INSIGHT: How greenwashing threatens global climate progress

More than ever before, consumers are paying closer attention to the environmental impact of the products they buy and the companies they support. Businesses eager to appear eco-friendly have responded with bold claims of sustainability, but not all of them hold up to scrutiny. Some use misleading labels, vague buzzwords, or flashy campaigns to create an illusion of environmental responsibility without making real changes. 

This practice, known as greenwashing, not only deceives consumers but also slows down genuine climate action, allowing pollution and unsustainable practices to persist behind a carefully crafted green image.

Greenwashing is particularly prevalent across Africa, where weak regulatory frameworks, low consumer awareness, and corporate influence make it easy for companies to mislead the public.

ORIGIN OF GREENWASHING

The term greenwashing was first coined by environmentalist Jay Westerveld in 1986. While staying at a hotel in Fiji, he noticed a card urging guests to reuse towels to help save the environment. The hotel itself was, however, engaging in wasteful and environmentally harmful practices, revealing the contradiction between its message and its actual operations. The hotel, located near sensitive island ecosystems, was also in the middle of an expansion.

Greenwashing has since evolved. Today, it spans multiple industries, including fashion, energy, food, technology, and finance, making it even harder for consumers to distinguish between real sustainability efforts and deceptive marketing.

COMMON GREENWASHING TACTICS

In most cases of greenwashing, companies often lack evidence to support their claims. Verifying such claims can be challenging, but consumers can rely on third-party research and analyst reports, as well as examine the product’s ingredient list.

Mary Mwanret Dasat, a sustainability consultant at Enable Green Consulting, told TheCable that companies often opt for a quick, aesthetic facade rather than a long-term commitment to sustainability.

“People just feel anything that looks like a green colour, they should splash it on their brand or product, and that is their way of making it green. But unfortunately, that is not sufficient,” she said.

“For example, construction companies would usually use the word eco-friendly to portray a certain level of sustainability of their buildings. However, you’ll soon realise that the plants they put in those structures are not live plants. They are plastic plants made from PVC, a byproduct of crude oil.

“You also find a lot of artificial grass and basically a lot of temporal fixtures — things that appear to be green while in the core, they are not green.”

Greenwashing tactics vary across industries, but they often follow similar patterns. Here are some of the strategies to watch out for.

Vague or misleading language: Companies use ambiguous terms like “eco-friendly”, “green”, “natural”, or “sustainable” without providing clear evidence to support these claims. Without concrete metrics, these words are meaningless.

False labels and certifications: Some brands create fake environmental labels or misleading certifications that imply sustainability without third-party verification. In some cases, they misuse legitimate eco-labels.

Hidden trade-offs: A company may highlight one environmentally friendly aspect of a product while ignoring larger negative impacts. For example, some fashion brands claim to have sustainable clothing lines, yet the production process involves high carbon emissions, excessive water use, and labour exploitation.

Dasat points out that in Nigeria, where textiles are mostly imported, companies trying to market green products often end up accidentally greenwashing.

“You want to start an eco-friendly line, but certain chemicals for your products are not available in Nigeria, and you have to import them. If the carbon footprint of importing those chemicals from China or India is very high, then you’re actually engaging in greenwashing,” she said.

Carbon offsetting without emission reductions: Many corporations claim “carbon neutrality” by purchasing carbon offsets instead of actually reducing emissions. While offsetting has some benefits, it should not be used as an excuse to continue polluting.

Irrelevant claims: Some companies highlight green initiatives that have little to no impact on the environment while ignoring their core environmental footprint. A common example is oil companies promoting renewable energy investments while continuing fossil fuel expansion.

Overstating recycling and circular economy practices: Some businesses exaggerate their recycling efforts to appear sustainable. For instance, plastic bottle companies claim their packaging is 100 percent recyclable, even though most plastic waste never actually gets recycled.

IMPORTANCE OF CONSUMER AWARENESS

Going green sells. But in the fight against greenwashing, consumer awareness is paramount. Archibong Akpan, a climate scientist and policy expert at the UN Climate Change, told TheCable that it has become increasingly important for individuals to critically assess the authenticity of sustainability claims made by companies.

