Climate-washing up by 81 percent

CLIMATE-WASHING cases are on the rise, increasing by 81 percent, according to the Global Trends in Climate Change Litigation: 2024 Snapshot.

Released by the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science in June 2024, the publication reported that 47 “climate-washing” cases were filed in 2023. This represents an 81-percent increase compared to the previous year.

Since the ratification of the Paris Agreement, there have been around 140 cases of climate-washing. These cases target companies and trade associations including governments, and they have seen significant success. More than 70 percent of completed cases have been decided in favor of the claimants. Traditionally, these cases have focused on the fossil fuel sector, but the report notes that they are now being launched across other sectors, including airlines, the food and beverage industry, e-commerce and financial services.

The report coincides with a period of unprecedented heat — when the world experienced temperatures of above 1.5 degrees Celsius hotter than the preindustrial era for 12 consecutive months (July 2023-June 2024).

Climate-washing is a type of climate-related greenwashing, where companies or organizations present a misleading impression of their environmental efforts or the environmental benefits of their products and policies. Specifically, it focuses on claims related to climate change.

While greenwashing and climate-washing have sometimes been used interchangeably, a Climate Social Science Network Report makes a distinction. It states that “climate-washing may encompass issues that go beyond the natural environment,” including claims relating to the environment, human health, economics or other aspects of climate change.

The key characteristics of climate-washing are exaggerated claims, selective disclosure, misleading marketing and insufficient commitments. This includes companies overstating the positive impact of their climate-related actions or the effectiveness of their sustainability initiatives. It also involves organizations highlighting certain “green” projects or practices while ignoring their broader negative environmental impacts. Companies may also use buzzwords like “carbon-neutral,” “eco-friendly” or “sustainable” without substantial evidence or verification to support these claims. They may also announce ambitious climate goals without concrete plans, clear timelines or sufficient resources to achieve them.

Recent examples

Climate-washing has become a global issue as consumers increasingly make purchasing decisions based on environmental considerations. This deception misleads consumers, causing them to support companies and products that do not align with their values and desired impact. As a result, consumer trust is undermined and financial support is misallocated away from genuinely sustainable businesses and products.

An example of climate-washing occurred when the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), the advertising regulator in the United Kingdom, banned Air France, Lufthansa and Etihad’s advertisements due to concerns that these companies deceived customers about the environmental impact of air travel.

According to a report by The Guardian last December, Lufthansa’s Google ad claimed that consumers could “fly more sustainably” with the airline, while Air France stated that the company was “committed to protecting the environment.” Etihad’s ad offered potential customers “total peace of mind” and mentioned their environmental advocacy. ASA concluded that these advertisements violated the rules on misleading advertising and environmental claims. Earlier, ASA had banned Ryanair, HSBC and energy companies Esso and Shell.

In the United States, the New York State attorney-general filed a climate-washing complaint against JBS USA Food Co., alleged to be the largest producer of beef products in the world, for making unsubstantiated claims about its Net Zero by 2040 commitment.

In the complaint filed with the New York Supreme Court in February 2024, the attorney-general contended that JBS USA’s greenhouse gas emissions calculations did not account for Scope 3 emissions resulting from Amazon deforestation and other land use changes in its supply chain. The attorney-general also argued that the Net Zero by 2040 commitment was misleading given the company’s plans to increase demand for its products.

Climate-washing undermines genuine efforts to combat climate change, deceives consumers, erodes trust and hampers the development of effective policies and practices.

By creating a false perception of progress, climate-washing allows companies to continue harmful practices while presenting themselves as sustainable. This can result in a significant disparity between actual environmental performance and public perception, hindering real progress toward climate goals. Misleading claims about environmental initiatives divert attention and resources from truly impactful actions needed to mitigate climate change.

Urgent action is needed to address climate-washing and ensure that efforts to combat climate change are effective, trustworthy and genuinely beneficial for the environment. This requires promoting transparency, accountability and genuine progress in the fight against climate change.

The author is the founder and chief strategic adviser of the Young Environmental Forum and a director of Climate Tracker Asia Inc. He completed a climate change and development course at the University of East Anglia (United Kingdom) and an executive program on sustainability leadership at Yale University (USA). You can email at [email protected].