Greenwashing
Greenwashing, a misleading marketing tactic in which companies make unsubstantiated claims about their sustainability efforts, has become increasingly common in recent decades across numerous industries. Greenwashing promotes consumer mistrust and has a long-term detrimental influence on a brand’s image.
The term “greenwashing” was coined by Jay Westerveld following the hotel industry’s “Save the Towel” campaign. Customers were encouraged to reuse towels to save water. However, the initiative was exposed to be cost-saving rather than environmental, as initially marketed.
Greenwashing in Fashion
The fashion industry has been condemned for utilising greenwashing tactics to leverage consumer’s interest in sustainability by creating the impression that their products and manufacturing processes are more environmentally friendly than they are. According to the Synthetics Anonymous research, based on UK Competition and Markets Authority criteria, 59% of environmental claims made by fashion companies are false or lack adequate proof.
The influence of deceptive tactics limits consumers’ ability to distinguish genuine initiatives, shaping their purchasing decisions. Approximately 47% of fashion customers in the UK would stop buying from a brand shown to be making false or deceptive statements about sustainability.
Millennials and Gen Z consumers are more likely than other generations to buy from brands aligned with their personal, social and environmental values. Gen Z consumers are considered the most sustainable generation; however, the demographic’s relationship with fashion consumption is complex. 73% of those surveyed are willing to pay more for sustainably sourced products and enjoy second-hand shopping. However, fast fashion clothing hauls promoted across social media platforms are one of this groups most popular and consumed trends. The increasing popularity of these hauls not only encourages, but also glorifies excessive consumption, contributing to the impression that fashion is a disposable commodity.
Greenwashing emphasises the importance of evaluating the credibility of sustainability claims. The lack of transparency and traceability within fashion supply chains makes it challenging to verify claims, as information is not readily accessible. The complexity of global supply chains, involving various stages and processes across different countries, poses challenges for brands in tracking their products from raw materials to finished goods. While brands typically have direct contact with their tier 1 suppliers, they often lack visibility into the subsequent tiers of the supply chain, making it difficult to trace the origins of materials and ensure accountability throughout the entire process.
Frequently used, interchangeable, vague terms like ‘eco’, ‘sustainable’, ‘recycled’, and ‘conscious’ may indicate potential greenwashing. While it doesn’t guarantee it, using these words warrants further research into the claims made by brands. As a result, consumers must actively educate themselves and increase their awareness to manage the challenges posed by greenwashing.
Greenwashing is prevalent in the fashion industry, including fast fashion and high-end brands, indicating a widespread issue across different market levels. However, an even cheaper and quicker business model compared to fast fashion, called ultra-fast fashion, is becoming increasingly popular. Ultra-fast fashion brands such as Shein’s business-to-customer (B2C) e-commerce platform operate across multiple countries and regions. By utilising their online presence and real-time demand analysis tools, ultra-fast fashion brands can introduce thousands of new products daily and align supply with demand in real time. Fast fashion is known for its rapid production. In contrast, ultra-fast fashion employs innovative technologies that may worsen environmental issues due to the speed and volume of production.
Examples of Greenwashing in Fashion
Luxury Fashion Brands
Luxury brands are not immune to greenwashing allegations, with multiple luxury clothing labels facing allegations of insufficient transparency in their supply chains. It’s standard for these brands to manufacture their garments in factories located in lower-income countries. However, gaps in European Union regulations enable brands to label their garments as ‘Made in Italy’ or ‘Made in France’, even if only minimal processes, such as quality control, occur in these countries. This loophole enables luxury brands to cultivate and maintain a specific premium image and customer perception. With higher price points and the implied mark of quality and craftsmanship associated with ‘Made in Italy’ or ‘Made in France’ Western luxury consumers typically do not associate expensive luxury products with production in lower-income countries. The need for clarity about the manufacturing origin raises concerns about transparency and can lead to greenwashing while affecting sustainability progress within the industry.
