Learn how to

Australia’s advertising industry is finally cracking down on greenwashing, with the Australian Association of National Advertisers publishing an Environmental Claims in Advertising and Marketing Code.

While not saying as much, the Association (AANA) has made it clear that the code is designed to stop advertisers misleading the public with bogus claims about the green-ness of their products.

In its official statement announcing the code, the AANA said it aims to ensure “marketers apply rigorous, industry-wide standards when they make environmental claims in advertising or marketing communications.”

The code states that claims made about the environment “shall not be misleading or deceptive or be likely to mislead or deceive.’’ Furthermore, the code prohibits these claims from being “vague, ambiguous or unbalanced.” Claims should be “supported by evidence that is current and reflects legislative, scientific and technological developments”, and have to be presented “in a manner that can be clearly understood by the consumer.”

Meanwhile, in the U.S.A…

Calling it ‘the victory of the week’ the US-based Organic Consumers Association (OCA) has released the following welcome report. It reads: ‘A committee of the USDA National Organic Standards Board wants to ‘Solve the Problem of Mislabeled Organic Personal Care.’

The Organic Consumers Association is very encouraged by the committee’s proposal to make sure that any use of the word ‘organic’ on a personal care product is backed up by third-party certification to USDA standards for products that are ‘USDA Organic’ or ‘Made With Organic Ingredients.’

This is what OCA’s Coming Clean campaign has been pushing the USDA to do for the last 5 years. Unfortunately, the USDA has been hostile to the idea and even USDA Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan, an advocate for organic agriculture, has resisted consumer pressure on this issue.

So, the long struggle for USDA enforcement of organic standards in personal care continues. But this also promises to be somewhat bigger than just a baby step forward. If you are interested in adding your support to this latest push for more honest labelling, you can go to its website and put your name to a support document.

& in the U.K…

The annual report from the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) shows that in 2007 the ASA received 561 complaints about environmental claims in 410 adverts, compared with just 117 complaints about 83 adverts the year before – a more than fourfold increase. The ASA has already censured several high-profile companies including Suzuki, Shell, Ryanair and Toyota for the practice of “greenwash” – where companies are found to have misled consumers on their environmental practices as a business or of the particular benefits of a product or service.

A complaint against the oil giant Shell was upheld by the advertising watchdog last year over a press advert that showed refinery chimneys emitting flowers. Environmental lobby group Friends of the Earth was among those who complained about the advert, which ran with the slogan, “Don’t throw anything anyway. There is no away.” Friends of the Earth said the ad’s central image - of refinery chimneys spewing out flowers - misrepresented the environmental impact of Shell’s activities.

Environmental marketing Company TerraChoice published the Seven Sins of Greenwashing website. This is a valuable resource that will help you and your customers be aware of greenwashing, the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service.

1: Sin of the Hidden Trade-off

A claim suggesting that a product is ‘green’ based on a narrow set of attributes without attention to other important environmental issues. Paper, for example, is not necessarily environmentally-preferable just because it comes from a sustainably-harvested forest. Other important environmental issues in the paper-making process, such as greenhouse gas emissions, or chlorine use in bleaching may be equally important.

2: Sin of No Proof

An environmental claim that cannot be substantiated by easily accessible supporting information or by a reliable third-party certification. Common examples are facial tissues or toilet tissue products that claim various percentages of post-consumer recycled content without providing evidence.

3: Sin of Vagueness

A claim that is so poorly defined or broad that its real meaning is likely to be misunderstood by the consumer. ‘All-natural’ is an example. Arsenic, uranium, mercury, and formaldehyde are all naturally occurring, and poisonous. ‘All natural’ isn’t necessarily ‘green’.

4: Sin of Worshiping False Labels

A product that, through either words or images, gives the impression of third-party endorsement where no such endorsement exists; fake labels, in other words.

5: Sin of Irrelevance

An environmental claim that may be truthful but is unimportant or unhelpful for consumers seeking environmentally preferable products. ‘CFC-free’ is a common example, since it is a frequent claim despite the fact that CFCs are banned by law.

6: Lesser of Two Evils

A claim that may be true within the product category, but that risks distracting the consumer from the greater environmental impacts of the category as a whole. Organic cigarettes could be an example of this sin, as might the fuel-efficient sport-utility vehicle.

7: Sin of Fibbing

Environmental claims that are simply false. The most common examples were products falsely claiming to be Energy Star certified or registered.

Seven Sins of Greenwashing: Resources

Seven Sins of Greenwashing homepage: http://sinsofgreenwashing.org/
Greenwashing Report 2009: http://sinsofgreenwashing.org/findings/greenwashing-report-2009/
Greenwashing Report 2007: http://sinsofgreenwashing.org/findings/greenwashing-report-2007/