Home / Publications / CMS Green Globe / Global Trends

The greenwashing and sustainability claims trends presented to readers in our ‘CMS Green Globe’ greenwashing and sustainability guide differ from country to country. However, some common trends can still be identified amongst the various jurisdictions. Below are the three most commonly encountered trends that are currently being observed across the globe in relation to greenwashing and sustainability claims.

1. The emergence of detailed regulations and guidelines

The issuance of guidelines detailing the legislation already in place, coupled with the adoption of new relevant legislation in countries where greenwashing and sustainability claims are not yet fully regulated, is the most common trend that can be observed in most of the surveyed jurisdictions. This applies, among others, to territories including Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Hungary, Netherlands, Chile, Norway, Poland, Romania, and the United Kingdom.

In those jurisdictions where governments are proposing to introduce (or have recently introduced) further laws and regulations to combat the issue of greenwashing, the proposed new laws and regulations cover a varying scope of topics. For instance, in Austria, the legislator is planning to introduce stricter labeling regulations that apply specifically to the food industry, whilst the ‘Guidelines on Environmental Claims’ issued by the relevant Belgian regulator aim to provide clarity on how to apply general (and somewhat vague) principles that are currently in place.

Some jurisdictions do not limit their focus solely to regulating the behavior of businesses and traders, but also try to increase public awareness of the issue of greenwashing. The Hungarian Competition Authority, for example, has issued both the ‘Green Marketing Guidance for Undertakings’ and a public-facing communication drawing the attention of consumers to the need to always double-check the accuracy of sustainability claims made by advertisers.

By contrast, some jurisdictions demonstrate the opposite position, reporting a notable lack of (and/or vagueness of) laws and regulations governing greenwashing and sustainability claims. In China, for example, despite the fact that the legal system governing environmental protection is improving, legislation on greenwashing is still largely absent.

Nevertheless, for the majority of the surveyed jurisdictions, the primary trend is the further development of laws and regulations targeting greenwashing and sustainability claims.

2. Greater public pressure and consumer awareness

Many jurisdictions indicate that efforts to combat greenwashing and misleading sustainability claims are increasingly driven by the public. In most countries, the growth of consumer awareness on the subject, as well as an increased readiness of consumers to take action in this regard, represent another notable trend in the area of greenwashing and sustainability claims. Increased public pressure of this nature can be observed most significantly in jurisdictions such as China, Germany, Hungary, Norway, Romania and the United Kingdom.

In many instances, public influence is ultimately implemented through action by competition and consumer protection organisations and associations. In Germany, for example, the ‘German Centre for Protection against Unfair Competition’ and the ‘Deutsche Umwelthilfe’ (Environmental Action Germany) have successfully taken action against businesses using misleading environmental advertising claims (namely, climate neutrality and recyclability statements).

Another jurisdiction in which there has been a significant increase in public awareness and consumer pressure in this area is the United Kingdom. Recently, non-governmental organisations such as ‘AdBlock Bristol’ and ‘AdFree Cities’ have been active in this sector and have, amongst other things, lodged a formal complaint with the Advertising Standards Authority in relation to a series of adverts published by a leading bank, which they argued were “greenwashing by omission” (such complaint ultimately leading to the regulating authority upholding the complaint).

As with the first common trend above, there are also exceptions to the rise in public pressure and consumer awareness. Consumers in some jurisdictions seemingly ‘lag behind’ in terms of their awareness and interest in greenwashing and sustainability claims. One such jurisdiction is the Netherlands, where a recently published study revealed that knowledge about the difficulties associated with green claims is very limited amongst Dutch consumers. The same anomaly has also been observed in Poland.

Overall, public interest in greenwashing and sustainability claims remains at a fairly high level, and is being further promoted by both government bodies and non-government organisations through various initiatives, including, for example, study programmes (as is the case in Spain).

3. Increased scrutiny of greenwashing and misleading sustainability claims by authorities

Another common trend in relation to greenwashing and sustainability claims is an evident increase in the amount of scrutiny applied by government authorities. For example, stricter enforcement and a higher level of applicable fines has been observed in countries such as the Czech Republic, Germany, Norway, Romania, Switzerland, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom.

For instance, in recent times, Switzerland's financial markets regulator has specified transparency obligations regarding climate risks, and has promoted transparency in order to avoid greenwashing and misleading the public about products’ sustainability characteristics.

The Ukrainian Competition Authority has also been increasing the attention it gives to greenwashing and sustainability claims by businesses in recent years. It has, for example, broadened the scope of information that is classed as ‘misleading’ in relation to sustainability claims, which has resulted in several companies’ activities being found to amount to dissemination of misleading information and thus constitute greenwashing.

Finally, certain other jurisdictions show an increase in regulatory authorities focusing on specific industries. In Norway, for example, the regulatory authority has recently been turning its attention specifically to the usage of green claims by fashion retailers. In Romania, by contrast, it is the agricultural sector that is receiving the focus of the relevant authorities, where the Unfair Trading Practices Directive has been transposed into Romanian law and triggered significant changes in the industry.

