These days, sustainability and climate protection are not just terms on the tip of everyone’s tongue but crucial goals for businesses that can really give them a competitive edge. Many firms strive to communicate their sustainability efforts as openly and transparently as possible. In this context, terms like greenwashing, greenwishing and greenhushing are bandied about. But what exactly do these terms mean and what do they have to do with corporate climate protection measures? In this article, we define these terms and offer practical tips on how to recognise and promote genuine sustainable engagement.
Greenwashing is when products or behaviours are portrayed as more environmentally friendly than they actually are. This includes sustainability promises that contain exaggerated, false, or misleading statements. A deeper dive is often required to tell the difference between greenwashing and genuine environmental efforts by a company.
There are seven different types of greenwashing:
Greenwishing refers to unintentional deception regarding sustainability engagement. Usually, the company’s desire to be more sustainable is genuine and, initially, positive. However, sustainability measures are often portrayed as more significant than they actually are, owing to a lack of knowledge or insufficient evaluation. Or the changes sought fail to come to fruition. Under pressure to set ambitious sustainability goals, companies can end up committing to unrealistic targets that they cannot achieve because of financial, technological or organisational constraints.
Merely wishing to be more sustainable is not enough to truly act sustainably. In fact, empty promises can actually mislead and cause similar problems to greenwashing.
Greenhushing, in contrast to greenwashing, involves deliberately keeping quiet about sustainability efforts, even when they are being done in the background. This is often done out of fear of negative reactions or accusations of greenwashing. While greenhushing protects companies from potential criticism, it also prevents them from contributing to public discourse on climate protection. This means other actors cannot benefit from their knowledge, which can ultimately slow down the broader adoption of sustainability measures. Companies also miss the opportunity to inspire others to take action.
Unlike greenwashing, bluewashing focuses on a company’s social rather than environmental engagement. Bluewashing is when companies overstate their social and ethical responsibility. Companies often use symbolic gestures or superficial measures to enhance their image, without achieving the substantial changes they promise. An example would be portraying working conditions as better than they actually are, in order to improve the company’s reputation.
Sustainability communication is challenging, in that it must be credible, understandable and distinctive. It requires a great deal of sensitivity and expertise. The following five basic rules can help you navigate this complexity and communicate your sustainability efforts successfully.
1. Be consistent in what you say: ensure that the statements you make are coherent and compatible.
2. Capture the audience’s attention: use a mix of content, excitement, storytelling and humour to ensure people listen. Acknowledging your weaknesses also arouses interest and enhances credibility.
3. Review and test your messages: messages should be checked, tested and adapted to the target audience, while remaining consistent in terms of their content.
4. Consider tone, word and image choice: choosing the right communication tools can enhance the effect you’re after.
5. Cover all bases: clear communication should be your top priority. Climate communication should be free of contradictions.
If using labels, make absolutely sure that they are serious and trustworthy.
Recently (since July 2024) greenwashing has become a topical and important issue in Switzerland and is often discussed in the media. In 2023, several companies came under fire for making various promises and claims regarding “climate neutrality”, attracting criticism from Swiss consumer protection bodies for unfair competition.
To prevent these kinds of cases in the future, Switzerland has already taken various measures to increase the transparency of environmental information.
1. Legislative changes: With the amended CO2 Act and Unfair Competition Act (abbreviated to UWG in German), Switzerland has introduced explicit measures against greenwashing. From 1 January 2025, it will be considered unfair to make false or unsubstantiated claims about the climate impact of products or services. Companies must support all environmental claims with objective and verifiable data. This regulation applies not only to large companies that are required to publish sustainability reports but also to claims and advertising statements made voluntarily.
2. Greenwashing reporting platform: the Swiss Foundation for Consumer Protection has set up a platform that consumers can use to report suspected cases of greenwashing. The aim is to support the enforcement of the new regulations and strengthen consumer rights (source: Swiss Consumer Protection).
New guidelines and regulations from the EU also aim to combat widespread greenwashing and promote reliable environmental information.
Sources:
KPMG: Greenwashing, greenhushing and greenwishing: Don’t fall victim to these ESG reporting traps
ZHAW: Greenshushing als strategisches Schweigen
Klimafakten: Über Klima sprechen
Gabler Wirtschaftslexikon: Bluewashing
admin.ch: Federal Council notes financial sector's progress in preventing greenwashing
Beobachter: EU verbietet Greenwashing – und die Schweiz?
MME: ESG: Schweiz beschliesst Verbot des Greenwashing
Institutional Money: Greenwashing: Schweiz entscheidet sich für Selbstregulierung
Green Circle: Problem Greenhushing: Pioniere feiern hilft
