Communicating one's position within the discourse on sustainability today is of primary importance to maintain a competitive position in the market. Communication should stem from action but is often driven by economic interests rather than genuine commitment. There are cases of contradictions behind certain labels that are supposed to represent specific qualities, as seen in the phenomenon of greenwashing, which exploits sustainability for manipulative purposes. The modern consumer is more disillusioned with messages influenced solely by image. Citizens desire substance, tangible examples, and concrete results. Sustainability must become an integral part of the company, not just through a marketing strategy but through a cultural change that involves the entire organization.
In recent decades, the abuse of environmental and social statements by companies has become a central theme in the corporate social responsibility (CSR) debate. Many companies are accused of engaging in greenwashing, providing sustainability statements not supported by concrete actions. This practice raises concerns due to the environmental misinformation it generates.
Towards the late '80s, managerial articles in business magazines such as Business Week, Fortune, or Advertising Age suggested that consumers were inclined to alter consumption patterns in favor of more ecological options. In response to this growing ecological awareness, advertisers and agencies increased the use of ecological communication to promote their products. However, this has led to the emergence of the practice of deceiving consumers about a company's environmental practices or the ecological benefits of a product. The executive effect of greenwashing is manifested through the use of nature-evoking elements in advertising to artificially enhance the ecological image of a brand.
The practice of greenwashing gained significant research attention in the late 2000s following a surge in ecological advertising between 2006 and 2009.
As advertising practices improve and debates on the need to regulate greenwashing grow, the implementation of those practices has decreased. However, the use of executive elements such as nature imagery, fundamental to advertising creativity, has not been concretely addressed. NGOs and environmental activists have elevated the greenwashing issue to a strategic importance, organizing movements to expose it. Some argue that greenwashing not only deceives consumers on its own, but may also hinder the global movement towards sustainable consumption by discouraging the sincere efforts of companies that prioritize sustainability over those that rely on superficial communications. Additionally, it steers genuinely conscientious consumers towards suboptimal choices.
Within public policies, Delmas and Burbano (2011) acknowledge the scarce regulation of greenwashing, with significant variations between countries, from extremely limited regulations in the United States to stricter rules in Australia and some European countries like Norway, the Netherlands, and France. Norway has a particularly rigorous approach, where no car can be labeled 'green,' 'clean', or 'ecologically friendly' since 2007, as all these descriptors are prohibited. In the broader EU, all manufacturers must display the average carbon emissions of their cars on all promotional materials. The Netherlands further extends this requirement, mandating a clear color-coded label on printed materials, functioning like a traffic light, to maximize consumer understanding of the information. Regulation specifically targeting executive elements of greenwashing is lacking, as there is currently little knowledge of their deceptive action. The French advertising professional authority (ADEME-ARPP 2012) included recommendations not to use images or symbols suggesting environmental benefits. Despite these efforts and growing debates, especially in Europe, little is known about what could be called "executive greenwashing", its deceptive effect, and the role of public policies in discouraging it.
Many companies may feel compelled to create a sustainable narrative even when the reality of their actions does not align with the communicated image. The main motivation for this unethical behavior is that the market judges companies in terms of sustainability, and an unsustainable company risks decreased sales due to market distrust. To maintain consumer trust, it is necessary to ensure authentic sustainability, where communication is simply the reflection of concrete and tangible actions. Another motivation is the voluntary nature of declarations. The absence of uniform rules for companies issuing voluntary environmental statements allows greenwashing and generates inequalities in the European Union market, penalizing genuinely sustainability-oriented companies.
A 2020 Commission study highlighted that over 50% of examined environmental claims in the EU were vague, misleading, or unfounded, creating a favorable environment for greenwashing and promoting inequalities in the European market to the detriment of authentically sustainable companies. In In March 2023, the European Commission proposed some common guidelines to combat greenwashing and misleading environmental self-declarations. According to the current proposal, consumers will enjoy greater clarity and certainty in verifying if a product advertised as ecological genuinely is. Additionally, consumers will have access to more detailed information to make informed decisions on environmentally respectful products and services. These new rules will also benefit businesses genuinely committed to environmental sustainability, as they will be more easily recognized and rewarded by consumers, enabling them to increase sales without facing unfair competition. The proposal aims to ensure equal conditions regarding information on the environmental performance of products.