The Rise of Greenhushing: Understanding the Shift in Marketers' Approach to Sustainability

It may seem like brands are not discussing sustainability as much as they used to. This is because they are not.

Consumers, especially younger generations, are placing a greater emphasis on climate change and prefer to support brands that share their values. However, marketers are concerned about being accused of greenwashing. This has led them to reconsider how they promote data and information about their sustainability efforts.

According to a recent report by South Pole, more than half (58%) of companies are reducing their sustainability-related communications. The report, based on a survey of 1,400 companies, highlighted a new trend called greenhushing, which is now prevalent in all major industry sectors. Companies are becoming more cautious due to the rise in greenwashing accusations, where marketing messages do not reflect actual environmental efforts. A 2023 report by RepRisk revealed a 35% increase in instances of greenwashing compared to the previous year.

"The crackdown on greenwashing is making many companies more cautious about their claims," said Wren Montgomery, an associate professor of sustainability at Ivey Business School and co-founder of the Greenwash Action Lab. Companies are now more mindful of not exaggerating their environmental efforts and are focusing on making real changes internally.

When companies with a strong ESG focus face criticism for greenwashing, it can severely damage their brand reputation. For example, Volkswagen faced backlash after it was discovered that they manipulated emissions data to appear more environmentally friendly in their marketing. This scandal had long-lasting effects on the company's image, joining a list of other brands like McDonald's, Nespresso, Starbucks, and Coca-Cola that have also been criticized for similar practices.

Moving from greenwashing to greenhushing

Many marketers have focused on sustainability in recent years, but now there is a trend of holding back on sharing these initiatives. This shift is not entirely new.

Some reports suggest that greenhushing was first mentioned in 2017. South Pole highlighted the trend in its 2022 annual report, revealing that one in four companies surveyed did not intend to share information about their emissions reduction targets.

The trend gained momentum due to an increase in litigation resulting from false advertising lawsuits, also known as accusations of greenwashing. For example, companies like H&M and Allbirds were sued for falsely advertising their products and manufacturing processes as eco-friendly. Despite the cases being dismissed, these brands faced backlash from consumers and the media.

Mastercard Chief Marketing and Communications Officer Raja Rajamannar believes that greenwashing often happens because of a lack of knowledge rather than intentional deceit. He emphasizes the importance of marketers understanding sustainability terms, recognizing the impact of their actions, and being transparent with consumers.

Efforts are increasing in the U.S. and Europe to make it mandatory for brands to disclose their emissions data, which is currently done on a voluntary basis. The Federal Trade Commission, which introduced its Green Guides in 1992, is updating them to reflect changing perceptions and attitudes towards climate change. The latest version is expected to be released later this year.

The FTC is encouraging companies to use clearer terms like “green,” “sustainable,” and “eco-friendly” so consumers can make more informed choices based on their priorities. Additionally, brands must specify targets and timelines for claims about achieving net-zero emissions.

According to Austin Whitman, CEO of The Change Climate Project, companies are hesitant to take action due to changing regulations. In uncertain times, many prefer to wait and see how things unfold rather than take risks.

Why Brands Limit Public Communication

With numerous risks at stake, it's understandable why brands choose to limit public communication to reduce the chances of facing legal issues or negative publicity.

"What the pullback does is it kind of puts brands back in this space of just collecting data and not actually trying to report on plans to improve company performance," Whitman said.

One of the biggest downsides to greenhushing is the loss of momentum. Without sharing research and progress — and even missteps — publicly, marketers won’t have the ability to learn from one another and keep up competition to develop different approaches. Though sustainability initiatives won’t completely disappear, the publicity keeps it top of mind for consumers and other marketers.

Rajamannar emphasized the importance of collaboration and sharing best practices in order to achieve our common goal of environmental stewardship.

Whitman pointed out that the industry has experienced periods in the past where the focus on sustainability was reduced. About 15 years ago, there was a "last cycle" of cutting carbon emissions which resulted in a loss of momentum and a decade of missed opportunities for experimentation and development. Given the current state of climate change, Whitman stressed that it is crucial not to lose momentum this time around.

Marketing around sustainability has a natural cycle to it, according to Whitman. Brands that began focusing on green initiatives about five years ago had a period to experiment and explore. Now, there is more internal scrutiny on whether these initiatives are beneficial for the business and provide a return on investment.

As a result, brands are now talking less about their sustainability efforts and are actually being rewarded for it. By reducing the amount of discussion, they are exposed to less scrutiny and risk, which is seen as a positive outcome.

Transparency drives accountability

Greenhushing may have a silver lining, as Montgomery from Greenwash Action Lab suggests. While some brands are hesitant to disclose their sustainability goals and strategies to the public, there could be greater transparency within the industry itself.

Due to stricter regulations like the Green Guides and pushback against greenwashing, brands are more cautious about labeling their products as “eco-friendly” or “eco-conscious” without solid evidence to support it. However, they continue to actively work on reducing emissions and developing more environmentally friendly products.

This commitment is highlighted in research conducted by South Pole and reported by nonprofit climate advocacy news organization Grist. The study found that 89% of publicly listed companies surveyed have set net-zero targets, and more than three-quarters of climate-conscious brands are increasing their budgets to achieve these goals.

"Everyone is aiming to be responsible and follow the correct procedures," mentioned John Osborn, the U.S. director at Ad Net Zero, a trade group. He added, "However, it can be challenging to figure out the most effective approach, which is why being open about what is working and what isn't becomes crucial."

Lack of transparency can lead to each brand operating independently towards similar objectives, without clarity on whether they are moving in the right direction or not.

In general, the brands and executives that Greenwash Action Lab’s Montgomery has spoken to want to do the right thing but are concerned about making mistakes.

“That’s where I believe the new regulations will be beneficial,” she explained. “It creates a fairer environment. People won't have to rely on guesswork anymore.”

Editor's P/S:

The article highlights a concerning trend of "greenhushing," where companies are limiting public communication about their sustainability efforts due to fears of greenwashing accusations. This has led to a loss of momentum in the industry and reduced awareness among consumers. However, it may also foster greater transparency within the industry as companies focus on internal improvements without the pressure of external scrutiny.

Efforts to address greenwashing, such as the FTC's Green Guides and stricter regulations, are pushing companies to be more cautious and accurate in their sustainability claims. This is a positive step towards ensuring that brands are held accountable for their environmental actions and that consumers can make informed choices. While greenhushing may have its drawbacks, it could ultimately lead to more meaningful and transparent sustainability initiatives within the business world.