Greenwashing . Green Claims

Greenhushing je praktika, pri ktorej spoločnosti alebo organizácie úmyselne znižujú komunikáciu o svojich ekologických iniciatívach alebo udržateľných postupoch. Namiesto toho, aby sa chválili svojimi environmentálnymi úspechmi (ako to robia pri greenwashingu), rozhodnú sa o nich radšej mlčať.

Prečo na tom záleží?

– Menej tlaku na ostatných – Ak firmy nehovoria o svojich ekologických aktivitách, môže sa spomaliť celkový posun k udržateľnosti, pretože chýba pozitívny príklad pre konkurenciu a verejnosť.

– Ťažšia kontrola a transparentnosť – Ak firmy nezverejňujú svoje udržateľné kroky, je náročnejšie hodnotiť ich skutočný dopad na životné prostredie a porovnávať ich s ostatnými.

– Strata dôvery spotrebiteľov – Mnohí zákazníci chcú podporovať udržateľné značky, no ak o ich aktivitách nevedia, môžu sa rozhodnúť pre menej ekologické alternatívy.

– Investori a regulácie – Rastie tlak zo strany investorov a regulátorov na väčšiu transparentnosť v oblasti ESG (environmentálne, sociálne a riadiace faktory). Greenhushing môže pre firmu znamenať reputačné a právne riziká.

Prečo firmy greenhushujú?

– Strach z kritiky alebo obvinenia z greenwashingu.

– Neistota ohľadom presnosti ekologických údajov.

– Obava, že udržateľnosť sa bude vnímať ako marketingový trik.

Hoci greenhushing môže vyzerať ako opatrná stratégia, v konečnom dôsledku spomaľuje potrebnú ekologickú transformáciu. Transparentnosť a otvorená komunikácia sú kľúčom k skutočnému pokroku v oblasti udržateľnosti. Spring

ESMA bude sledovať, ako sa implementujú jej usmernenia, vrátane pokynov týkajúcich sa označovania fondov s využitím ESG kritérií, udržateľnostných podmienok alebo presadzovania informácií o udržateľnosti. Organizácia bude viesť diskusie o dohľadoch a poskytovať špecializované školenia prostredníctvom centra pre znalosti o udržateľnom financovaní.

Nedávno ESMA prehodnotila svoje kľúčové ukazovatele výkonnosti a vytvorila nové ukazovatele výsledkov, ktoré merajú, do akej miery sa napĺňajú jej priority. V oblasti rizika greenwashingu v sektore fondov sa nový relevantný ukazovateľ výsledku týka percenta európskych fondov s udržateľnostnými vlastnosťami, kde existuje riziko zavádzania investorov. Toto riziko sa hodnotí na základe konzistencie a jasnosti dokumentácie fondov a jej zhody s údajmi o portfóliových držbách pomocou techník spracovania prirodzeného jazyka.

Čo bude ďalej?

Pre ESMA zostáva riešenie greenwashingu prioritou, čo naznačuje zvyšujúce sa regulačné zameranie na udržateľnosť. ESMA bude pokračovať v podpore prechodu EÚ na udržateľné hospodárstvo tým, že sa bude snažiť predchádzať rizikám spojeným s greenwashingom. Čo sa týka konkrétnych krokov, ESMA oznámila plán vypracovať správu o riešení rizika greenwashingu na trhu udržateľných investičných fondov do druhého štvrťroka 2026. Okrem toho dokončí projekt „Riešenie rizika greenwashingu na trhu udržateľných investičných fondov“ ako súčasť technickej podpory Európskej komisie pre rok 2024 a dokončí ho v roku 2026.

Čo by mali správcovia fondov robiť?

