Home / Publications / CMS Green Globe / Sustainability claims and greenwashing in the United...
  1. Global Trends
  2. News in Sustainability Claims
    1. France: Extended Producer Responsibility
    2. Germany: New court decision: Advertising climate neutrality
    3. UK: Investigations by CMA into the fashion sector
    4. Switzerland: Initiative for recycling plastic
    5. Austria: “Greenwashing check” – Recycling
    6. France: Sorting rules (Triman and Info-Tri): hot topic
    7. UK ad regulator issues harsh ruling on “misleading” environmental advertising
    8. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Carbon credit market in The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
    9. Switzerland: Climate disclosures for Swiss large companies in force as of 1 January 2024
    10. Italy: Sustainability in the fashion industry
    11. Switzerland: Swiss Federal Council takes action against greenwashing in the financial sector
    12. France: Update on the Green Dot
    13. UK: CMA announces review into the FMCG sector
    14. EU Commission makes another push to prevent greenwashing
    15. France: Single-use tableware in on-site restaurants is no longer allowed
    16. Germany and the EU: New study on competition and sustainability in Germany and the EU
    17. France: Carbon neutrality claims
    18. France: Update on the Triman
    19. France: Update of the Practical Guide to Environmental Claims
    20. Switzerland: The Swiss Bankers Association (SBA) has included a new section on ESG risks
    21. Netherlands: Dutch regulator updates Guidelines on sustainability claims
    22. UK: Transparency in “green” claims: UK Advertising Regulator updates guidance on misleading environmental claims
    23. France: Annulment of the Green Dot penalty – CMS Francis Lefebvre, legal advisor of the claimants
    24. Germany: Court decides on Advertising of Climate Neutrality in two Appeal Proceedings
    25. Switzerland: Advertising of carbon neutrality at sports events
    26. Germany: German Court decides on advertising of climate neutrality based on a CO₂ compensation by a forest conservation project
    27. UK: CMA launches greenwashing investigation into boiler manufacturer
    28. EU: Stricter regulations to combat greenwashing and to empower consumers on the horizon
    29. Belgium: New decision about an advertisement for an SUV
    30. UK: ASA bans Toyota advertisement for promoting environmentally irresponsible behaviour
    31. Germany: New decision concerning CO2 positive and climate neutral production advertisement
    32. Mexico: New amendments to the Environmental Law for the Protection of the Land
    33. Switzerland: New Guideline on Green Claims
    34. Austria: Court decision regarding carbon-neutral flights
    35. Austria: Court decision regarding carbon-neutral beer
    36. Germany: New decision regarding Advertising of Climate Neutrality
    37. EU: First directive to combat greenwashing adopted and published in Official Journal
    38. EU Parliament positions itself in favor of a strong Green Claims Directive
    39. UK ad regulator publishes research on consumer understanding of green claims in the food industry
    40. Netherlands: Misleading environmental claims in airline marketing
    41. Switzerland: Explicit legal regulation against Greenwashing in the Swiss Unfair Competition Act
    42. Germany: New Court Decision on 'Net-zero' claim used by cruise company
    43. UK: CMA Issues New Greenwashing Guidance for Fashion Sector
    44. Germany: The Federal Court of Justice rules on “climate-neutral” claim
    45. EU: News on emissions-related data for airlines
  3. Common Trends for EU
  4. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Albania
  5. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Austria
  6. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Belgium
  7. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Bosnia and Herzegovina
  8. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Brazil
    1. Brasil - Alegações de sustentabilidade e greenwashing
  9. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Bulgaria
  10. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in China
  11. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Chile
  12. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Colombia
  13. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Croatia
  14. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in the Czech Republic
  15. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Germany
  16. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in France
  17. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Hungary
  18. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Italy
  19. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Mexico
  20. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Morocco
  21. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in the Netherlands
  22. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in North Macedonia
  23. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Norway
  24. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Poland
  25. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Portugal
  26. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Romania
  27. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Saudi Arabia
  28. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Singapore
  29. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Slovakia
  30. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Slovenia
  31. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Spain
  32. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Sweden
  33. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Switzerland
  34. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Turkiye
  35. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in the UAE
  36. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in Ukraine
  37. Sustainability claims and greenwashing in the United Kingdom

United Kingdom - Sustainability claims and greenwashing

What are the top 3 developments in your territory concerning green claims and the associated risk of greenwashing? 

Environmental issues are increasingly important to the UK government and UK consumers alike. Accordingly, ‘green’ claims have fast become a key point of focus for companies keen to demonstrate their green credentials. These same claims have also attracted the attention of government regulators and campaigners who are increasingly cracking down on misleading or unsubstantiated claims. In addition to the reputational risk of a public ruling that an advert is in breach of the UK advertising codes, non-compliant advertisers face the risk of stiff sanctions from the Competition and Markets Authority under consumer law. These include formal investigations, financial penalties, civil sanctions, and criminal prosecution, which in the worst case could lead to custodial sentences for the company directors and officers involved. 