Ultra-Fast Fashion Brands
Boohoo PLC introduced its UP.FRONT Fashion Ready for the Future sustainability strategy based on three main principles: Clothes.made smarter, Suppliers.on better terms and Business.taking action. Despite the debut of the “Ready for the Future” range, which included 466 items made from recycled polyester, it was overshadowed by the huge and constantly updated “new in” area. Vice magazine’s calculations found that Boohoo launched roughly 100 new products daily. The brand attracted criticism and allegations of greenwashing because its production and business model were contradictory and made no significant improvements in sustainability.
Shein, pronounced ‘She-in’, the Chinese fast fashion company known for rapidly producing cheap garments and accessories, has experienced criticism for its sustainability activities, including greenwashing. Critics highlight vague and unverifiable sustainability claims and use terms like “sustainable practice” and “material with little impact on the environment” without substantial evidence. Accusations of greenwashing stem from influencer-sponsored trips to the factories, disseminating misinformation and fostering a deceptive image of sustainable practices. Shein uses influencers to promote excessive consumption, as shown by the popularity of #SHEINhaul videos across social media. Shein’s lack of transparency and low environmental and social responsibility have caused the brand to receive the lowest ratings for its environmental impact, labour conditions, use of Uyghur cotton and animal welfare. These factors have sparked widespread concerns regarding Shein’s ethical and sustainable practices alongside greenwashing.
High Street Fast Fashion Brands
Inditex, the parent company of popular fashion retailers such as Zara, Berska and Stradivarius, received criticism of greenwashing and “ambiguous and unsubstantiated” sustainability claims across its subsidiaries. One of its most popular brands, Zara, has popularised the fast fashion model as it can take a design to market in 15 days and replicate high-end designs at lower prices. A crucial element of Zara’s fast fashion model lies in its agility to swiftly respond to consumer demand and feedback. This approach lets them consistently update their inventory, tempting customers to return and explore the latest designs. Zara’s sustainability commitments are overshadowed by its overconsumption-fuelled business model and environmental impact. The genuineness of its sustainability initiatives has been questioned as Fashionchecker scored Inditex a low score on supply chain transparency.
H&M gained a negative reputation and was accused of greenwashing on multiple occasions, with critics highlighting the deceptive and misleading sustainable marketing initiatives. These allegations include lawsuits aimed mostly at their “Conscious Choice” collections alongside misleading labelling, marketing, and advertising. H&M used green hangtags to market its Conscious Choice products, implying that these items were more environmentally conscious than others. However, this practice was criticised as a ploy ‘designed to mislead consumers by using false environmental sustainability profiles‘. This criticism stemmed from the fact that most Conscious Choice products were made from polyester and recycled plastic.
Swedish Boulevard newspaper Aftonbladet alleged that H&M misrepresented the sustainability of its business, particularly concerning its ability to close the loop and divert textiles from landfill through its recycling program. The newspaper tracked several H&M garments, with two items reaching a recycling facility as expected. However, one garment ended up in a textile factory in India, and the digital trail mysteriously vanished for three other garments.
A report by Quartz exposed “misleading” and “outright deceptive” tactics employed by H&M, and the retailer faced more accusations of greenwashing. H&M implemented the Higg Materials Sustainability Index, a ranking system that assesses brands from 0 to 180, with lower scores indicating better sustainability practices. These scores were displayed on each product page online to inform consumers about the environmental impact of materials used. However, H&M failed to address negative scores on the Higg Index, leading to a misrepresentation. They falsely claimed that over half of the scorecards labelled items as environmentally friendly despite potentially having higher scores, indicating a need for improvement in sustainability practices. This discrepancy raises concerns about the accuracy of H&M’s claims regarding the environmental friendliness of their products. For example, products were advertised as using 20% less water instead of scoring minus 20 in that category. The various scandals and greenwashing accusations surrounding H&M have led to doubts about the company’s dedication to genuine sustainability and ethical principles.