Zameranie na znižovanie rizika greenwashingu a stanovené vyhlásenia nie sú ničím novým, avšak pripomínajú, že ide o kľúčovú prioritu. Správcovia fondov by mali dôkladne preveriť svoje udržateľnostné tvrdenia v materiáloch fondu, aby zabezpečili, že sú jasné, spravodlivé a nezavádzajúce, odrážajú skutočný stav vecí a sú v súlade s akýmikoľvek ESG zverejneniami (napríklad podľa SFDR). S rastúcimi rozdielmi v prístupoch k ESG medzi USA a Európou sú tieto otázky ešte dôležitejšie, a preto je riadenie rozdielnej dynamiky v prezentácii týchto informácií kľúčovou výzvou pre globálnych správcov. Spring

Odkaz na programový dokument na roky 2026 – 2028 here

Dokument porovnáva prístupy Európskej únie (EÚ) a Spojeného kráľovstva (UK) k regulácii greenwashingu vo finančnom sektore. Cieľom je pomôcť bankám orientovať sa v regulačných rámcoch, najmä ak pôsobia v oboch jurisdikciách. (more…)

CMA zverejnila ďalšie usmernenie o tom, ako môžu maloobchodníci s módou dodržiavať Green Claims Code; kľúčový súbor pravidiel určujúcich, či tvrdenia o vplyve produktov alebo značiek na životné prostredie (známe ako ekologické tvrdenia) porušujú predpisy na ochranu spotrebiteľa v Spojenom kráľovstve. Veľká časť týchto pokynov vo všeobecnosti opakuje existujúce pokyny (pozrite si napríklad náš predchádzajúci článok Snímky ), ale s niektorými užitočnými funkciami zameranými na módu, ktoré maloobchodníkom pomôžu presne pochopiť, čo v tomto odvetví funguje a čo nie. Obsahuje tiež praktické príklady určitých praktík, ktoré CMA považuje za nevyhovujúce. (Oliver Bray, viac na lexology.com)

Greenwashing, also known as "greenwashing," refers to the practice of companies and organizations pretending to be green or promoting sustainability in order to improve their image, but without actually making fundamental changes. The behavior may include the use of advertising slogans, false claims about the greenness of products, or misleading labels that create the impression that the company is acting green, although its main activity and approach are still harmful to the environment.

Greenwashing creates the impression that consumers are contributing to conservation with their purchases, but they are often only contributing to the environmental profits of higher-ups who exaggerate their claims. Here are 10 examples of greenwashing to help you better understand the problem and how to spot it.

1. "Bioplastic" products

Many companies have started using terms like "bioplastic" or "biodegradable" to describe their products, giving consumers the impression that plastic is greener. However, the truth is that many bioplastics are actually created from petroleum derivatives, and some only break down under certain conditions, such as in industrial composting facilities, which are not normally available. In practice, such plastic can end up in landfills, where it is not broken down, thus still polluting the environment.

2. "Ecological" 

Names such as "eco-bottle" or "natural bottle" are becoming increasingly common when selling bottled water. These names may seem ecological, but they are often plastic bottles that are only partially recyclable. Indeed, the ecological impact of bottled water, including the production and transportation of bottles, is very large compared to the use of tap water.

3. Cosmetics with "natural ingredients"

Cosmetic brands label their products as “natural,” “organic,” or “chemical-free.” These claims highlight a few natural ingredients, no products may contain harmful chemicals or ingredients that are not good for the environment. Terms such as "natural" are not regulated by legislation, which means that a brand can use these claims even if the product is not fully organic.

4. Car companies promoting "low-emission vehicles"

Many automakers promote "low-emission" or "eco-friendly" vehicles that have only slightly reduced emissions compared to traditional models. Although these vehicles produce fewer emissions, they are still powered by fossil fuels and contribute to pollution.

5. Fashion brands with "ecological collections"

Some fashion brands have started to offer collections marked as "sustainable" or "eco-friendly," which appear ecological. These collections may contain materials such as organic cotton or recycled polyester, but this is only a small part of the brand's offer. Continuing production is another fast fashion that consumes large amounts of resources and contributes to the destruction of the planet. These brands can thus gain an image of ecological responsibility, even if most of their activities are still unsustainable.

6. Energy company with renewable energy programs

Energy giants often highlight their investments in renewable sources such as wind and solar power. While these investments do help the development of clean energy, they can only provide a small portion of their business, while the majority of revenue still comes from fossil fuels. These companies can thus present a green image, but their carbon footprint remains high.

7. Food with "eco" or "bio" packaging

Some food companies use labels such as "eco" or "bio" on the packaging of their products, even if the product itself or the process of its production is not environmentally friendly. An example can be the use of cardboard packaging instead of plastic packaging, which, however, contains a thin plastic layer, which makes it impossible to recycle it. This procedure looks ecological, but in reality it can create a similar impact as classic plastic packaging.

