This January 10th 2013 article offers a great summary of greenwashing as well as an explanation of why greenwashing occurs and rough rules of thumb to detect it.
Greenwashing is the unjustified appropriation of environmental virtue by a company, an industry, a government, a politician or even a non-government organization to create a pro-environmental image, sell a product or a policy, or to try and rehabilitate their standing with the public and decision makers after being embroiled in controversy.
The U.S.-based watchdog group CorpWatch defines greenwash as "the phenomena of socially and environmentally destructive corporations, attempting to preserve and expand their markets or power by posing as friends of the environment." This definition was shaped by by the group's focus on corporate behavior and the rise of corporate green advertising at the time. However, governments, political candidates, trade associations and non-government organizations have also been accused of greenwashing.
Showing posts with label Greenwashing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Greenwashing. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Saturday, February 9, 2013
Video - Greenwash Coverage from TerraChoice: The Seven Sins (CBC Newsworld)
TerraChoice Environmental Marketing Inc president Scott McDougall talks about the dangers of Greenwashing on CBC NewsWorld on April 17th, 2009.
Related Posts
New FTC Green Guidelines for Marketers
Profiting From the New Rules of Marketing
The 8 C's of Sustainability
Using Trees to Generate Electricity is Not Green Energy
Earth Day Marketing Mayhem ROI
Profiting from the New Rules of Green Marketing by Jacquie Ottman
2012 Review of Forests and Trees
Wednesday, February 6, 2013
New FTC Green Guidelines for Marketers
In October 2012 the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) updated its Green Guides for marketers. The original draft of the updated guidelines were released in 2010. The changes that should be noted pertains to the FTC's interpretation of general environmental benefits, more specifically claims that a product is “eco friendly” or “green,”
There are at least two salient points to be made here. The first is that the FTC now requires proof of any stated environmental benefit and the second is what it calls “environmental tradeoffs.” The replacement employed in the greener offering must indeed be green. The net effect is that companies will have to work harder to prove the claims they make. The FTC also has new powers to act against those who contravene these guidelines.
There are at least two salient points to be made here. The first is that the FTC now requires proof of any stated environmental benefit and the second is what it calls “environmental tradeoffs.” The replacement employed in the greener offering must indeed be green. The net effect is that companies will have to work harder to prove the claims they make. The FTC also has new powers to act against those who contravene these guidelines.
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
How the Hell did Enbridge get on the 2012 -2013 DJSI Leaders List?
The Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) is ostensibly for companies who have a smaller impact on the environment, but some of the companies in the index are not even remotely green. One prominent example on the DJSI includes a Canadian oil gas company called Enbridge Inc. Enbridge is a company that is helping Canada to expand its role as a dirty energy superpower, they have proposed new tar sands pipelines.
Enbridge's proposed Northern Gateway heavy crude pipeline would run between the Edmonton area in Alberta and Kitimat, British Columbia. The Pipeline would serve as a key export link to Asia that would see massive oil tankers navigating narrow coastal waterways.
Enbridge's proposed Northern Gateway heavy crude pipeline would run between the Edmonton area in Alberta and Kitimat, British Columbia. The Pipeline would serve as a key export link to Asia that would see massive oil tankers navigating narrow coastal waterways.
Monday, January 16, 2012
The Best Global Green Brands of 2011 (Top 50)
The "Best Global Green Brands" is published by the marketing and research company Interbrand. Over the last 10 years, Interbrand has built its corporate citizenship practice. They believe that corporate citizenship isn’t just “good practice” but “smart practice,” with its benefits greatly outweighing its risks.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Volkswagen's Dirty Automotive Brands
Volkswagen owns three of the world's most exotic brands, Porsche, Lamborghini and Bentley, yet even these gas guzzling car companies are striving to increase fuel efficiency and reduce emissions.
The Porsche 918 Spyder, was first unveiled at the Geneva Motor Show in March 2010. With its three electric motors, Porsche claims that in the "Eco" mode (one of the car's four settings), the Spyder gets an astounding 94.1 mpg and emits just 70g carbon dioxide (CO2) per kilometer. However in this mode the battery has a range of only 16 miles.
In "Race" mode, the car's power plant is supplemented by two electric motors giving it an extra 218 horsepower. The electric motors also redirect energy lost in braking back to the wheels. Despite the car's dynamic use of mobile electricity, the 918 is primarily powered by a 500-horsepower V8 internal combustion engine. The car is a marvelous feat of engineering, it can get from 0-62 mph in just 3.2 seconds and has a top speed of 198 mph, but at these speeds, it is also devours fossil fuels and emits high levels of emissions.
