Green Or Just Coloured In Green?

The editorial board of Kongres Magazine has been closely following and analysing various sustainability marketing campaigns. It seems their numbers have skyrocketed this year. As it turns out, many of them are misleading and purposefully used by greenwashers to increase sales or improve a company’s reputation. By doing so, they deceive well-intentional consumers and, ultimately, do not contribute to solving ecological and social issues. It is vital to stay aware of the ways in which they attempt to outwit us. Recognising greenwashing is how we can reduce its influence on our choices.

We have decided to prepare a series of articles that will uncover such practices and, hopefully, contribute to a more responsible meetings industry.

Green pledges are becoming an increasingly powerful marketing tool within the meetings industry

Type of greenwashing: Deceiving and irrelevant labels

Purchasing canned tuna is often a subconscious process. In our region, we trust the origin of products supposedly from the Adriatic Sea. The taste of the Adriatic was a slogan we grew up with. We are convinced to believe that fish and tuna, in particular, from the Adriatic is far tastier than tuna from other seas. Our naiveness is exploited by one of the largest tuna producers in the region. The Eva trademark is synonymous with the Adriatic Sea; however, the brand has lately become known for the taste of the Meditteranean. I am still often a victim of this nostalgic subconscious consumer reaction. Yet, as I check the small print information on the can, I sadly conclude that there is not a trace of the Adriatic Tuna in the can. The tuna comes from the Atlantic Sea, the Indian Ocean, and who knows where. The Adriatic or the Mediterranean Sea are the only places you will not find mentioned.

I feel similar when bombarded daily with new green labels that are boasted by meeting venues and destinations. Until we precisely and meticulously read the coded data on the backside of the can, PR message or the latest destination video, we are unsure about what we are buying in the first place.

Green and eco-labels are synonymous with labelling products and services that supposedly meet particular criteria and standards. At the same time, they label the social and ecological validity of products.

Labelling, however, often leads to confusion, as it is not clear what a particular label signifies. To understand the concept of labelling, one need not look further than the ISO 14020 standard that demands the following requirements for green labelling:

– information presented via green labels must give relevant, precise and understandable environmental aspects of products and services;
– the claims must be supported by verifiable scientific methods;
– A product or service must include all aspects of its life cycle;
– information pertaining to the methodology, processes and criteria must be publicly available to all users (open access to licences).

To simplify, labels certified according to the ISO methodology are more trustworthy than those that are not.

Considering green labels seem to be functioning well, estimates suggest over 450 of them can be found on the European market. Their number also represents plentiful opportunities for greenwashing. Labels can be awarded by official government bodies (European or national), various institutes or other private companies. On the other hand, some are owned by select companies or business concerns.

The problem that particular signatories did not understand entirely lies in the definition. Here is what the initiators of the project wrote: The Pledge is a commitment which has been developed through a collaborative process involving stakeholders from across the events industry.

Signatories will commit to:

– Before the end of 2023, publish the organisation’s pathway to achieving net-zero by 2050 at the latest, with an interim target in line with the Paris Agreement’s requirement to reduce global GHG emissions by 50% by 2030
– Collaborate with partners, suppliers and customers to drive change across the value chain
– Measure and track Scope 1,2 and 3 GHG emissions according to industry best practice
– Report on progress at least every two years.

The rules are thus entirely clear and precisely defined. Nonetheless, there have been marketing abuses of this noble intiative, where individuals have been misusing the pledge for greenwashing purposes. The line is thin, and in the case of Net Zero Carbon Events, it is about commitment, not a label that makes your event or conference centre green, sustainable or however you name it.

The numbers speak for themselves – people are not familiar with certificates. Hence, there is much space for greenwashing. That is why we have plenty of work and education ahead of us. More importantly, providers themselves should strive to be fair.

In any case, the core message of the greenwashing story is to start measuring the carbon footprint of events as soon as possible. That is when our path of discovery and solving pressing issues will start.

In the future, I wish to see a system similar to that of energy classes. Such labels show which energy class from A to G individual household appliances belong in relation to their energy efficiency. They help consumers choose products that cost less energy and thus help them save money.

If we could label events the same way, I do not doubt we could make a leap forward. Needless to say, we would need to solve this on an EU scale, similar to the European Product Registry for Energy Labelling (EPREL) model.

Note: We look forward to your opinion about such practices. Feel free to comment and send us further examples of greenwashing. We will inspect them and write additional articles about them in Kongres Magazine.

Westerveld was the first to use the term greenwashing in his expert article, and the rest is history. The term has survived till today and encompasses all areas of sustainability, including gender equality, poverty, hunger, health, education, paid work etc.

There are several typical examples of greenwashing. They have been around for some time, yet, we continue to be duped by them. We have summarised the most typical examples of greenwashing below:

1. Presenting information selectively

An example of greenwashing is emphasising environment-friendly information whilst withholding negative information. A typical example is ignoring the carbon footprint of event transfers which can amount to 75% of an event’s entire carbon footprint.

2. Lack of proof to back up claims

Let us suppose a company claims their event is green or eco-friendly but does not enclose any concrete proof. They should at least calculate their event’s carbon footprint and support it with a certificate issued by an official institution.

3. Ambiguity and vagueness of claims

Another way of misleading is using loose and undefined terms that are nearly impossible to understand in one way. A recurring example, for instance, is stating that an event is carbon-neutral without elaborating what that stands for.

4. Deceiving and irrelevant labels

Companies will often refer to certificates and labels that, in fact, do not exist or are misleading. Lately, there have been cases of green venue finders with no real foundation. This type of deception is embodied by companies that sell “products without CFC”, even though chlorofluorocarbons are forbidden by law.

5. Highlighting the lesser evil

Event organising is environmentally unfriendly. Hence, the claim that one event is greener than another is plainly false.

6. Selling lies

On occasions, companies choose to proclaim lies. Making false claims, certificates, and inventing facts leads to misleading customers.

7. Meaningless labels

Certificates, labels and awards can often have little or no meaning. In some cases, organisations even award themselves with certificates or endorsements not backed by any authority.

There are even cases when companies tell outright lies. Sooner or later, such practices are exposed, and information about them spreads like wildfire.