8. "Sustainable" aviation fuels

In recent years, airlines have started promoting the use of "sustainable" aviation fuels (SAFs), which promise lower emissions. However, these fuels often contain only a small proportion of sustainable components, while most fuels come from fossil sources. This will not significantly reduce the overall emission during the flight, but the company gets the impression that it is ecological.

9. Banks promoting "green" investment funds

Some banks offer clients "green" investment funds or "sustainable investment funds." These funds may contain shares in renewable resources, but none may also include investments in fossil fuels or unsustainable industries. Banks thus use marketing to support an ecological image, even if they finance projects that are not sustainable.

10. Recycled plastics in the automotive industry

Car companies have started using recycled plastics in the interiors of their vehicles and present it as an ecological innovation. Although the use of recycled materials is a positive step, it is a small shift in the overall context of car manufacturing.

How to recognize greenwashing and why is it important?

Green deployment can be confusing for consumers and lead them away from truly sustainable options. If we want to minimize our impact on the planet, we should be critical when making decisions and check companies' claims about their "greenness."

• Verify certificates : Look for certified labels such as eco-certificates or brands such as Fair Trade and Energy Star.
• Explore transparency : Green companies regularly provide detailed information about their processes and impacts. If the company does not provide this data, it may be a signal of greenwashing.
• Watch your words : Claims like "natural," "green," or "sustainable" are often just marketing terms with no real basis.

Greenwashing undermines efforts to protect the environment because it distracts from real solutions and sustainable options. It is therefore important that we as consumers approach 'green' claims with a critical eye and support only those brands and products that have a real environmental benefit. Spring

The term "greenwashing" has gained importance in recent years, as more and more companies try to present their products and services as environmentally responsible. However, in many cases behind this green facade hides a reality that is much less flattering. Greenwashing is a deceptive practice designed to give consumers the impression that a product or service is greener than it actually is.

The resources provide valuable insight into this issue and point to various aspects of greenwashing regulation in the EU.

Why is greenwashing a problem?

Greenwashing undermines consumers' trust in environmental claims and makes it difficult for them to make informed decisions. Ultimately, this hinders real progress in sustainability.

• Misleading claims: Companies may use misleading claims, unsubstantiated evidence, vague wording, or emphasize one environmental aspect while ignoring other, negative impacts.
• Absence of standards: The absence of clear standards and definitions for environmental claims allows companies to manipulate information and avoid accountability.
• Green Marketing: Firms may invest more in marketing their environmental activities than in actual changes in their products and processes.

How does the EU fight against greenwashing?

The EU adopts legislative measures to regulate greenwashing and strengthen transparency in the field of sustainability. The sources mention several initiatives:

• EU Taxonomy: This classification defines which economic activities are considered environmentally sustainable, providing investors with a clear framework for evaluating investments.
• Regulation on Disclosure of Information on Sustainability in the Financial Services Sector (SFDR): It requires financial institutions to disclose how they consider sustainability risks and opportunities in their investments and advice.
• Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD): It prohibits deceptive and misleading practices, including greenwashing, and protects consumers from unfair business practices.
• Insurance Distribution Directive (IDD): It establishes rules for the transparency and professional competence of insurance and reinsurance intermediaries, which indirectly contributes to the fight against greenwashing in this area.
• Specific information disclosure requirements: EU legislation also defines specific requirements for publishing information on environmental aspects in various sectors, such as energy, transport, construction and agriculture.

What is the impact of these measures?

These EU legislative initiatives have the potential to reduce the extent of greenwashing and strengthen the credibility of environmental claims. They set clearer rules, definitions and disclosure requirements, making it harder for companies to manipulate information and avoid liability.

• Increased transparency: The new rules motivate companies to more transparently publish information about their environmental activities and impacts.
• Clearer definitions: The EU taxonomy and other initiatives provide clearer definitions for terms such as 'sustainable' and 'green', limiting the scope for interpretation and manipulation.
• Strengthening enforcement: The EU is strengthening mechanisms to monitor and enforce compliance, making companies more accountable.

The future of the fight against greenwashing

Although the EU is taking steps to regulate greenwashing, combating this issue is a long-term process.

