22 manufacturers known as out for greenwashing in 2023 | Information | Eco-Enterprise

2023 was the 12 months that policymakers in Asia Pacific took cues from regulators within the West and made tentative steps to police greenwashing.

South Korea turned the primary Asian nation to fantastic firms for making exaggerated inexperienced claims in February, following a regulation go well with towards an power main that claimed it may produce “carbon dioxide-free” pure fuel. However the most fantastic for greenwashing corporations in Korea is US$2,300, prompting questions on whether or not it makes an impression in any respect. 

Japan, Australia, Hong Kong and Singapore are among the many Asian international locations have launched tips for a way the finance sector can keep away from greenwashing in environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosures.

Singapore is contemplating utilizing expertise – synthetic intelligence – to weed out iffy claims, and Australia’s promoting watchdog is tightening its environmental claims code after a examine discovered a leap in deceptive advertising campaigns.

Asia’s public relations business affiliation lastly produced tips for manufacturers on easy methods to talk sustainability credibly in October, greater than a 12 months after saying it might. Singapore’s promoting watchdog turned the primary in Asia to name an commercial out for greenwashing in December.

Japan-based tutorial Kim Schumacher, who coined the time period “competence greenwashing” to explain folks or firms that embellish their inexperienced credentials to land a brand new job or contract, informed Eco-Enterprise Podcast that there have been fewer regulation fits and laws that maintain companies’ toes to the flame for greenwashing in Asia partly of the cultural tendency to keep away from battle.

What subsequent? Coca-Cola is a well being drink? – unsure we should always single this out , can we modify quote?

Bitasta Roy Mehta on the coal business affiliation’s rebrand to “sustainable coal”

In the meantime, regulation fits towards manufacturers accused of trumping up their inexperienced credentials within the West gained momentum, and regulators began to show the screw on firms responsible of greenwash. The European Union moved to ban the time period “carbon impartial” and outlaw local weather claims primarily based purely on carbon offsetting. 

On the COP28 summit, activist group Clear Creatives launched a report highlighting how promoting and public relations businesses had a component to play within the rebranding technique of the United Arab Emirates to current itself as a pacesetter in renewable power within the lead-up to the local weather talks. It recognized 18 businesses that labored for COP28, the UAE presidency, Masdar and UAE’s state-owned oil firm Adnoc from 2021 to 2023, and amongst them 10 businesses that “double dealed” and labored concurrently for the COP28 presidency and on fossil gasoline contracts. 

Although some manufacturers retreated into their shells and stopped speaking their sustainability credentials for concern of getting accused of greenwashing – a phenomenon often known as greenhushing – there have been extra circumstances of manufacturers getting known as out for greenwashing in 2023 than the earlier 12 months, when 18 circumstances had been highlighted – up from 11 in 2021 and eight in 2020, in response to Eco-Enterprise’ reporting on the difficulty.

Eco-Enterprise casts a essential eye over the 23 instances manufacturers made inexperienced claims in 2023 that didn’t seem to cross the credibility check.

Apple: Sustainability report cherry-picking blessed by Mom Earth

Octavia Spencer starred as Mom Earth in a video model of Apple’s sustainability report. Critics known as it “woke capitalism at peak cringe”. Picture: Apple on YouTube

September’s curtain-raiser occasion for the iPhone 15 was interluded with a video wherein Mom Earth, performed by Oscar-winning actress Octavia Spencer, critiqued however in the end blessed Apple’s inexperienced credentials. Some praised the five-minute movie for injecting a welcome dose of storytelling into the drab world of sustainability reporting, and had been impressed by Apple’s observe document on clear power, reforestation, soil safety and plastic discount. Others identified that Apple’s standing replace – like so many sustainability studies – cherry-picked environmental wins and glossed over the remainder.

“Then cease making new telephones yearly. Make telephones upgradable,” an X consumer tweeted in response to Apple CEO Tim Prepare dinner’s publish of the video, referring to the idea of deliberate obsolence that critics say Apple pioneered. “You mass-produce your merchandise in China, one of many world’s greatest polluters,” wrote one other.

In an open letter, sustainability consultants Rajul Priyadarshini and Emma Bluck pointed to extensively reported human rights and labour points in Apple’s provide chain, which weren’t talked about within the video, and the truth that Apple used the video as a gross sales pitch – to advertise its first “carbon impartial” watch.