Although Bentley claims it will cut CO2 emissions and fuel consumption 15 per cent by 2012, the Bentley Brooklands emits CO2 at a rate of 465g of CO2 per kilometer. According to the EPA, the company currently makes some of the least fuel efficient cars on the US market. The Bentley Continental GTC, with a 12 cyl, 6 L engine gets only 10 mpg (17 hwy). The Bentley Azure, 8 cyl, 6.8 L and the Bentley Brooklands, 8 cyl, 6.8 L get only 9 mpg (15 hwy). According to the EPA, the only cars with worse fuel economy are manufactured by Volkswagen's other brand Lamborghini.
Despite dropping CO2 emission 20.5 percent in 2010 compared to the previous model, The Lamborghini Murcielago still emits CO2 at a rate of 539g of CO2 per kilometer. The EPA lists Lamborghini as the manufacturer of the least fuel efficient car in the US. The Lamborghini Murcielago, 12 cyl, 6.5 L and the Lamborghini Murcielago Roadster, 12 cyl, 6.5 L, get only 8 mpg (13 hwy).
Volkswagen is advancing greener car technologies, including cars powered by methane from human waste, but there is nothing green about the vehicles produced by some of the company's other brands. Owning companies that manufacture some of the most environmentally destructive cars on the planet obscures Volkswagen's new brand.
_______________________________________________
Related Posts
Volkswagen's Greener Vehicles
Volkswagen Wins Green Car of the Year for 2010
Porsche and Audi`s Greener Vehicles
Germany and the Global Competition for EV Supremacy
Competition in the Green Vehicle Market
Toyota and Tesla Making Electric Sedan
Toyota's Greener Vehicles
Honda's CR-Z and Second Generation Hybrids
Honda's Greener Vehicles
European Greener Cars
GM Breakthrough Reduces Emissions
GM's Greener Vehicles
Ford's Greener Vehicles
Korean (Hyundai & Kia) Greener Cars
Nissan's Greener Vehicles
Greener Commercial Transport Vehicles
Greening Vehicle Fleets
Electric Vehicle Bill Passes Energy Committee
Governments and the Growth of EVs
Government Investment Fuels Greener Vehicles
American Electric Vehicle Strategy
Private Public Cooperation Behind SA Joule
Jaguar XJ: A Greener Luxury Car
The FIAT 500 is Coming to America
E-Range: World's First Fully Electric 4x4
Toyota and Tesla Making Electric Sedan
Electric Vehicles Combat Global Warming
Electric Vehicles Combat Smog
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Cannon`s Green Efforts Under Fire
Cannon`s GreenNation program touts the eco-friendliness and the energy efficiency of its products. The GreenNation campaign also has a program that recycles the Canon Selphy and PIXMA ink cartridges. Cannon has also produced Malaysia’s first “green” scientific calculator.
Despite these efforts, Cannon is under fire from environmentalists. Influential environmental media outlets like Triple Pundit and ENN are criticizing Cannon for what is seen as contradictions in its marketing message.
Canon claims that a new line of printers have components that are made with recycled materials, but its company’s literature indicates that the exterior is actually made from biomass plastic.
Canon`s new printers also use electricity more efficiently. Canon states that the devices use only 1 watt of power when at rest, or a 90% reduction. But this is now a common feature employed by many electronic manufacturers.
Canon`s new printers also use electricity more efficiently. Canon states that the devices use only 1 watt of power when at rest, or a 90% reduction. But this is now a common feature employed by many electronic manufacturers.
Although not as good as paperless offices, Canon`s line of “eco-image” paper, is sourced from eucalyptus trees which can be harvested quickly and replenished easily. While paper from post-consumer content is preferable, plant fiber is a better option than tree fiber.
Scrutiny encourages accurate sustainability claims and vigilance encourages ongoing environmental improvements. However, it is important to acknowledge progress and give credit where credit is due. Canon may be less than perfect, but we need to be very careful about unfounded allegations of greenwashing.