• The evolution of greenwashing: Businesses are constantly looking for new and more sophisticated ways to present their products and services as green.
• The need for harmonization: There is a need to harmonize standards and definitions at a global level to prevent "greenwashing tourism".
• Consumer involvement: Consumers play a key role in the fight against greenwashing. Informed and critical consumers can pressure companies to act responsibly and transparently.

In conclusion, greenwashing is a serious problem that undermines consumer confidence and hinders real progress in sustainability. The EU adopts legislative measures to regulate greenwashing and strengthen transparency, but the fight against this issue requires long-term efforts on the part of regulators, companies and consumers. Spring

Unreliable environmental claims or eco-labels can mislead consumers and give them false impressions about the environmental impact or benefits of a company or brand. This practice is known as "greenwashing". Fraudulent products or misleading advertising may breach the Fair Trading Act or the Consumer Protection Act. However, due to the lack of transparency and asymmetry of information, it can be difficult for regulatory authorities and rights holders to prove corporate greenwashing.

In March 2023, the European Commission approved a proposal for a directive on environmental claims, which aims to tackle the problem of misleading environmental claims by setting strict standards for environmental claims and introducing fines for greenwashing practices. This law is expected to be approved by the European Parliament by 2024.

The aim of this directive is to create a global standard for environmental claims, particularly with a focus on companies doing business in the EU market. In addition to companies from the EU, foreign companies (outside the EU) aimed at consumers in the EU must therefore also comply with this directive. However, there are exceptions: Small businesses with fewer than 10 employees and an annual income of less than 2 million euros are exempt from the obligation to comply with the rules.

This directive sets strict certification standards for ecological claims. If companies want to make ecological claims for themselves or their products, they must prepare rigorous and scientifically recognized evidence that is verified by independent and officially recognized certification bodies, which should then issue a certificate of conformity. (Chun-Kai Huang, more at lexology.com)

In recent years, ever-increasing consumer awareness of climate and environmental protection has led to the growing importance and spread of sustainability statements in advertising, the so-called green claims. Sometimes catchphrases such as "100 % CO2-neutral", vague expressions such as "climate friendly" or various seals of quality are used. This often makes it difficult for consumers to verify the veracity of such advertising claims. Exaggerated, inaccurate or euphemistic sustainability claims (“greenwashing”) are not only considered socially frowned upon, but sometimes also cross the boundaries of what is legally permissible. In Austria, this limit has so far been the Fair Trade Act with a general prohibition of deceptive business practices in accordance with § 2 of the Federal Act against Unfair Competition (UWG). There are currently no specific rules for environmental claims in Austria. (Mag. David Konrath, Mag. Christian Zimmer, more at lexology.com)

EIOPA issued its final report on 4 June 2024, which contained its recommendation to the European Commission on the risks of greenwashing and the supervision of sustainable financial policies. The report was issued following the Commission's call for advice in May 2022, which in summary consisted of three parts:

1. input information from European supervisory authorities ( ESA ) on occurrences, cases and complaints of greenwashing practices combined with ESA's assessment of the extent and frequency of greenwashing;
2. supervision of greenwashing by national competent authorities ( NCA ); a
3. proposals to provide ESA to improve the current regulatory framework.

The report serves as EIOPA's final contribution to the call for advice and addresses the first and second parts of the Commission's requests. EIOPA addressed the first part in its Greenwashing Progress Report of 31 May 2023. (Eoin Caulfield, Ian Murray, Catherine Carrigy, more at lexology.com)

Greenwashing is back on the agenda after the Council of the European Union, after various discussions and exchanges of views, adopted on 17 June its position ("general approach") on the Green Claims Directive, which aims to tackle greenwashing and help consumers make truly greener decisions when purchasing a product or using the service.

This is the last attempt to influence to some extent the course of the next legislative phase, which will be managed by the newly elected parliament.

