Cookies managing
We use cookies to provide the best site experience.
Accept All
Cookie Settings
Cookies managing
Cookie Settings
Cookies necessary for the correct operation of the site are always enabled.
Other cookies are configurable.
Essential cookies
Always On. These cookies are essential so that you can use the website and use its functions. They cannot be turned off. They're set in response to requests made by you, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms.
Analytics cookies
Disabled
These cookies collect information to help us understand how our Websites are being used or how effective our marketing campaigns are, or to help us customise our Websites for you. See a list of the analytics cookies we use here.
Advertising cookies
Disabled
These cookies provide advertising companies with information about your online activity to help them deliver more relevant online advertising to you or to limit how many times you see an ad. This information may be shared with other advertising companies. See a list of the advertising cookies we use here.
Flagship blog - eng

Communicating Sustainability: How to Avoid Greenwashing

News & Insights
Companies are competing to appear “green,” but not all are taking real, verifiable steps toward sustainability. The result? Loss of trust, legal risks, and confusion about what responsible business truly means.
In this article, we’ll cover what greenwashing actually is, why it remains dangerous for businesses and investors, and how to avoid it. We’ll also review concrete examples – some negative, where a “green coat” backfired, and positive, where companies base their communication on transparency and real results. We introduce our tool – the Honesty Filter – which helps you avoid greenwashing.

What is Greenwashing?

As interest in sustainability grows, so does the number of companies that present it as a priority. Sadly, not all do so honestly.
Greenwashing is the practice by which companies use their communication and PR to create a false or misleading impression of the environmental friendliness of their products or services, deceiving consumers. This threatens trust (of customers and investors), and undermines meaningful sustainability efforts. Some companies are genuinely transforming; others rely on marketing tricks, half-truths or misleading labels to appear greener than they really are. The outcome is reputational risk, and slowing of actual progress toward a sustainable economy.
Typical forms of greenwashing:
  • Vague claims — using words like “eco,” “natural,” “100% recycled,” “carbon neutral” without sufficient evidence.
  • Selective information — promoting one positive aspect while hiding significant negative impacts.
  • Symbolism without substance — green colours, natural imagery, “eco-logos” without certification.
  • Unsubstantiated promises — communicating goals or commitments without specific data, plans, or metrics.

Why Avoid Greenwashing?

Greenwashing might appear as a shortcut to attract customers or investors, but in fact it involves serious risks.

Legal and regulatory risks

  • The EU proposed a Green Claims Directive (GCD), but its future is uncertain.
  • The Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive (EmpCo) — adopted in 2024, effective from 2026 – bans vague environmental claims (like “eco” or “green”) unless they are backed by clear, verifiable evidence.
  • Even without GCD, companies should expect regulation – either through green claims rules or consumer protection law (including EmpCo).
  • Misleading or vague claims can already be treated as unfair commercial practices, leading to fines and reputational damage.

Reputational Damage

  • Once a company is exposed for misleading environmental claims, the damage can be swift and long-lasting.
  • Stakeholders (customers, investors, regulators) are increasingly alert.
  • The fact that the GCD is paused doesn’t mean tolerance for misleading claims has increased – quite the opposite. Transparency and credibility are becoming competitive advantages.

Negative Impacts on the Market and Society

  • Misleading claims undermine consumer trust in sustainability in general.
  • They distort competition: companies making genuine efforts may be unfairly disadvantaged.
  • They delay real environmental progress.

Internal Impacts on the Company

  • Employees, especially those involved in sustainability, expect integrity. If internal action doesn’t match public claims, morale and trust suffer.
  • Long-term strategy suffers if marketing is ahead of reality.

Greenwashing imposes a strategic risk with legal, financial, and reputational consequences. In the long run, honesty, transparency, and gradual but real steps toward sustainability pay off.

Our Honesty filter
To make sure your messages are clear and trustworthy, we developed the Honesty filter, a tool that lets you test your marketing claims in just a few minutes.
It’s fast, easy to use, and helps you spot weak points before you publish your text. This way, your words rest on solid foundations – and your audience will believe them.
🔗 https://flagshipimpact.com/community#green

Latest EU Regulatory Context (Mid-2025)

Here’s what is new / changed about green claims law and regulation in the EU as of June–July 2025:
  • Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive (EmpCo; EU 2024/825) is in force and requires transposition by Member States. Full binding effect from 27 September 2026.
  • EmpCo includes “blacklist” provisions: certain environmental claims are automatically considered misleading, unless specific conditions are met. These include vague terms (“eco”, “natural”) without proven credentials; claims of environmental neutrality or improvements without credible, verifiable plans; claims that rely solely on offsetting.
  • The Green Claims Directive proposal has been withdrawn / paused. In particular, the Commission has announced its intention to withdraw it on 20 June 2025. Negotiations are not currently moving forward.
  • Stakeholders are closely watching whether a revised version might appear later. If so, one expects lighter burdens on small and micro-enterprises, clearer thresholds, possibly scaled requirements, and more alignment with existing laws (EmpCo, UCPD).

Real-Life Examples

Examples of Greenwashing:
  • Marketing campaigns: Some nature-related initiatives or projects communicate very ambitious goals but lack transparency about how funds are used or what impact the activities really have. This often results in public distrust and reputational harm – even if there are no immediate regulatory penalties.
  • Investment sector: Certain institutions publicly present sustainability as a core value and claim to hold a high share of “green investments.” However, audits have revealed that the reality often differs – marketing claims don’t match actual portfolio composition. In some cases, this has led to regulatory investigations and fines worth tens of millions of euros.
  • Financial sector: A company may present itself as a sustainability partner and actively support ESG-related events, while simultaneously providing services to sectors with significant negative climate impact. When such information becomes public, the company’s reputation is threatened, and stakeholder pressure may force it to rethink its policies – for example, by ending cooperation with high-emission industries.
  • European context: Recent cases show companies fined or investigated by national authorities for misleading claims – typically around “carbon neutrality” based solely on offsetting without clear justification.
Examples of Fair ESG Communication:
  • Tesco Czech Republic: The first company in the country to publicly report food waste volumes in its stores and warehouses back in 2017. Thanks to this and other measures, they reduced food waste by 80% by 2024. Transparent reporting and concrete targets help Tesco build credibility and avoid greenwashing.
  • LEGO: The company abandoned its plan to replace ABS plastic with recycled plastic (rPET) when it realized that the material was too soft and would require additional components and more energy to achieve durability—resulting in a higher carbon footprint.
  • Patagonia: Communicates openly about potentially problematic impacts of its production.

How to Communicate Sustainability the Right Way

At the heart of fair communication is not perfection but honesty – with yourself and your stakeholders. The road to sustainability is not straightforward. Don’t be afraid to share not only your successes but also the challenges and setbacks along the way. This openness builds trust and shows that your statements are not just marketing, but a real commitment to long-term change.