Minimising the risk of greenwashing and maximising the value of green messaging

By: Jon Clements | Metamorphic PR

Regulations around businesses making environmental claims – and running the risk of so-called “greenwashing” – have just got tougher.

The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has released guidance which updates its Green Claims Code by putting responsibility on all organisations in a supply chain to ensure consumers get “clear, honest and accurate information on green claims” made about products.

And businesses would be wise to take the CMA seriously, as its enforcement powers mean it can “issue fines to businesses that fail to comply, without having to take businesses to court”.

So, what does this mean for businesses who want to demonstrate the environmental benefits of their products and services and make it part of their marketing communications activities?

The risks of “greenwashing”

First, a useful reminder on “greenwashing”. It is, according to Ellie Smith of The Marketing Pod – one of the panel on a recent Business Green webinar – when companies claim sustainability credentials without having strong evidence, therefore having the potential to mislead buyers.

Avoiding this means a “need to substantiate everything” with “defensible, accurate messaging that can be backed up”, Smith said.

Failing to do this in marketing activity can bring businesses to the attention of the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) – the UK’s advertising regulator – which recently updated its guidance on “misleading environmental claims and social responsibility in advertising”.

Noting that any sanction a business receives from the ASA is a “strong one”, Stephen Woodford of the Advertising Association said that advertising had an obligation to be

“legal, decent, honest and truthful”. He added that “adverse publicity about breaking rules and misleading customer is damaging to trust in business”.

However, in many instances, the greenwashing by a company is inadvertent.

Miles Lockwood of the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said that 99% of cases were the result of a “genuine mistake” by companies.

“The big issue is not around substantiation; most get it wrong by being too bombastic and absolute in their claims. The solution is to be more conditional in the claims made,” he said, while Woodford feels that “well-substantiated, incremental claims rather than grandiose claims” are more believable.

The biggest challenge, Smith believes, is explaining a claim in lay terms but without being vague: “The best communications are achieved when sustainability is more central to the business ethos. It makes it more credible and helps the comms teams,” she added.

Remaining compliant with environmental claims

So, how should businesses and their marketers/communicators ensure their environmental claims don’t fall foul of regulations and harm their reputation with customers?

Choosing to add generalised descriptions such as eco-friendly, green and sustainable – according to Lockwood – will “attract a high level of evidential requirement” and companies “will be held to a high standard on such claims”.

Evidence is critical, Smith said, such as greenhouse gas reduction data, credible sustainability reports and science-based targets with rigorous calculations and, ideally, external validation. Specific evidence examples could include a percentage reduction in Scope 2 emissions or a specified quantity of renewable energy used by the organisation.

Equally, companies – especially in their sustainability assessment and reporting – should not shy away from telling the full story of their sustainability performance, highlighting both the achievements and the work still in progress.

“Companies are more comfortable with nuance and admitting failings or not meeting targets; being more open and with more humility in sustainability storytelling,” Smith said.

Then again, any environmental claims that need the equivalent of “small print” or the rapid-fire clarifications at the end of some radio adverts are not the basis for a good claim – something the ASA “takes a dim view of”, according to Woodford: “Find ways of telling the stories that are simple and easy to understand. Consumers don’t like seeing small print – it undermines trust and should be avoided.”

Speaking for the ASA, Lockwood added that “small print is not a get-out-of-jail-free card; making a claim should be in the main copy and consumers want practical things they can relate to – breaking down a complex issue into something relatable and bite-sized.”

Sustainability reporting and environmental claims – the small business challenge

Metamorphic PR – attending the webinar – posed a question about how small and medium-sized firms can navigate the challenges of sustainability reporting and ensuring their environmental claims pass muster.

“There are so many opportunities to learn, and third parties can provide reassurance to get it right. Validation, due diligence and certification give companies confidence they are making progress in line with best practice guidance,” Smith advised.

And putting sustainability at the core of a company’s ethos and operations can make a huge difference, according to Woodford: “Small companies formed with sustainability at their heart have a big advantage over large companies by starting from scratch and building it in from first principles.”

For support with communications activity involving environmental claims contact Metamorphic PR and for sustainability assessment and reporting support visit our Intellisus page.