We have identified the top three areas of development for those who operate or target consumers in the UK to be mindful of when making green claims. 

1. New guidelines and enforcement by the government regulator 

In response to the increasingly high-profile environmental issues, and concern that many consumers were being misled by unjustified environmental claims, the UK consumer regulator, the Competition and Markets Authority (the “CMA”), published an updated ‘Green Claims Code’ in September 2021. 
 
The CMA’s Code has six key principles: (i) claims must be truthful and accurate; (ii) claims must be clear and unambiguous; (iii) claims must not omit or hide important information; (iv) comparisons must be fair and meaningful; (v) claims must consider the full life cycle of the product or service; and (vi) claims must be substantiated. 
 
These principles apply to both business-to-business and business-to-consumer advertising, and are applicable to all kinds of marketing communications (including advertising on social media platforms). They have been actively applied and enforced by the CMA since publication, and already investigations have been launched. The CMA, unlike the Advertising Standards Authority (see below) has the power to conduct sector-wide enquiries and bring court proceedings against companies who fall foul of these principles. Clearly, the organisation intends to utilise those powers.  

In January 2022, the CMA launched a review of green claims used in the UK’s fashion retail sector. Six months later, the CMA announced that three prominent fast-fashion retailers were under formal investigation. Further, in January 2023, the CMA announced a similar review into the use of green claims in the FMCG market. According to the CMA, this review is intended to focus on “concerning practices”, including the use of “vague and broad eco-statements” such as those which claim a product or a product’s packaging is “sustainable” or “better for the environment” without evidence. The CMA will examine the environmental credentials of individual products, as well as entire product ranges, thought to carry misleading green claims. Most recently, as part of an adjacent investigation by the CMA into consumer protection in the green heating and insultation sector, which began in September 2022, the CMA announced it was investigating a boiler manufacturer for potentially misleading green claims. In addition, the CMA has put the wider green heating and insulation sector and the travel and transport sector on notice that it too may soon be the focus of the CMA’s attention. 

Companies operating or targeting consumers in the UK, irrespective of their sector or industry, should take great care to closely follow the CMA’s Green Claims Code and any subsequent guidance it issues, and should always seek to demonstrate, with regards their green claims, a ‘best practice’ against this Code. The flurry of recent activity by the CMA shows that UK companies should assume that their green claims will be scrutinised by the CMA. Companies should therefore ensure that, prior to publication of any green claims, they have documentation in place to demonstrate the substantiation which is required to comply with the regulator’s principles. Given the CMA’s wide powers to impose sanctions ranging from written warnings to criminal prosecution (including custodial sentences for company officers), and its evident willingness to utilise such powers, the CMA’s guidance should be taken seriously by advertisers. 

2. A corresponding increase in scrutiny by the Advertising Standards Authority 

The UK’s self-regulatory body for the advertising industry, the Advertising Standards Authority (the “ASA”), is also increasing the level of scrutiny that it applies to green claims, with the ASA recognising the role that advertising, and advertising regulation, needs to play if the UK is to meet its legally binding target of ‘Net Zero’ by 2050. 
 
The ASA’s aim is to ensure that it (and advertisers producing such claims) ‘look behind’ green claims to ensure they can be fully substantiated and corroborated, and are therefore not misleading. The ASA has stated that its initial focus is on the travel, energy and heating sectors, but its attention has widened to claims made by companies operating in the waste and food industries. 
 
The ASA assesses ads under UK Codes of Broadcast / Non-Broadcasting Advertising (the “BCAP” and “CAP” Codes, respectively), as applicable, and also takes into account compliance with its own guidance on green claims. Where it finds advertising to be non-compliant and environmentally irresponsible or misleading, it will uphold complaints against advertisers by way of a public adjudication on its website. An upheld complaint against an advertiser can, and frequently does, result in significant public relations damage. 
 
In an issued ruling against well-known food company, Oatly, in January 2022, the ASA focused on the company’s failure to (a) make clear what part of its products’ life cycle the claims applied to, and (b) make a like-for-like assessment when comparing CO2 emissions from the meat and dairy industry with the transport industry. Similarly, in a ruling against beverage manufacturer, Innocent, in February 2022, the ASA found that apparently innocuous green messaging which encouraged consumers to “Reduce. Re-use. Recycle” amounted to an implied claim that the manufacturer was environmentally friendly and that, overall, its products benefited the environment (a claim Oatly could not substantiate).  

