Phrases such as “packaging made from 30% recycled plastic” or “ocean-friendly sunscreen” have become common signals about how often products are bought and marketed. Brands use these messages to project a commitment to the environment and to the products they sell, and eco-conscious consumers often favor offers bearing ecological assurances over those that lack them.
Yet the reality is that many of these labels—often boldly green with plant illustrations and terms like “bio,” “eco,” “natural,” or “organic”—are not always credible. Some claims are unnecessary or simply untrue, barely capable of withstanding scrutiny.
In fact, a 2020 study funded by the European Commission found that 53.3% of so-called ecological claims were vague, misleading, or unfounded, and 40% lacked scientific support.
This practice is known as greenwashing: a strategy that washes products and services in environmental slogans without providing verifiable evidence to back them up.
Concept greenwash emerged about four decades ago, credited to American researcher Jay Westerveld, and today it sits at the center of widespread consumer concern. Ecological organizations and advocacy groups have pressed for greater accountability, and their voices have found allies in regulatory bodies and legislators who are listening more closely than ever before.
In Spain, the National Commission on Markets and Competition (CNMC) has signaled, as part of its 2024 strategy, that financial firms carefully disclose environmental information provided to potential clients, reinforcing the need for transparency in environmental claims.
In Europe, the European Commission has proposed a directive to curb environmental misinformation. The Directive on Green Claims would set minimum standards for substantiating ecological statements, with independent, accredited verifiers responsible for verification before the rules are finalized by Parliament and the Council.
Experts warn against misleading advertising, such as calling a product “handmade” and “biological” when those attributes lack proper verification. Miguel Ángel Soto of Greenpeace notes that decades of inflated green language have become socially stigmatized and are increasingly regulated to protect consumers.
Gas and nuclear: green?
Even with the European Union’s tough stance, environmental groups—Greenpeace, WWF, Friends of the Earth, Germany, and Transport & Environment—have challenged the Commission in court, accusing it of greenwashing. The core tension lies in how energy sources are classified as sustainable. Under current classifications, gas plants with permits before 2045 and low emissions goals are debated as possibly green, raising questions about how lifetime emissions are calculated.
The European Commission’s green taxonomy guide defines which projects and investments qualify as sustainable and which do not. Critics argue that including gas and nuclear energy temporarily could mislead investors and consumers about true environmental benefits, potentially conflicting with EU climate law and the Paris Agreement goals. The Court of Justice of the European Union could hear the case later in 2024, with a final ruling expected in 2025. Advocates, including Soto, caution against presenting investments in these energy sources as truly green, stressing that clear signals for the energy transition are essential for public trust.
An independent observatory focusing on greenwashing—comprising WWF, Ecologistas en Acción, BirdLife, and Ecos—has proposed an alternative, science-based taxonomy to guide investors. This separate framework aims to help financial actors verify whether their portfolios genuinely align with ecological science, especially when the official EU taxonomy includes contentious energy sources. The alternative taxonomy is available for public review at www.greenwashed.net.
HOW TO DETECT GREENWASHING?
Purchasing with environmental awareness goes beyond trusting dubious labels. These practical steps help consumers avoid greenwashing:
1. Question the terms “biological” and “organic.” Descriptive words tied to sustainability are often used without a robust scientific basis or traceable proof of origin.
2. Watch for excessive green on the package. Some marketing campaigns rely on green visuals and plant imagery to create a sense of natural or less-processed goods, regardless of actual practices.
3. Verify certificates. When a brand cites third-party certifications, check their origin and whether they carry official authorization from a recognized regulator.
4. Look for legal compliance disclosures. Some claims highlight features that are legally required, such as bans on certain substances, which should not be presented as exclusive environmental benefits.
5. Examine composition. Especially in foods, marketing may spotlight a few natural ingredients while omitting other components that could be harmful to health or the environment.
…
For further guidance, many official bodies provide consumer resources that help distinguish genuine eco-friendly practices from marketing ploys, encouraging critical assessment of environmental statements.