_______________________________
Related Posts
Related Posts
Shoot the Messenger: The Costs of Greenwashing
Greenwashing Organic
Best Practices for Communicating Sustainability
Environmental Revolution: Honest Marketing
Green Marketing and Recession
Marketers Need a Green Education
Surviving Economic Volatility
An Open Model of Innovation
Carrotmobs: Adding Incentives to the Consumer Arsenal
GE's Investments in Green are Paying Off
Silencing Earth Day Critics
The Commericialization of Earth Day
Earth Day 2010: The Business of Green
The Business of Earth Day
At Target Everyday is Earth Day
Climate Counts: Businesses Combating Climate Change
Business for the Environment Global Summit
NYSE Green Summit
Earth Day Tool Kit
Earth Day Business Resources
Greenwashing Organic
Best Practices for Communicating Sustainability
Environmental Revolution: Honest Marketing
Green Marketing and Recession
Marketers Need a Green Education
Surviving Economic Volatility
An Open Model of Innovation
Carrotmobs: Adding Incentives to the Consumer Arsenal
GE's Investments in Green are Paying Off
Silencing Earth Day Critics
The Commericialization of Earth Day
Earth Day 2010: The Business of Green
The Business of Earth Day
At Target Everyday is Earth Day
Climate Counts: Businesses Combating Climate Change
Business for the Environment Global Summit
NYSE Green Summit
Earth Day Tool Kit
Earth Day Business Resources
Monday, July 12, 2010
Canadian Guidelines on Environmental Claims
The second edition of the guideline titled Environmental Claims: A Guide for Industry and Advertisers, was published in June 2008 by Canadian Standards Association, a not-for-profit private sector organization. It supersedes the previous edition published in 2000, entitled The CAN/CSA-ISO 14021 Essentials.
The first objective of this guide is to provide the users of ISO 14021, with a best practice guide to the application of the standard and some practical examples of how the standard could be applied to environmental claims in the Canadian marketplace.
The second objective is to provide assistance to industry and advertisers in complying with certain provisions of the Competition Act, the Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act, and the Textile Labelling Act.
This guide provides examples of preferred approaches and discouraged approaches to illustrate commonly used environmental claims; shows how to avoid misleading or deceptive claims relating to an implied or expressed environmental benefit; establishes the guidelines for Mobius loop markings; and suggests methodologies for tests that can be used to clarify claims.
The guide offers best practices for complying with the provisions that prohibit false or misleading representations. Download the entire document (PDF, 589 KB, 72 Pages) .
Related Posts
ISO 14020 Series: 3 Types of Environmental Labels and Declarations
ISO Principles for Environmental Labels and Claims
The History and Value of Environmental Labeling
Standards to Combat Eco-label and Eco-Certification Confusion
Organic Standards and Certified Labels
ISO 50001 Energy Management Standard
The Implications of ISO 50001 for Your Business
ISO Standards and Greener Vehicles
ISO 14001 Certification in the Solar Sector
Cititec ISO Environmental Management
G3 Guidelines and GRI Sustainability Reporting
Best Practices for Sustainable Businesses
Canon Reaffirms Green Procurement Program for Earth Day
Organic Standards and Certified Labels
The Green Job Market
Environmental Revolution: Technology Certification
IT Sector Should Leverage Their Supply Chains
Sustainable Supply Chains
Puma's Sustainable Supply Chain
Walmart and HP's Sustainable Supply Chains
America's New Fuel Efficiency Standards
The EPA Proposes Cleaner Air
Growing US Corporate Investments are Driving Cleantech in 2010
Best Practices for Communicating Sustainability
Green Marketing Legislation
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Silencing Earth Day Critics
Earth Day is an important day for business, collectively companies are spending tens of millions on Green marketing. But others have expressed their concerns that Earth Day constitutes little more than another over-commercialized marketing event. As Natalie Zmuda writes in an AdAge.com article, "It's Earth Day: Time to consume more to save the planet."Others are even more cynical, "My concern is that some companies just view [Earth Day] as a marketing event, like Thanksgiving or Christmas," said Larry Light, chairman-CEO of Arcature, a management consulting firm. "Then they've fulfilled their obligation for the rest of the year. The whole issue of sustainability means that a commitment also has to be sustainable. If it's only for one day, then it's a marketing event."
Some are resolute in their dismissal of Earth Day. "Earth Day's usefulness has passed," said Alex Steffen, executive editor of World Changing, a sustainability blog. "The idea that we're going to direct our attention to the planet for a day or a week ... is not a sufficient response anymore. An awful lot of people view Earth Day as the time to express the idea that they are sympathetic to change. We need to move from being sympathetic to change to actually changing things."
For years Grist has derided Earth Day, two years ago David Roberts was complaining about it, noting that it wasn't enough, saying “The time for "small steps" is long past. It's time for people to wake the hell up.” This year Grist unveiled an appropriately titled Screw Earth Day campaign. The purists behind Screw the Earth think that we do not do enough to get the message across. They feel we need to do more to protect the environment. As they expain, “It’s not about a single day, dude, it’s about living green every day.”
