Is ‘eco-friendly’ always better? The truth about greenwashing
Research shows that many “eco-friendly” claims are misleading or unverified. Studies by the European Commission, ICPEN, and RepRisk highlight the scale of greenwashing and its impact on consumer trust and markets. The article explains why labels alone are not enough.
Being eco-friendly has become synonymous with credibility, and it suits well to put it on the packaging as well as in advertisements. Nevertheless, this may not always be the case.
According to the European Commission’s study “Environmental Claims Consumer Market Study 2020,” 53% of environmental claims in the EU are either misleading or unfounded, and 40% of these statements lack any form of substantiation.
The scale of greenwashing is bigger than you think
This isn’t limited to a few bad actors. It’s a widespread issue. As mentioned in the ICPEN Global Review of Environmental Claims (2021), up to 40 per cent of environmental claims found online were misleading. In another report by the European Commission on Screening of Websites for “Greenwashing” (2021), it was found that 42 per cent of environmental claims were either exaggerated or outright lies.
There is still another dimension in the form of corporate risk data. As stated in the RepRisk ESG Risk Platform Report (2023), about 25% of corporate climate risks result from greenwashing, with cases increasing significantly in recent years. In other words, greenwashing is not an uncommon phenomenon. Greenwashing is deeply rooted in marketing sustainability.
The reason why “eco-friendly” is ambiguous
It is due to the use of terminology in this case. Words such as “green,” “eco-friendly,” “natural,” or “sustainable” can be interpreted in a loose manner legally, thereby giving companies leeway to bend the interpretation. According to the UNEP and UN Global Compact report titled 'Greenwashing' published in 2023, greenwashing is defined as "misleading communications that falsely convey an implication of environmental responsibility."
Even certification programs are ambiguous. According to the OECD publication "Environmental Labelling and Information Schemes," there are hundreds of ecological labels worldwide, some of which are more reliable than others.
Why consumers are starting to question it
As awareness grows, so does scepticism. The European Commission’s 2020 study also noted that consumers increasingly struggle to distinguish between genuine and misleading claims. Meanwhile, research published in the Journal of Marketing Research (studies on consumer perception of greenwashing) shows that exposure to misleading sustainability claims reduces long-term brand trust. In simple terms, people are beginning to look twice, and not always in a good way.
The real impact goes beyond marketing
Greenwashing isn’t just a branding problem. It affects how markets function. The ScienceDirect study regarding greenwashing and market distortion (2022-2024 trends) reveals that the unfulfilled expectations could cause misdirection of consumers' investment from sustainable products to non-sustainable products, which will hamper environmental advancements.
Moreover, it leads to unfair competition, where firms dedicated to sustainability compete with other organisations that only invest in perceptions.
So, is ‘eco-friendly’ always better?
Not necessarily. Some products genuinely reduce environmental impact. Many simply appear to. And the label alone isn’t enough to tell the difference. Looking for specifics helps. Convincing data, verifiable certification by third parties, and open disclosure of sources and manufacturing processes are much more trustworthy than unsubstantiated claims.
“Eco-friendly” is not proof. It’s a claim. And when more than half of such claims may be misleading, awareness becomes essential. Because making better choices today isn’t just about what you buy. It’s about how carefully you question what you’re told.
Also read: Street food in summer: What’s safe and what you should avoid