can provide the information in the post itself. Adding a hyperlink to redirect to their website where further information is available in a linear manner means that readers can find the information quickly. Many companies already have the data, goals, standards and labels but neglect to include this information where consumers can find it.

Another way that companies can avoid greenwashing is by using text that is appropriate for the post. Some of the posts included in the research were for open employment positions but included for example #sustainability without any clear reason to.

As social media users, we can communicate with the companies, ask for information, dispute the claims, and look more deeply into the sustainability claims before we make the financial commitment and purchase a greenwashed product or service. Further, in a consumer survey, 70 % of respondents indicated that it would report a misleading or false claim about how environmentally friendly a product or service is (European Commission, 2022), and this reporting should be streamlined.

We can also be on the lookout for common words and phrases that are used such as sustainable, renewable, decarbonize, green, carbon neutral, climate friendly, net zero and so on. Images play an equally important role but are more difficult to classify and compare. Just be aware next time a company shows you mushrooms or a running brook when they are writing about their products.

• European Commission. (2022). Impact Assessment Report. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52022SC0085
• Trouwloon, D., Streck, C., Chagas, T., & Martinus, G. (2023). Understanding the Use of Carbon Credits by Companies: A Review of the Defining Elements of Corporate Climate Claims. Global Challenges, 7(4).

Short Biography

Alicia Trezise-Segervall is an ex-pat Australian living in the countryside outside of Vaasa, Finland. She is the former owner of a wool spinning mill, educator and administrator. Alicia relaxes by designing knitwear, picking mushrooms on long forest hikes and enjoying the changing seasons in the archipelago in Western Finland.