CMS Green Globe Team

Show more Show less
Katja Middelhoff
Dr. Katja Middelhoff
Counsel
Rechtsanwältin
Cologne
Kaisa Patsalides
Kaisa Patsalides
Senior Associate
London
Philine-Luise Pulst
Dr. Philine-Luise Pulst, LL.M. (University of Cape Town)
Counsel
Rechtsanwältin
Hamburg
Diana Valyeyeva
Diana Valyeyeva
Lawyer
Kyiv (CMS RRH)
Inshaal Ahmad
Inshaal Ahmad
Associate
Dubai
Mike Walsh
Mike Walsh
Senior Associate
London
Taner Elmas

Subscribe to CMS Green Globe newsletter

Discover related products

09/04/2024
CMS Expert Guide to plastics and packaging laws
 Plastics and packaging have attracted  consumer, media and legislative interest over recent years with an array of laws being proposed to incentivise behavioural and design change. Significant reforms are expected globally to deal with environmental
Comparable
16/03/2022
Greenwashing: reputations on the line
As global heating and other environmental issues have come to the forefront of public consciousness in recent years, with extreme weather events and increasingly urgent warnings about the damage humans are doing to the planet, consumers have taken a greater interest in the environmental impact of the products they buy and use. Dozens of surveys have revealed that consumers prefer en­vir­on­ment­ally-friendly products, and that they are willing to pay a premium to get them. Naturally, business have responded to this concern, with brand-owners increasingly highlighting the benign or even beneficial effects their products and services have on the natural world. However, environmental issues are highly technical, and therefore raise a significant risk of confusing and misleading consumers, who may be persuaded to part with their cash to obtain products whose environmental benefits may be less than they appear. A European Commission website screening project, which reported in January, found that green claims were exaggerated, false or deceptive in 42% of cases, and more than half the time the information provided was in­ad­equate. 2021 therefore saw an increased focus from regulators on misleading green claims. In the UK, the Competition and Markets Authority recently published a new Green Claims Code, setting out six key principles for traders to follow when making environmental claims, together with over 100 pages of examples and more detailed advice, and has implied that enforcement in this area may follow soon in 2022. The Advertising Standards Authority recently carried out a review of its regulation of green claims regulation, announcing its decisions following the first stage of its review in September. In January 2021 the Netherlands Consumer and Markets Authority published Guidelines on Sustainability Claims, and in August 2021, the French government issued its Climate and Resilience Law. Similar developments are in train across Europe. Given the level of public concern about the environment, we expect that a finding that a business has been misleading consumers about its environmental credentials has the potential to be even more damaging to its reputation than other advertising breaches. Here are some key points to remember when making green claims. 1. Be clear Environmental claims are often technical and complex. Where terms are unclear, explain what you mean by them. Use appropriate qualifications and clarifications in the ad – significant qualifications should not be on a separate web page or another location where they are likely to go unread – but remember that these must be genuine qualifications of clarifications, and may not contradict the main claim. Avoid industry jargon, or explain it when used. 2. Be specific Identify the specific environmental benefit of your product or service and state it clearly. Avoid terms like “sus­tain­able”, “green”, “en­vir­on­ment­ally friendly”, “eco-friendly” or “kind to the planet”, which are largely meaningless. Comparative claims, such as “more sustainable” or “greener”, may be acceptable if you explain the specific environmental benefit clearly. A claim made for a product or service generally should be based on a “cradle-to-grave” assessment, taking into account the environmental effects of inputs such as raw materials, water and electricity, manufacturing, transport, use and end-of-life disposal. Even with more narrowly-framed claims, make sure you consider all aspects – a common pitfall is to claim that packaging is recyclable or plastic free, without considering whether inner packaging, glue or tape, all of which form part of the packaging, meet that description. 3. Limit your claims to what you can prove Start with the evidence you have, and work out what claims you can make based on that evidence. A common pitfall is to start with the claim and then cast about for evidence to support it, which often leads to a broader claim than can be substantiated. If you have taken waste out of the supply chain, limit your claim to the supply chain. If you have reduced CO2 emissions from transport, limit your claim to transport. 4. Sub­stan­ti­ation should be thorough and detailed Because they are often technical and detailed, environmental claims may require in-depth substantiation, and you may need to expend significant time and effort compiling it. For example, claims regarding carbon neutrality or reduced carbon require a thorough survey of a business’s operation and supply chain over a significant period, first to determine its baseline carbon emissions and then to track its progress towards reduced carbon or carbon neutrality. Be aware that terms such as “bio­de­grad­able”, “organic”, “renewable”, “com­postable”, “recycled”, “re­cyc­lable”, “reusable” and “car­bon-neut­ral” have specific technical meanings, and be ready to substantiate them accordingly. Substantiation by reference to an independent test standard, such as ISO 14021 on self-declared environmental claims, tends to be more persuasive than a standard developed in-house. Take care with symbols, which have specific meanings and rules for use. Make sure evidence is up to date. Make sure claims are accurate for normal use of the products, or qualify them accordingly – for example, if a product is only biodegradable in a specialist facility, and is likely to go to landfill where it will not degrade any quicker than normal products, do not claim “bio­de­grad­able”, or at least state that specialist facilities are required. 5. Don’t claim normal product features, or things you are required to do by law, as environmental benefits For example, in the UK, rinse-off toiletry products may not contain micro beads. Claiming such products are “micro bead free” is misleading, as it implies that the products have a particular environmental advantage over other products, which they do not. 6.  Take care with comparisons Comparative advertising raises its own specific issues, and, where it refers to a competitor or its product or service by name, can substantially heighten risks by opening up the possibility of trademark infringement. Make sure you compare like with like – the comparison should be of products or services meeting the same needs or intended for the same purpose. The features compared should be material and representative, and also “veri­fi­able”, which requires the detailed basis of the comparison to be disclosed proactively, either in the advertising itself or by way of a “signpost” in the ad directing readers to the source of information.  
07/12/2021
Spotlight on Sustainability II December 2021 - Consumer Products Newsletter
Welcome to the December 2021 edition of the CMS Consumer Products Newsletter!