Greenwashing is an operation that emphasises the environmental credentials of a product, passing it off as eco-friendly when in reality it is not. Let's learn to decode it in the cosmetics sector too.
The market for cosmetics with a natural, organic and sustainable character is going from strength to strength: according to the research centre of Cosmetica Italia, the turnover of this category reached 16 per cent of the total cosmetics industry by the end of 2022, worth over two billion euros (up 13 per cent compared to 2021). But, keeping pace with the growth in supply in this segment, the phenomenon of cosmetic greenwashing is also on the rise — a neologism formed from the words "green" and "whitewash", used to define marketing practices that emphasise the environmental credentials of a company or the composition of a cosmetic, passing it off as eco-friendly when in reality these characteristics are marginal or, worse, entirely absent. The topic, as current as it is thorny, has recently been taken up once again by Natrue. The international non-profit association, whose rigorous certification standards are referenced by many of the most widespread organic brands, has just launched a video on its YouTube channel that, using modern language and a punchy, fast-paced visual style, also tackles the thorny question of greenwashing.
The practice of greenwashing finds fertile ground in the lack of a single official regulation defining the meaning of "natural" in cosmetics and of official legislation on organic cosmetics in Europe. "It must be acknowledged, however, that in each country private bodies have been active for years, having drawn up specifications to guarantee the entire production cycle of a cosmetic and certifying whether the ingredients contained in the product are natural and organic — that is, whether they contain active ingredients derived from the plant or animal world without harm to the animals themselves. But each body has its own standards, so the presence of an organic certification on the label is indeed a guarantee of the cosmetic's good natural and sustainable profile, but one that is always relative to the parameters of the certifying body," explains Pucci Romano, dermatology specialist and president of Skineco (International Association of Ecodermatology). Variables aside, one simplification for avoiding greenwashing is therefore to look for the organic logo on the label. "Organic certification attests, among other things, that the cosmetic contains at least 95 per cent plant-based raw materials and that at least 70 per cent of these ingredients are also organic — meaning they do not come, for example, from GMO crops or those involving the use of pesticides," says Romano. The logos to look for include those of Demeter, Ecocert, Ccpb and Icea, the private certification bodies that guarantee the standards for the most accredited cosmetics, such as Natrue and Cosmos, which differ from one another not only in terms of the content of natural and organic substances, as already noted, but also in the synthetic ingredients permitted, such as colorants and preservatives. In the case of Natrue, for example, to obtain certification the product must include at least 75 per cent organic ingredients. Another certification that also helps to sidestep greenwashing is B Corp, which stands for Certified Benefit Corporation and identifies companies that commit to meeting certain standards (transparency, performance and accountability) and operate in a way that optimises their positive impact on employees, the communities in which they operate, and the environment.
For a generic natural cosmetic, the risk of falling into a less virtuous eco profile is greater than for an organic one. So what should one pay attention to? The first step is looking beyond appearances — beyond the impact of packaging that is often presented in green, with drawings of flowers and leaves, seeking in this way to strike an emotional chord with environmental sensibilities. "Be wary of vague messages such as 'conscious', 'ecobio', 'sustainable', or of slogans like 'does not contain', which can be used to mislead about the actual content of the formula. Furthermore, claims such as 'Contains plant stem cells that regenerate the skin' are not scientifically correct because, in this specific case, these ingredients, though effective in the formulation of a good cosmetic, are completely different from cutaneous stem cells and therefore cannot regenerate the skin," argues Romano, stressing how transparency is instead to be valued. One example is packaging that includes a website address where consumers can learn about the brand's philosophy, what it is doing to reduce emissions and the impact of its packaging, but also the tests carried out to validate product efficacy (beyond self-assessment). Another step is learning to read the INCI (International Nomenclature of Cosmetic Ingredients). "As a general rule, a green product is of good quality if it is composed of at least 98–99 per cent ingredients of natural origin, while the remainder may contain synthetic molecules, such as stabilisers and preservatives, which are also fundamental to the safety of the cosmetic," explains Romano. In essence, it is important to find natural ingredients high up in the INCI: "decoy" ones (cited merely to attract) are few and present in such minimal percentages that they appear at the bottom alongside the preservatives. "In the INCI, a descending order applies: the higher up and the more numerous the eco ingredients are, the more a cosmetic can be described as natural, bearing in mind that substances of plant origin are described with their Linnaean botanical name, followed by the part of the plant used and the type of derivative, reported in English," says Romano. Synthetic-origin ingredients are recognisable, instead, by their official English denomination.