World Coal Affiliation: “Sustainable” makeover

When the World Coal Affiliation rebranded to “FutureCoal: The World Alliance for Sustainable Coal” in November, observers puzzled if an April Idiot’s joke had landed 5 months early. How “sustainable” can the only greatest trigger of synthetic local weather change be? FutureCoal argued in its launch assertion that for too lengthy the coal sector had allowed “anti-coal sentiment to dominate and fragment us, which has resulted in a decreasing of the worldwide coal IQ.” By “coal IQ”, it meant the overall degree of understanding of coal’s contribution to society, and the way abatement applied sciences can cut back air pollution from burning the black stuff.

Bitasta Roy Mehta, a practitioner within the human assets sector, stated the audacity of labelling coal as inexperienced was nearly amusing. “What subsequent? Coca-Cola as a well being drink?” With “sustainable coal”, all the pieces now is smart. It’s concerning the sustainability of manufacturing that petro-associations at COP28 might be discussing,” pointing to the fossil fuels lobbying military current on the local weather talks in Dubai.

Indonesia’s palm oil company: Plantations are extra climate-friendly than rainforests

Talking to an viewers of farmers and Indigenous peoples at an occasion in August, a senior government for Indonesia’s Palm Oil Fund Administration Company, the federal government’s palm oil finance company, prompt that the crop is a extra highly effective carbon sink than the pure forests that it has changed. Consultants dismissed the declare as “goofy” and “criminally deceptive”. The presentation was made because the Indonesian authorities was locking horns with the European Union over a deforestation regulation that makes forest-risk commodities resembling oil palm, of which Indonesia’s is the world’s greatest producer, trickier to export.

Toyota: EV stalling

Japan’s largest firm appeared to have flip over a brand new leaf and embrace the autos electrification period earlier this 12 months when it changed its chief government with a extra pro-EV boss. New CEO Koji Sato has made some efforts to spice up EV manufacturing, and Toyota has pumped US$8 billion into a brand new battery plant within the US. However critics say the automaker, in its advertising, is as much as its “outdated methods”. Toyota typically confuses hybrid autos, which run solely on petrol and derive no power from non-polluting sources – with electrical autos. The corporate additionally appears preoccupied by what critics suspect are unrealistic options, resembling solid-state EV batteries, which they are saying will solely push EV adoption timelines again.

Lufthansa: Planetary safety posturing

Lufthansa’s “Connecting the world. Defending its future” marketing campaign was banned by the UK’s Promoting Requirements Authority for making a deceptive inexperienced claims. Picture: Lufthansa

An promoting marketing campaign for Lufthansa was banned in the UK for making deceptive claims concerning the German airline’s efforts to guard the planet. Britain’s Promoting Requirements Authority (ASA) stated there have been no commercially viable applied sciences within the aviation business which might substantiate Lufthansa’s declare that it was defending the world’s future.

In its defence, Lufthansa – which has pledged to be carbon impartial by 2050 and half its emissions by 2030 – stated the tagline was “open to interpretation” and argued that buyers wouldn’t see it as an “absolute promise” to guard the planet or that its planes didn’t trigger hurt. The ASA stated manufacturers in excessive carbon emitting sectors shouldn’t make claims that give shoppers a misunderstanding about plans they’ll’t substantiate.

Austrian Airways: “Local weather-friendly” aviation

In a nasty 12 months for the Lufthansa group’s inexperienced credentials, the corporate’s Austrian subsidiary was discovered responsible of greenwashing by a courtroom in Korneuburg for main shoppers to imagine that through the use of sustainable aviation fuels (SAF),  “climate-friendly” air journey was now attainable. The courtroom reasoned that SAF nonetheless emits CO2 when burned and are blended with fossil fuels. Austrian Airways promised to supply “clearer” info in future on the usage of “sustainable” fuels. The ruling didn’t embrace any monetary penalties. 

S.E.A Aquarium: Can it say it’s an ocean steward if dolphins are nonetheless stored captive?

An academic promotion to draw dad and mom and their kids to go to Singapore’s Southeast Asia Aquarium to find out about ocean conservation in celebration of World Oceans Day omitted the truth that the vacationer attraction homes greater than 20 Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins that had been caught from the wild. The irony was not misplaced on animal welfare teams, who stated that letting these very smart mammals go can be one of the simplest ways to coach children about accountable ocean stewardship.