ASA enforcement against green claims appeared to become even stricter when, in October 2022, it ruled against two HSBC adverts describing specific environmental initiatives undertaken by the bank. Despite the claims being specific and accurate, in accordance with good practice, the ASA nonetheless decided that they were misleading when viewed against the bank’s wider practices, which include the financing of greenhouse gas-emitting industries. The HSBC ruling has been greeted with some concern, as it appears to suggest that environmental claims may not be made unless the advertiser simultaneously describes any activities that harm the environment. However, the ASA’s CEO has told CMS that this concern is misplaced and that forthcoming rulings will clarify the position.  

The ASA has upheld several complaints over the course of 2023 in relation to misleading green and environmental claims indicating that it will continue to scrutinise any such claims made by businesses. These include, amongst others, rulings against businesses with particularly high greenhouse gas emissions (such as airlines, oil and gas companies, and car manufacturers).  

In June 2023, the ASA published an updated version of its guidance on misleading environmental claims and social responsibility, in an effort to alleviate marketers’ concerns that they face a “binary” choice when making green claims: choosing between advertising their green credentials and risk “greenwashing”, on the one hand, and not mentioning their green efforts and “greenhushing”, on the other. 

That said, when taken together with active enforcement action by the CMA, advertisers targeting UK consumers should be mindful of the ASA’s hardening stance on green claims.  

3. The increasing role of public pressure 

Pressure on companies to comply with UK regulation and guidance (including the Green Claims Code), and to demonstrate responsibility with regards to their green claims not only stems from the CMA and ASA, but also from an increasingly proactive UK public. Pressure groups are increasingly calling out companies for what they deem to be irresponsible green advertising; such groups are joining the tens of thousands of complaints made to the ASA each year which are filed by individual members of the public in relation to a variety of allegedly misleading or irresponsible forms of advertising. Complaints from pressure groups, such as Adfree Cities and A Greener World, led to the HBSC, Innocent and Oatly rulings described above.  
This heightened awareness among the UK public has manifested in the development of the term ‘greenwashing’ and the range of activities businesses might be engaging in that warrant this label. A report published by Planet Tracker, a non-profit organisation producing climate analysis, has identified a ‘greenwashing hydra’ that consists of six types of activities conducted by businesses that all fall under the umbrella term of ‘greenwashing’. These are: 

  • ‘Greenlabelling’ - of the six types, this is the most pertinent for advertisers, whereby a business makes misleading claims stating that its products or practices are green but has little or no substantiating evidence.  
  • ‘Greenlighting’ - when a business highlights its climate-friendly behaviours in an attempt to shift attention away from more harmful activities. An example is the HSBC advertisements that were the subject of the ASA ruling, described above.  
  • ‘Greenshifting’ - a label given to businesses’ practices that attempt to shift the blame of harmful environmental practices up or down the value chain – for example, this can be seen through advertising that suggests it is consumers who must make a conscious change in their behaviour.  
  • ‘Greencrowding’ – when a business ‘hides’ within a crowd of other businesses by undertaking joint activities in order to avoid scrutiny, but which fails to address its own, individual, environmental credentials.   
  • ‘Greenrinsing’ – whereby businesses will regularly amend their climate or sustainability targets before they have been achieved; and 
  • ‘Greenhushing’ – when businesses deliberately under-report, or even hide, their sustainability data in order to avoid accountability to their shareholders.    

Companies targeting UK consumers should be mindful, therefore, of the increasing sophistication and significance of the role now played by the UK public in the regulation of green claims. The UK public is adopting an ever more hostile approach towards advertisements perceived to be environmentally irresponsible, including those which “omit or hide important information” (contrary to principle 3 of the CMA’s Green Claims Code). Companies should therefore expect all green claims to be subject to public scrutiny and, for even those claims which sit on the borderline between ‘fair’ and ‘misleading’, to be subject to complaints by the UK public. 

Read latest news on sustainability claims and greenwashing in the UK here.

Key contacts

Stuart Helmer
Of Counsel
UK Head of Advertising and Marketing
London
T +44 20 7367 2687
Kaisa Patsalides
Senior Associate
London
T +44 20 7067 3213
Mike Walsh
Senior Associate
London
T +44 20 7367 3908
Rosie Walsh-Kirk
Associate
Glasgow
T +44 141 304 6152

Subscribe to CMS Green Globe newsletter

Discover related products


02/10/2023
Expert Guide on ESG in Real Estate
In the ever-evolving landscape of real estate development, investment, and operation, a remarkable surge in ESG (environmental, social, and governance) regulatory activity is reshaping the sector. With these changes come new and vital requirements th
Comparable
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
06/12/2023
Green Claims & Green(er) Products
21/08/2023
European Commission publishes European Sustainability Reporting Standards...
On 31 July 2023, the European Commission published the first set of the European sustainability reporting standards (ESRS). This is the first big step towards the implementation of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), which came i
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.  
Previous 38 / 38 Next