Another clue to understanding whether a green cosmetic that lacks organic certification does not fall into suspected greenwashing is the absence (within that minimum percentage of permitted chemical ingredients) of non-biodegradable substances that are highly impactful on the environment or that current scientific research suggests may cause problems of various kinds to the body and/or the environment. "When it comes to the environmental impact of a cosmetic, it is impossible to generalise and reduce it to a single figure, because it depends very significantly on the composition of the individual product. By way of example, and according to the Ecolabel calculation, a shampoo containing a generic fragrance has a very high impact on aquatic organisms, around one thousand. If the fragrance is biodegradable, the impact drops to one hundred; if the fragrance is poorly biodegradable and poorly toxic to aquatic organisms, it falls further to ten. This is why modern cosmetology should think along two parallel tracks, choosing substances that are harmless to all organisms, human and animal," observes Fabrizio Zago, industrial chemist and creator of the EcoBioDizionario. Besides fragrances, among the most impactful pollutants are silicones, petrolates (though now fallen out of use) and microplastics, currently banned by law in rinse-off detergents and exfoliants, and therefore still permitted in all other formulations (in the INCI they may appear, among other forms, as: Polyethylene (PE), Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), Nylon, Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) or Polypropylene – PP -).
Other controversial substances used in cosmetic production are siloxanes (chemical compounds made up of silicon, oxygen and alkane hydrocarbons, analogous to silicones): according to a study from 2018 by American and Canadian researchers, published in the journal Environmental science and technology, particularly in the early morning — the "rush hour" for cleansing and skincare — they release a very significant quantity of pollutants into the air. Also among the most debated ingredients are anionic surfactants of synthetic origin, such as Sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) and Sodium laureth sulfate (SLES). "A shampoo or other face or body cleanser with a good ecological profile should ideally contain no surfactants — as in the case of cleansing oils — or contain very few, and of vegetable origin, which are also better tolerated by the skin, such as Polysorbate and Sodium lauroyl glutamate," says Romano. Regarding preservatives (which are nonetheless necessary to ensure the stability of cosmetics, particularly water-based ones such as creams or serums): among the "ones to watch" are parabens, because they are suspected of "disrupting" the body's hormones (the so-called endocrine disruptors) and the marine ecosystem. "Anyone looking for a good eco-friendly profile should check for the absence of these substances — in the INCI they usually end in 'paraben' preceded by an English term, for example Methylparaben — and for the presence of alternative preservatives considered biocompatible, such as benzoic acid, sodium benzoate, sorbic acid and its salts, potassium sorbate and sodium sorbate, tocopherol (vitamin E) or essential oils which, at adequate percentages, also function as good natural preservatives, such as tea tree oil," says the expert.
Another key factor in building a good eco-sustainable profile for a cosmetic is packaging. A definite point in favour is if the bottle or jar is made of bioplastics derived from organic materials, such as maize, rice or wood waste. Or if it comes from recycled and recyclable materials such as plastic itself (ideally collected from beaches or oceans). Materials such as aluminium, paper and glass are also virtuous from an ecological standpoint, but only on condition that they are as thin and compact as possible. "It should be borne in mind, in fact, that glass in particular is a heavier material to transport than, for example, bioplastic, and that it therefore entails a greater quantity of CO2 emissions," observes Romano. Further points in favour are refillable packaging, at home or at the point of sale, and mono-material packaging, because it simplifies disposal and recycling of the product once it has been used. Design is also a distinguishing factor: packaging that is easy to stack and simple to transport reduces the number of lorries required during various movements and the resulting emissions.
Slightly different from everything discussed so far is the question for those wishing to choose a vegan cosmetic. The first step is to verify its certification: the most widely used logos are the "V" with a stylised green sunflower, the international mark issued by the British Vegan society, and the Italian mark VeganOk, often accompanied by Lav. But vegan certification alone does not guarantee that the cosmetic is also eco-sustainable, because a vegan product totally excludes ingredients of animal origin or derivation, such as milk, snail slime and beeswax, but unlike organic products it can include synthetic ingredients in significant percentages. "A genuinely green and vegan profile is therefore provided by dual certification: vegan and organic, or by the presence of a percentage of at least 98–99 per cent vegetable ingredients and the other variables already listed. The presence of generic 'cruelty free' logos or wording should be treated with caution: they can be borderline and convey misleading messages, especially if they appear on labels that are already questionable for other reasons, because since 2013 a European Union regulation has banned animal testing within the EU on both the finished product and the raw materials of any cosmetic, without exception," concludes Romano.