Greenwashing: When Sustainability Becomes Just a Good Story

We are witnessing major global changes, particularly in corporate communication and sustainability reporting. Companies and their leaders, especially those responsible for communications and marketing, are under increasing pressure to demonstrate environmental responsibility.

At the same time, regulators, investors, employees and consumers are paying closer attention not only to what companies say, but also to whether their messages reflect what they actually do.

This is why every management team should ask a simple question: Are we sure the way we communicate sustainability is not crossing the line into greenwashing?

Greenwashing is no longer simply a communication mistake or an ethical issue. It has become a reputational, regulatory and business risk.

In the European Union, new rules applying from 27 September 2026 further restrict unsubstantiated generic environmental claims such as “green”, “eco-friendly” or “environmentally friendly”, as well as certain sustainability labels that are not based on appropriate certification schemes or established by public authorities.

In other words, calling something “green” is no longer enough. You need to be able to prove it.

When does green communication become greenwashing?

Greenwashing is a communication and marketing practice in which a company, product or service is presented as more environmentally responsible than it actually is.

The problem often begins with communication itself.

Words such as “natural”, “green”, “bio”, “eco”, “sustainable” or “environmentally friendly” may sound attractive, but without concrete evidence and measurable results, they can easily become nothing more than a marketing façade.

The same applies to visual communication. Green colours, images of nature, leaves, earthy tones and environmental symbols do not prove sustainability. They can, however, create the perception that a product or company is environmentally responsible.

Another problem arises when a company highlights one positive aspect of a product, such as recycled packaging, while creating the impression that the entire product or business model is sustainable.

We often see similar examples in the fashion industry. Some brands launch special “sustainable” collections while these products represent only a limited part of their overall business. There is nothing wrong with taking a small step towards greater sustainability. The problem begins when communication turns that small step into evidence that the entire business model has changed.

Highlighting selected positive initiatives while ignoring the broader environmental impact is one of the recognised patterns of greenwashing.

Communicate what you have achieved, not what you hope to achieve

True sustainability is not a marketing campaign. It is a business strategy.

The role of marketing and communications should therefore not be to make reality look better in order to follow global trends. Our role should be to communicate clearly, transparently and responsibly what a company is actually doing.

My advice to managers is simple.

Start with a plan. Define what you want to change, which actions you can realistically implement and how you will measure their impact. Only then should you communicate the results.

Communicate what you have actually achieved, not what you might achieve one day.

Companies should also be particularly careful when using certificates and sustainability labels. A logo created by an internal marketing or design team can easily give consumers the impression that a product has received an official environmental certification when no such certification exists.

Instead of creating your own “green” labels, research which recognised certificates are relevant to your industry and market. The same certification criteria do not apply to a food producer, a hotel, a fashion brand and an IT company.

Sustainability communication should not remain solely the responsibility of the communications department either.

When preparing serious public claims about environmental impact, involve the people who actually have access to the relevant information. Procurement, production, finance, sustainability teams, legal departments and other relevant functions should all be part of the process.

Every figure you publish should be verifiable.

Instead of saying:

“Our packaging is environmentally friendly.”

Explain what it is made from, how much recycled material it contains and what measurable improvement has been achieved.

It may sound less impressive from a marketing perspective, but in the long term it creates something far more valuable: trust.

Greenwashing was born from the gap between words and reality

Interestingly, the term greenwashing is not new.

It is widely associated with American environmentalist Jay Westerveld, who used the term in 1986 when writing about the hotel industry.

During an earlier trip to Fiji, Westerveld noticed a hotel message encouraging guests to reuse their towels in order to help protect the environment. At the same time, the resort was expanding. This led him to question whether the message was genuinely motivated by environmental concerns or primarily by the financial benefits of reducing laundry costs.

Almost four decades later, the example still feels remarkably relevant.

I am sure many of us have seen similar messages during hotel stays, encouraging guests to reuse towels to protect the environment.

How do you react when you see them?

Do you see them as a genuine environmental initiative or as a cost-saving measure presented through environmental communication?

That is precisely the question companies should ask before launching any sustainability campaign:

How will this message be perceived by someone who can also see what we do beyond the advertisement?

Today, greenwashing can be much more sophisticated. It can hide behind vague environmental language, self-created “green” labels, selective presentation of data or the promotion of one positive initiative without acknowledging the company’s broader environmental impact.

This is why transparency matters more than perfection.

Consumers and employees do not necessarily understand every technical expression related to CO₂ emissions, carbon footprints or complex ESG indicators. The responsibility of communicators is to translate complex information into language people can understand without simplifying it to the point where it becomes misleading.

If you claim that you have reduced something, explain what you reduced, by how much, over what period and how you measured it.

If you have not yet reached your target, explain where you currently stand.

If there is still room for improvement, acknowledge it.

Credibility does not come from convincing people that a company is perfect. It comes from consistency between what a company does and what it says.

From greenwashing to green responsibility

Greenwashing should therefore not be treated solely as a marketing problem. It reflects the relationship between a company’s business model and its communication.

If sustainability exists only as a campaign, there will always be a risk that communication moves ahead of reality.

If sustainability is embedded in the business strategy, communication no longer needs to create a green image. It simply needs to communicate credibly what the company is actually doing.

This is why I would encourage communication professionals and managers to become familiar with the Roman Declaration of Green Communication Responsibility, an initiative promoting transparent, ethical and evidence-based green communication.

In 2026, the Declaration received the support of the Global Alliance for Public Relations and Communication Management and was formally adopted at the Global Alliance Annual General Meeting. Today, the Global Alliance represents more than 360,000 public relations and communication professionals and academics around the world.

One principle of the Declaration is particularly important: greenwashing should be replaced by creative communication based on evidence, genuine environmental commitment and accountability.

Before publishing your next “green” campaign, statement or label, ask yourself one question:

Are we communicating what we actually do, or are we creating an image of what we would like people to believe we are?

The difference between those two answers may be the difference between responsible green communication and greenwashing.