Grist's David Roberts points out, "Green is all the hype everywhere. So you might think that the public would be engaged in this push....polls find public interest as low as ever, and opinion about climate and energy policy is as inchoate and incoherent as ever. There are no rallies. There are no emails and letters and phone calls streaming into Congressional offices. There is no real social movement behind energy/climate action. There’s nothing to push a recalcitrant member of Congress in the right direction."
Although Mr Roberts may be correct about the hype surrounding Earth Day, he is wrong on just about every other count. Earlier this year, one Billion people around the world turned out their lights to vote for climate change action during Earth Hour and today another billion are expected to get involved with Earth Day events. The social momentum of environmental interest is obvious and irrefutable. This is an important period of transition, and although the mediums by which this interest will express itself are not yet fully formed, the mechanisms of change are coalescing.
Contrary to Mr Robert's assertions, public interest in the environment is not low, studies are finding that despite the recession the interest in Green continues. Earlier this month Joel Makower pointed this out as the one constant from the polling data on consumer environmental attitudes, "Vast majorities of consumers say they have adopted greener habits in their daily lives, and shop for at least some products with a keen eye on their environmental provenance and energy and climate impacts. In other words: the marketplace is getting greener -- way greener."
At least one criticism is well founded. As more companies and marketers jump on the Earth Day bandwagon it is evident that some are guilty of masking environmentally destructive practices under the guise of environmental sensitivity. This practice, commonly referred to as greenwashing, dilutes the integrity of Green branding efforts. And this prompts concerns that consumers will stop paying attention to Green altogether.
Earth Day is not only an opportunity to move product, such events also exert pressure on companies to improve their environmental record. All companies who promote sales in conjunction with Earth Day open themselves to scrutiny. Unsubstantiated Green claims or associations will be exposed and this could prove detrimental to a company's reputation. Although some companies are guilty of greenwashing they will be punished by consumers and legislators.
The business community is an important contributor to the environmental crises we are confronting and they are an equally important part of the solution. Forward looking companies understand that greenwashing is simply counterproductive, these companies know that the best and most enduring way to position themselves is through earnest environmental initiatives that have integrity. That is why many companies are already looking well beyond events like Earth Day and emboldening their commitment to sustainable business practices.
For business, Earth Day is a marketing opportunity, and as such an opportunity to grow profits and increase market share, but businesses are also using Earth Day to fund environmental projects and raise awareness about the environment. If the world is to change, people's attitudes must change and public events like Earth Day are an important part of the transition to a Greener world. Earth Day engages people and helps to transform the wider culture.
Although it is easy to respect the dedication of many Green activists, it is sometimes difficult to understand the approach of certain eco-purists. The anger they vent as they rail against popular movements like Earth-day seems at times incomprehensible. It is easy to appreciate the purists' roles as watchdogs and stalwart activists, even their impatience has its place, but at times their comments detract from the urgency of the Green message.
As a force within the broader efforts eco-purists serve a valuable purpose, but when they hijack the mainstream discussion, they foster anger, apathy and cynicism. Environmental extremists may attract a core of misanthropes, but they alienate the general public and send businesses looking for loopholes instead of contributing to the discussion. Thankfully many corporate leaders are participating in finding solutions, and many more appear ready to follow.
Are eco-purists trying to help the planet or as it sometimes appears, do they prefer distancing people with unproductive vitriol? Some purists go so far as to call for a revolution that does away with capitalism and the whole free market system. However, it is clear to almost everyone that these nihilistic reveries do not serve people or the planet.
More reasonable approaches envision ways of bringing about change without bloodying our streets. It seems obvious that the most expedient change will occur by working within our system. For example, proposed climate change legislation in the US would put a price on carbon emissions and unleash the power of free markets expediting an efficient transition to a carbon restricted world. Perhaps the most reasonable approach involves sending a loud message to our elected representatives.
As purists rue the popularity of Earth Day, Green businesses are taking advantage of the opportunity to highlight their Green initiatives and eco-entrepreneurs are hopeful that events like Earth Day will expedite the task of bringing their innovations to market. Earth Day is effectively turning the wheels of our free market economy.
Sadly some green-purists appear confused, they fail to understand that sustainable consumerism is not the enemy it is the goal. Their cynical rants further serve to illustrate that their approach does not engage the public nor influence politicians.
Admittedly, Earth Day is a highly commercialized event, but those who criticize should remember that commerce is the language of action. If we are to see a Greener world, businesses must not only be amongst those who contribute solutions, they must lead.
For businesses and consumers, Earth Day is about more than a point on a calendar. The Earth Day event has amplified a message that will reverberate throughout the year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