Akpan highlights how advertising strategies perpetuate greenwashing, saying, “when you look at product labels, you might find claims like 100 percent recyclable or biodegradable. But they will not tell you specifically how to dispose of or recycle the product properly”.

“Lack of access to detailed information can affect our efforts to reduce carbon emissions. Consumers have to do their research before purchasing products because caring for the environment and protecting the planet is a collective responsibility,” he said.

“It’s important to be aware that some greenwashed products may actually be cheaper than those that adhere to national and international standards. If a product contains toxic chemicals, it’s likely not eco-friendly.

“Various applications now offer verification tools that help consumers assess product claims. Resources like Ecolabel and HowGood allow consumers to check products by serial number.

“Platforms developed by organisations like Greenpeace and the FTC can also guide consumers in determining the eco-friendliness of a product.”

Akpan noted that authentic eco-friendly products are typically certified by an official vetting organisation, and this certification will be clearly indicated on the labeling.

HOW GREENWASHING IMPACTS CLIMATE ACTION

Greenwashing is a threat to global climate action. It undermines the integrity of sustainability movements and delays progress toward a healthier planet.

According to the United Nations, this deceptive practice erodes the trust, ambition, and action required to achieve meaningful reductions in emissions and combat the climate crisis. While it may present the illusion of environmental responsibility, greenwashing distracts from real solutions and stalls the urgency of climate interventions.

One major consequence is the delay of genuine sustainability efforts. When companies present themselves as eco-friendly without making substantial operational changes, it creates a false sense of progress. This illusion leads to complacency among both businesses and the public, reducing the momentum needed to implement impactful environmental solutions.

Greenwashing also damages consumer trust. As more companies make exaggerated or unverified sustainability claims, consumers grow skeptical, even toward brands that are making honest efforts. This distrust undermines public support for sustainable products and discourages ethical consumption.

Investors and stakeholders are not immune. Many rely on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics to guide their funding decisions. When companies manipulate these metrics through greenwashing, it distorts ESG ratings and causes investments to be funneled into businesses that are not truly sustainable, thereby misallocating resources that could have advanced real climate solutions.

Furthermore, greenwashing weakens regulatory and policy efforts. If corporations can successfully deceive regulators with glossy reports and misleading data, it slows the push for stronger environmental laws and enforcement. Without clear accountability, harmful industries are allowed to operate with little oversight.

Ultimately, the greatest danger lies in the environmental harm that continues behind the scenes. Many companies claiming to be climate champions still engage in unsustainable practices like deforestation, excessive carbon emissions, and industrial pollution. Greenwashing not only masks these harmful activities but enables them to persist without consequence.

AUTHENTIC SUSTAINABILITY EFFORTS 

For businesses aiming to avoid the pitfalls of greenwashing, conducting a materiality assessment is crucial. This assessment will help businesses understand the real impact of their activities on carbon emissions and develop effective strategies to mitigate those impacts.

Dasat said the materiality assessment is simply asking: “What are the activities involved in the production of my products or services? What are the impacts of those activities in regards to carbon emissions? What are the strategies I can imbibe in my business to minimise the impact that I’m making?”

“It is after the materiality assessment that you can now decide to come up with measures you will take to mitigate carbon emissions,” she added.

This process ensures that sustainability efforts are not just performative but are rooted in a genuine commitment to environmental responsibility.

Dasat also noted that investors have the power to demand corporate transparency, but without strong government policies and penalties, many continue to prioritise profit.

“We don’t have policies in place to penalise companies that are guilty of greenwashing. Investors are also looking at their return on investment,” she stated.

“If there are no policies that fine companies guilty of greenwashing, then investors won’t care. But if these policies exist, investors will drive actual green measures because they know the fines will affect their bottom line.”

The fight against climate change is too urgent for shortcuts and half-truths. To achieve a truly sustainable future, businesses must be held to higher standards, and consumers must ask difficult questions.