Good Practices to Avoid Greenwashing

The term greenwashing refers to the communication strategy of certain companies, organizations, or political institutions aimed at creating a misleadingly positive image of themselves in terms of environmental impact.
Greenwashing is therefore a strategy based on deceiving the public by using advertising and corporate communication with references to ecology and sustainability to conceal the actual negative environmental impact of a product. The lever is mainly consumer perception, which is misled through non-transparent claims and slogans designed to create an environmental image of the company that does not match reality.

The EU Directive 2024/825 already establishes a set of rules to prevent communications that could be considered greenwashing, but below we present some good practices to minimize any risk of communication that could appear as greenwashing.

Telling the Truth

How can greenwashing be avoided? By telling the truth.
Easier said than done. Starting with the concept of “truth,” which is delicate to handle.
Is it enough not to communicate with the intention to deceive? Is it enough to provide a representation sufficiently close to reality, even if slightly embellished in form?

Greenwashing (or at least communicative errors that could risk being perceived as greenwashing) can also be unintentional. A classic example is companies that carry out offsetting activities and then communicate that they have reduced their emissions.
Is this communication correct?
No, it is not. Reducing one’s emissions is an objective achieved, for example, through process optimization or by sourcing energy from renewable sources. Offsetting activities are extremely useful and appropriate, but they do not result in a reduction of one’s own emissions.

In this sense, like Treedom, we want to offer these recommendations to those planting trees and, even more, to emphasize that tree planting generates a wide range of impacts that go beyond CO2 absorption over time.

It requires careful attention, great semantic precision, and formal correctness in every step of communication. Numerous codes of conduct to avoid greenwashing are available online. Below, we use a framework that we consider among the most useful.

Good Practices

• Authenticity – Corporate sustainability and the related communication must be organically integrated into business operations: talk about what you actually do.

• Transparency – Sustainability communication must highlight positive aspects without exaggeration. It is also important not to hide areas where there is room for improvement and where corrective actions are underway: no one is perfect.

• Pervasiveness – Sustainability communication, especially environmental, concerns the entire company and involves multiple parameters. Companies must communicate across all areas, even those where performance is not excellent: don’t hide the dust under the carpet.

• Open and Accessible Information – Sustainability communication must be supported by concrete, measured, and validated information. Furthermore, this information must be made accessible to everyone. This may not always be appreciated by companies, but it is essential: nothing can be hidden.

• Continuity – One-off actions rarely pay off in communication, even less so in sustainability communication. Everyone, if they want a more sustainable lifestyle, must implement systemic changes rather than merely temporary or accessory ones. The same applies to companies and their sustainability communication strategies. An “infinite mindset” is needed.
  This also applies to thematic campaigns or special observances. Not all campaigns are created for the same purpose, and not all must aim at the same goal. In this sense, defining the broadest and most detailed possible objectives is what ultimately ensures long-term message effectiveness.
  Objectives should be plural: a central objective and 2-3 secondary objectives. If possible, secondary objectives should have a horizon beyond the campaign itself and serve as a foundation for the next communication campaign. In other words, building a communication strategy means planning for a medium- to long-term period. Logical and narrative consistency in communication will produce more substantial and lasting results.

• Authority / Accountability – Data on environmental performance must be clear, precise, comparable, and openly accessible. To increase credibility, certification by recognized and authoritative third parties is strategic. Fake certification marks are prohibited, and relying solely on self-certification is not effective: showcase your degree but also make your thesis available to those who want to verify it themselves.

• Consistency – Communication tools must be consistent with the message being conveyed. This can range from using low-impact service providers to traveling by less polluting means, or even reducing the volume of internal emails: claiming to be green while destroying a forest may undermine your message.

• Modesty – Communication should not aim to convince the audience that your company is the best. It is better to communicate clearly, elegantly, and accurately about your sustainable actions, leaving the audience to recognize the merits themselves.

• Balance Between Head and Heart – One of the most complex challenges in sustainability communication lies in balancing technical accuracy with emotion and creativity, which varies depending on the audience, objectives, and company evolution. Rarely are the two mutually exclusive, but both must be managed with the audience in mind. Optimal communication occurs when a technically correct concept is explained in a creative or emotional way.

Conclusion

The risk of unintentionally delivering unclear or misleading communication always exists. Even the most meticulous work and best practices leave room for error. However, following these good practices significantly reduces that risk compared to ignoring them.