Petronas, Shell and Repsol: Solely speak about renewables

“Chances are high, you’re going to want so as to add some stability to your adverts,” stated Man Parker, chief government of the UK’s Promoting Requirements Authortiy (ASA) in an interview with Bloomberg Inexperienced. Parker was speaking about adverts by Malaysian oil big Petronas and European majors Shell and Repsol whose campaigns had been banned by the ASA for chest-beating about their investments in renewables with out mentioning the extent of their companies’ total local weather impression. A September advert for Petronas claimed that it was “enriching lives for a sustainable future”, however the ASA stated the advert failed to say the corporate’s carbon emissions and appeared that Petronas was already having a optimistic environmental impression. Malaysian environmental group Rimbawatch has additionally questioned the accuracy of Petronas’ reported emissions, stating that though the corporate stated it was as but unable to completely measure its emissions, that they had in reality reported their Scope 3 of their 2022 built-in annual report primarily based on the emissions of the businesses they’ve stakes in.

Australian Petroleum Manufacturing & Exploration Affiliation: ‘50% cleaner” than what?

An advert for Australia’s petroleum foyer group was banned by the nation’s advert watchdog for claiming that pure fuel is “50 per cent cleaner” with out clearly specifying what it was cleaner than. In one of many adverts, a employee sporting protecting gear says: “As Australia shuts down coal, fuel is choosing up the load”. One other employee later says, referring to fuel: “It’s 50 per cent cleaner, so along with renewables it will get emissions down.” However this was problematic, complained regulation agency Environmental Defenders Workplace on behalf of non-profits Comms Declare and Lock the Gate. “It’s a blanket and deceptive assertion that fuel is ‘inexperienced’, when in fact the exploration, extraction, transport, processing and logistics of fuel are very damaging to the surroundings and emit quite a lot of greenhouse fuel – particularly methane,” learn the criticism. Australia’s advert watchdog upheld the criticism, marking a uncommon event wherein an commercial has been banned in Australia for making a deceptive or unsubstantiated inexperienced declare.

Prism+: Airconditioners that save the planet

Advert for Prism+ aircon models that includes Singaporean influencer Xiaxue. Picture: Prism+ on Instagram

An airconditioner – one of the energy-intensive house home equipment – that may save the planet? Singapore-based shopper electronics model ran a social media marketing campaign wherein influencer Xiaxue known as by a fictional president who asks for her assist to “save Earth”. In response, Xiaxue places on winter clothes, units the airconditioner to 23 levels Celsius, and snuggles underneath a blanket. “Save Earth and electrical energy with 5 ticks power saving,” reads the caption. Professor Lawrence Loh, director of the Centre for Governance and Sustainability at Nationwide College of Singapore Enterprise Faculty, informed Eco-Enterprise that the commercial was responsible of what a current examine discovered to be the commonest type of greenwashing in Singapore – making imprecise claims unsupported by particular knowledge sources. The video was known as out by the Promoting Requirements Authority of Singapore – the first advert to be eliminated in Asia for greenwashing.

Etihad: not zero?

Etihad’s advert marketing campaign in Australia prompted a criticism concerning the credibility of its net-zero declare. Picture: M101Studio / Shutterstock

Activist group Flight Free Australia took difficulty with airline Etihad’s declare in its promoting marketing campaign in Australia that it had a reputable path to web zero emissions by 2050. The group stated in its criticism to the Australian Competitors and Shopper Fee that Etihad’s adverts, which ran on digital advert banners throughout an A-League soccer match in February 2022, conveyed the deceptive impression that flying with the Abu Dhabi-based airline doesn’t have a lot of an environmental impression and that it has plans and affordable grounds for anticipating it is going to attain the 2050 goal. Etihad marketed the phrases “web zero emissions by 2050” subsequent to its emblem, and in one other advert, claimed “Flying shouldn’t price the Earth.”

Coca-Cola, Danone and Nestlé: Plastic guarantees?

The three shopper good giants had been accused of creating deceptive claims about their single-use plastic water bottles being “100 per cent recycled” or “100 per cent recycled” by the European Shopper Organisation, a shopper rights group, backed by environmental nonprofits Shopper Earth and ECOS. The criticism to the European Fee argued that Danone, Coke and Nestlé’s packaging is by no means made solely of recycled supplies, and their recylability depends upon elements resembling obtainable waste administration infrastructure – which in lots of Asian international locations is missing or absent. “A ‘100 per cent’ recycling price for bottles is technically not attainable and, simply because bottles are made with recycled plastic, doesn’t imply they don’t hurt folks and planet,” stated Rosa Pritchard, plastics lawyer at ClientEarth. In response, Nestlé stated it was reducing use of plastic packaging, Danone stated it was persevering with to put money into recycling infrastructure, and Coca-Cola stated its claims might be substantiated.