EU’s green claims directive
According to a European Commission study, companies in the EU made vague or misleading sustainability claims in more than half of the cases, with 40% being completely unsubstantiated. The EU’s Green Claims Directive protects consumers against deceptive marketing practices and unsubstantiated sustainability claims, encouraging a shift toward more sustainable consumption. This legislative initiative establishes a comprehensive framework for companies operating within the EU/EEA, necessitating independent verification and substantiation of green claims using scientific evidence before advertising to consumers. The directive also puts in place verification and enforcement processes conducted independently by accredited verifiers. Non-compliance with these regulations can result in fines of up to 4% of a company’s revenues, confiscation of related revenues, and loss of public funding access. The Green Claims are particularly interested in cracking down on carbon offsetting claims, which are often ambiguous and mislead consumers. Companies must be transparent about what part of that claim concerns their operations and what part relies on offsetting carbon or climate-related claims.
UK’s Anti-Greenwashing rules
The UK’s Anti-Greenwash Measures and Green Claims Code involve a collaboration of regulatory bodies, including the Competition & Markets Authority (CMA), the UK Code of Non-broadcast Advertising, Direct & Promotional Marketing (CAP code), and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). These entities collectively play vital roles in overseeing environmental green claims. The CMA guides through the Green Claims Code, offering direction on making environmental claims and specifically prohibiting generic green claims like “carbon neutral” or “eco-friendly” the regulatory focus is strengthening protections against misleading advertising related to product’s environmental or social impacts.
Greenhushing
Greenhushing, in contrast to greenwashing refers to the intentional or unintentional act of hiding or withholding information about environmental impacts, sustainability measures, or eco-friendly initiatives. This behaviour often stems from a fear of criticism for perceived inadequacies in sustainability efforts. Companies are also concerned about potential accusations of greenwashing, as such claims can irreversibly damage their reputation.
The concept of greenhushing presents challenges for consumers seeking to make sustainable choices. As businesses choose to publish less about their sustainability efforts, consumers may need help understanding the total environmental impact of the products they buy. This lack of transparency can hinder informed decision-making and limit consumers’ ability to support sustainable practices within the fashion industry to make informed choices that drive positive change.
Tackling Greenwashing and Greenhushing in the Fashion Industry
Role of Policymakers:
Policymakers play an essential role in combating greenwashing and greenhushing by legislating specific standards and legislation that require businesses to substantiate their environmental claims with scientific proof. Policymakers should hold those accountable for noncompliance with transparency requirements, creating a deterrent effect. Also, educating organisations about transparency and accountability in sustainability reporting helps prevent greenwashing and greenhushing.
Role of Academics:
Through research activities that will improve current approaches to social and environmental impact assessment, academics serve a vital role in preventing greenwashing through research activities. Researching the impact of greenhushing provides significant information to develop practical solutions for tackling this practice. Also, by working with businesses, policymakers, and consumers, academics can help develop improved communication tools and approaches that support greater transparency within the industry.
Role of Businesses:
Transparent reporting of sustainability efforts and accomplishments promotes trust among stakeholders and displays a commitment to authentic environmental practices. Third-party verification helps authenticate environmental claims and mitigates against potential biases in reporting. Also, stakeholder participation, which includes employees, consumers, investors, and suppliers, is vital to maintaining transparency throughout the reporting process.
Role of Consumers:
To prevent falling victim to greenwashing, consumers should look for third-party certifications, demand transparency, investigate companies’ sustainability programmes, and be wary of imprecise or unverifiable promises.
Consumers may help to increase transparency in the fashion industry by actively supporting businesses that show true sustainability initiatives and adhere to transparent reporting standards. Making educated decisions based on accurate information is critical for promoting responsible practices in the sector.
By taking actions relevant to their context and capabilitities, all stakeholders can resist greenwashing and reduce greenhushing. Through implementing regulatory measures, promoting research projects, encouraging honest business practices, and educating consumers, all stakeholders have the power to collaboratively foster a culture of responsibility and honesty in sustainability reporting within the fashion industry.
Written by Krishma Sabbarwal