Washing away the black fossil soul in green. In their bid to appeal to those who are particularly mindful of environmental respect, a company can stumble into unfair practices and display ecological virtues that it does not actually possess. In a word: greenwashing.

A communication or marketing strategy pursued by companies, institutions and bodies that present their activities as eco-sustainable, seeking to conceal their negative environmental impact

Treccani

Origins and evolution

Despite turning 36 years old – it was 1986 when American environmentalist Jay Westerveld coined the term in reference to hospitality establishments more concerned with their own revenues than with the environment – the phenomenon of greenwashing is today experiencing a sharp surge. It is no coincidence that this mirrors consumers' heightened awareness, also in light of the green carpet rolled out by the European Union to encourage growth supported by sustainable finance.

In 2021 the European Commission, under the coordination of the Ipcen-Consumer protection and Enforcement Network, the international consumer protection network, together with national consumer protection authorities, conducted an in-depth study on the practice. The sample revealed that 42 per cent of online retail websites carried misleading environmental information, and that in 37 per cent of cases the claim made to consumers was vague and generic, while in a further 59 per cent there was no evidence to support it.

If a product – or service – is described by the company that makes it as "green" or "natural", that doesn't mean it actually is. These terms, which we might call "buzzwords" given how frequently they appear in everyday conversation, can cause confusion. One example speaks for itself: in the wake of the "green wave" that swept through the consumer market in recent years, packaging dominated by the colour green has proliferated. The fir-tree shade was practically everywhere: from body care product packaging to the wrapping of the most common foodstuffs, from shampoos to milk biscuits. But is aesthetics alone enough to guarantee compliance with sustainability criteria?

From the EU to Italy: the regulatory framework

The US government agency Federal Trade Commission (Ftc) was a pioneer in drawing up, in the early 2000s, guidelines for the use of "environmental marketing claims" — rules that bind companies even in their choice of language. In 2005, European Directive 29, including subsequent interpretations, set in motion the regulation of unfair commercial practices between businesses and consumers. Sixteen years later came the legislative proposal Green consumption pledge, aimed at strengthening the role of consumers in the green transition and the truthfulness of environmental claims.

In Italy, also in 2005, legislative decree 206, and subsequent amendments, highlights the need for adequate, correct and transparent communication. The body responsible for oversight in the country is the Autorità garante della concorrenza e del mercato, which has the task of deciding whether an advertisement is honest and has included greenwashing in its list of misleading advertising. Alongside it is the Istituto dell'autodisciplina pubblicitaria, a voluntary association that since the 1960s has brought together industry operators to monitor honest commercial communication. In 2014 it promoted a decisive tool in combating greenwashing by introducing article 12 in the 58th edition of its own Codice di autodisciplina, which establishes that "communication must allow a clear understanding of which aspect of the advertised product or activity the claimed benefits refer to".

In 2015 came a further regulatory step: law 221 on the Green economy, "Disposizioni in materia ambientale per promuovere misure di green economy e per il contenimento dell'uso eccessivo di risorse naturali", the so-called Collegato ambientale. More recent still was the 2021 ruling by the Gorizia court, the first ordinary court in Italy to do so, which ordered the suspension of advertising for a microfibre described by its manufacturer as "ecological" and "environmentally friendly".

More questions to identify greenwashing

Those who set out on the path of sustainable development do so in many ways. Within a production supply chain, some use energy- and water-efficient technologies, some use fuels with a lower environmental impact to power logistics vehicles, and some choose packaging made from recycled and, in turn, recyclable materials.

If a company describes itself as sustainable, it is important to understand whether it truly is. Reading the list of ingredients is not enough; one must also ask "why green?", "is it the product or the company that is green?", "does 'green' refer to a single material, a single stage, or the entire production process?" and, further, "what are the figures, the results certified by independent and impartial bodies that prove it?".

When the information circulated by a company fails to provide answers, when the person on the receiving end cannot understand what the specific environmental benefits are, then one is faced with a clear example of greenwashing. According to the World Economic Forum, 66 per cent of consumers prefer products obtained with attention to environmental impact, a figure that rises to 75 per cent among millennials, and they are willing to pay more for them. The availability and verification of data is now just a click away, and there is a (justified) expectation that declared environmental performance claims are upheld.

With certifications, you can't go wrong

The boundary is blurred, and unfair practices are not always easy to spot. There are cases in which companies omit information, crowning themselves green without providing precise data. Energy-intensive communication campaigns are chosen without a second thought, and reforestation actions are proclaimed without first taking the trouble to calculate and reduce one's own impact (emissions must be cut at the root, or at the very least an attempt must be made).

The subject-specific certifications — covering both processes and products, issued by independent third-party bodies and obtained by meeting strict sustainability criteria — also serve to unmask "environmental lies":

• Uni En Iso 14024: with this type I environmental label, issued by an independent third party, only products that guarantee a reduced environmental impact are marked;
• Uni En Iso 14021: this is a self-declaration made by manufacturers on the basis of verified and proven methodologies used to obtain reliable results. It falls under type II environmental labels and relates to the ecological characteristics of the product;
• Uni En Iso 14025: this is a type III environmental label, subject to verification by an accredited and independent body, which provides information on the environmental impact of the entire life cycle of products and services;
• the voluntary certifications Emas (Eco-Management and Audit Scheme) and Iso 14001 allow companies to attest to the validity of their environmental management system (Ems), which is useful for complying with current regulations on the matter;
• European Ecolabel has since 1992 promoted the circular economy through high environmental standards applied to the entire life cycle, from the extraction of raw materials to disposal.

Useful compasses for those who, with discernment, wish to make more sustainable purchases from genuinely "green" companies.