Metropolis Vitality: Go “inexperienced” with fuel

Singapore fuel firm Metropolis Vitality ran a marketing campaign with native cell phone firm M1 in September providing reductions on gas-powered heaters it stated would assist shoppers “go inexperienced”. The marketing campaign knowledgeable shoppers that they may warmth water extra sustainably and make price financial savings with fuel in comparison with electrical storage water heaters, citing knowledge from Singapore’s Nationwide Atmosphere Company (NEA). Critics say that advertising a fossil fuel-based product as a inexperienced resolution is deceptive at a time when the world is making an attempt to wean itself off soiled power.

Nike: Plastic-based “Sustainability” assortment

Nike was sued in a US district courtroom for its “Sustainability”, 90% of which the regulation go well with alleged weren’t “made with recycled fibers” as marketed and are made largely of virgin artificial supplies which might be recognized to be unhealthy for the surroundings. The lawsuit pushed for Nike to launch a “corrective promoting marketing campaign” and reimburse shoppers who the case argued had been duped into believing the corporate’s merchandise had been inexperienced.

Saudi Aramco: Oil big crops some mangrove timber

Among the many deluge of suspiciously optimistic feedback (astroturfing?) left beneath Aramco’s LinkedIn marketing campaign to advertise its mangrove-planting efforts to its 4 million+ followers had been posters who had been much less satisfied by the world’s largest oil firm’s inexperienced campaign. “Greenwashing?! Please Aramco, present your accountability in exiting all of your polluting actions and reworking these to sustainable and respectful companies,” wrote one poster. “Greenwashing whereas destroying the planet. 🤦🏻‍♂️ disgrace on you – and fireplace your PR crew 🤢” wrote one other.

TotalEnergies: Rebranding oil enlargement

In Could, a landmark greenwashing authorized case towards French oil and fuel agency TotalEnergies was allowed to proceed. The complainants, nonprofits Greenpeace, Associates of the Earth and Notre Affaire a Tous, backed by ClientEarth, argue that TotalEnergies’ “Reinvention” rebranding marketing campaign violates European shopper regulation by deceptive the general public over what the corporate’s plans actually imply for the local weather disaster. The primary level of rivalry is that TotalEnergies’ enterprise plans embrace the enlargement of fossil gasoline manufacturing. The complaints additionally argue that the corporate “seems to be avoiding any vital emissions reductions right through to the tip of the last decade.” 

Shell: Renewables overclaiming?

A Shell petrol station present process renovation in Singapore. Picture: Robin Hicks/Eco-Enterprise

The anglodutch oil main misleadingly overstated how a lot it’s investing in clear power, in response to non-profit World Witness, which lodged a criticism with the US Securities and Alternate Fee (SEC) in February. In Shell’s annual report, the corporate acknowledged that 12 per cent of its capital expenditure was channelled right into a renewables division in 2021. The unit’s webpage says it’s investing in “wind, photo voltaic, electrical car charging, hydrogen, and extra”. World Witness argued that 1.5 per cent of Shell’s capital expenditure has been used to develop real renewables, resembling photo voltaic and wind, however a lot of the remainder of the division’s assets had been being pumped into fossil fuel.

JBS: Meatless inexperienced bonds 

Beef carcasses dangle within the gross sales cooler on the JBS beef plant in Greeley, Colo. Picture: Stephanie Paige Ogburn/KUNC

The world’s largest meat producer was on the receiving finish of a criticism by environmental group Mighty Earth to SEC over the corporate’s “deceptive and fraudulent” inexperienced bonds. Mighty claimed that the US$3.2 billion in debt issuances or sustainabilty-linked bonds by JBS, that had been tied to the corporate’s acknowledged objective to attain net-zero by 2040, had been suspect as a result of its emissions have elevated in recent times, and excluded Scope 3 provide chain emissions that comprise at the least 97 per cent of its local weather footprint. 

Have we missed any? Virtually actually. Tell us by writing to information@eco-business.com. This story is a part of our Yr in Evaluation collection, which journals the tales that formed the world of sustainability in 2023.