The guidelines are approved by the Council and the European Parliament on a proposal from the Commission, and in this case the Council decided to issue "general guidelines" to give the newly elected Parliament an idea of its position on the legislative proposal submitted by the Commission. . This should speed up the legislative process and make it easier to reach an agreement. (Guolo Elisabetta, more at lexology.com)

Green claims are ubiquitous and have almost become standard across industries. However, many approach green advertising critically, often linking it with the term "greenwashing". Associations for consumer protection (more…)

Regulation (EU) 2019/2088 " on the disclosure of information related to sustainability in the financial services sector ” imposes requirements on the disclosure of the environmental and social effects of transactions on financial markets when creating financial products for their participants and on financial advisors when providing investments or insurance. consulting for end investors. Such disclosures relate to the integration of sustainability risks, the consideration of adverse sustainability impacts and sustainable investment objectives, or the promotion of environmental or social considerations in investment decision-making and advisory processes. Regulation 2019/2088 aims to prevent greenwashing and increase transparency by a) reducing information asymmetries in the relationships between principal agents regarding the integration of sustainability risks and b) taking into account adverse sustainability impacts and promoting environmental or social characteristics that require financial market participants and financial operators to take into account pre-contractual advisors and ongoing disclosure of information to end investors. (Dimitris Chatzimichael, more at lexology.com)

In today's business environment, sustainability and environmental awareness have become paramount. However, it is crucial for businesses to avoid misleading or exaggerated claims about their green initiatives, a practice known as greenwashing.

How can businesses navigate the complex world of sustainability claims and maintain their credibility?

To shed light on this important topic, the company's intellectual property team recently hosted a multi-jurisdictional Lexology webinar masterclass on preventing greenwashing and navigating sustainability claims. This article aims to highlight some of the key points discussed during the webinar and provide valuable information for businesses seeking to maintain credibility and transparency in their sustainability efforts. ( Dan Smith, Miray Kavruk, Alexis Augustín, more at lexology.com)

The European Council announced today that it has reached agreement on a series of proposals to protect consumers from greenwashing, introducing requirements that force companies (more…)

The Green Claims Directive is a proposal of the European Commission. Its aim is to limit the effects of greenwashing and increase the control of producers. The Green Claims Directive (GCD), officially (more…)

Misleading claims that exaggerate how environmentally friendly a product is, known as "greenwashing", have made it difficult for consumers to identify genuine green products.

That's according to new research from the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which also found that consumers who are informed about greenwashing are better able to identify it.

The research bodies' experiment echoes previous EU calls for better education about the environmental durability of products and suggests that companies that greenwash their products are spoiling the competition for genuine eco-friendly brands. (More on thejournal.ie)

The European Commission and EU consumer authorities have sent letters to 20 airlines "identifying several types of potentially misleading environmental claims", focusing on "claims by airlines that CO2 emissions from flying could be offset by climate projects or the use of sustainable fuels". In particular, the authorities stressed that "airlines have yet to clarify whether such claims can be supported by reliable scientific evidence". (Jacob H. Hupart, more at lexology.com)

Greenwashing is likely to damage a company's reputation when deceptive activity is discovered. Under the term " green washing ” is commonly understood when a company engages in practices to mislead or exploit the desire for environmentally friendly products or services. This is done by creating a false impression that its actions, goals or products are more environmentally friendly than they actually are. We explore how auditors and financial boards can measure best practice in an area of increasing regulatory focus.

Greenwashing can mislead investors and consumers, who may forgo savings on similar products and services by paying a premium for what they perceive to be a "greener" product. Ultimately, this practice poses a serious business risk. This is particularly worrying as a recent worldwide review of randomly selected Competition and Markets Authority websites found that 40 % green claims made online could be misleading. (Aoiffe Moran, Joanne O'Rourke, more at lexology.com)

EU regulators have launched investigations into 20 airlines over their use of potentially "misleading greenwashing practices", reports the Financial Times. The European Commission has written to airlines and national consumer protection authorities "identifying several types of potentially misleading environmental claims," it continues. Although the airlines involved have not been named, the national regulatory authorities involved are Belgian, Dutch, Norwegian and Spanish, the FT adds. A key concern for regulators is that airlines have argued that carbon emissions from flying can be offset either by investing in environmental projects or by using more sustainable aviation fuels, which still emit carbon when burned but are less polluting than the kerosene currently used. , he explains. (For more, see Carbon Brief's carbon offset explainer .) In addition, the bloc called on companies to bring their practices into line with EU consumer law within 30 days, Al Jazeera reports . The article quotes European Commissioner for Values and Transparency Vera Jourova as saying that "if we want responsible consumers, we need to provide them with accurate information", adding that consumers "deserve accurate and scientific answers, not vague or false claims". (Philip Georgiadis and Kenza Bryan, Financial Times, ft. com)