Consumers have made efforts to shop more sustainably in recent years. A study by the Journal of Business Ethics found that 66% of global shoppers are willing to pay more for an item if they believe it to be more environmentally friendly, and for millennials and Generation Z, this number is as high as 73%. While this trend should encourage companies to adopt more ethical practices, it has also sparked instances of “greenwashing,” the practice of providing misleading information in order to project a more eco-friendly image. Companies must stop cutting corners through greenwashing and instead make real, tangible efforts towards sustainability to reduce the dissonance between their marketing claims and actual environmental practices.
Greenwashing is especially common with fast fashion clothing companies, which are defined by Vogue as “quickly produced trends sold at low price points.” While companies like H&M, SHEIN and Forever 21 profit from the production of fast fashion, the generational shift towards sustainability poses a threat to their business models.
Thrifting and second-hand shopping has become a $28 billion a year industry, while typical fast fashion brands are generating about $4 billion in revenue annually according to a 2021 National Public Radio article entitled “When Second Hand Becomes Vintage: Gen Z Has Made Thrifting A Big Business.” Thus, companies are becoming increasingly aware of their potential to profit off of improving their environmental practices, or at least appearing to.
Canadian company Lululemon, the world’s fourth largest sportswear brand has been under investigation since May for claims of greenwashing through their “Be Planet” initiative. Lululemon introduced “Be Planet” in 2020 as a part of the company’s Impact Agenda, the initiative reads “our products and actions avoid environmental harm and contribute to restoring a healthy planet.” However, Lululemon’s own reports reveal that the company has doubled its greenhouse gas emissions four years since the initiative was launched.
Likewise, H&M launched its “H&M Conscious” collection in 2019, which encouraged customers to donate old clothes in exchange for H&M coupons. H&M claimed that they would recycle the donated clothing into new clothes, and that items that could not be made into new clothes would be turned into insulation or rags.
The company promoted the collection with advertisements which featured women in long, flowy dresses, frolicking in nature, saying “I dress for love […] and on this planet of ours, a little love can’t hurt.” For all the green imagery and environmental promises in the ad campaign, a case study conducted at Koc University found that only 0.7% of the clothing donated to the collection was actually recycled and turned into new clothing.
In May 2023, a class action lawsuit brought against H&M alleged that the “H&M Conscious” collection violated California and Missouri consumer protection laws and the Federal Trade Commission’s “Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing,” however the case was ultimately dismissed.
While any clothing being recycled is a step in the right direction, the “H&M Conscious” collection marketing campaign highlights the deceptive nature of greenwashing, and how it allows companies to give the illusion of sustainability without making any real efforts to improve their practices. The coupon exchange aspect of the campaign is particularly harmful, because it encourages consumers to give money back into H&M under the guise of helping the planet, when they otherwise might have invested in companies that are actually putting in the work to become more environmentally ethical.
This phenomenon is not unique to the clothing industry. In 2023, Delta Airlines ran a series of advertisements, including on in-flight napkins, which claimed that it was the “world’s first carbon-neutral airline.” Delta was sued over this claim, which the plaintiff argued was “demonstrably false” due to Delta’s reliance on “carbon offsets” which are investments in offsite projects that aim to “cancel out” Delta’s emissions by removing carbon from the air.
In an interview with The Guardian, Krikor Kouyoumdjian, a partner with the legal firm who brought the case against Delta, said “When companies say: ‘Don’t worry about our emissions, they’re sorted,’ they are communicating complacency. They are letting consumers pay to feel better and not have to worry about the impact of their consumption. But that is counterfactual to reality. It is not something you can pay away.”
By promoting itself as the “world’s first carbon-neutral airline,” Delta misleads consumers into believing they can offset their environmental impact simply by purchasing a ticket. This not only creates a false sense of security but also allows the airline to avoid meaningful accountability for its emissions.
Ultimately, greenwashing is not just a marketing tactic, but a barrier to genuine environmental progress. As consumers increasingly aim to support environmentally ethical businesses, the prevalence of greenwashing undermines their efforts. Companies that engage in greenwashing not only mislead their customers but also stifle the pursuit of real sustainable practices. To achieve real sustainability, companies need to be more transparent and move beyond superficial marketing strategies towards real accountability.
Editor-in-Chief: Jordan Premmer, Chief Copy Editor: Sophia McCrackin, Managing Editor: Jordan DelFiugo, News Editor: Phebe Bridges, Sports Editor: John Lindroos
