FAQs
Log in
MyCIM
Greensquashing: Why some organisations are quietly retreating from their sustainability promises
- 29 January 2025
In this article, CIM’s James Delves explores the impact of greensquashing, a phenomenon where organisations are quietly retreating from their sustainability promises whilst the conversation is quieter in response to changing market dynamics and a complex operating environment.
Have we hit peak purpose? The US election and scepticism surrounding November’s COP achievements appear to be eroding the green ambitions of many brands. Marketers who have spent the last few years adjusting to heightened scrutiny around their environmental claims, appear now to be actively pulling back from purpose-driven campaigning.
The furore spurred on by movements to expose greenwashing, a term originally coined by Jay Westerveld in 1983, burst into the mainstream in 2019, with climate strikes and protests led by figures such as Greta Thunberg.
That anger and scepticism within the critical Gen Z demographic led many brands to back away and hide their green credentials out of sight, considering championing such causes no longer worth the hassle and risk of being accused of hypocrisy.
Under consideration
For some organisations there may be valid reasons for pulling back from commitments, to regroup or refine activities so they are more effective. Some brands may choose to work hard on their sustainability efforts but only share their progress with internal stakeholders.
The topic is complex. Marketers need to use the approach that works for their organisation and market. But remember, retreating from promoting positive sustainability progress could worry audiences, and it is to be avoided when the pressure to ‘get it right’ leads to not talking at all, or much worse, pulling back on efforts entirely.
As we enter a new era of ‘drill baby, drill’ from a new US administration, are we at risk of seeing businesses and brands back away from sustainability claims? It seems that post-greenhushing, we might be entering a new era of greensquashing: where brands reduce their commitments to sustainability while the conversation is quieter.
It’s a phenomenon CIM debated in Parliament in late November 2024, reflecting on the mixed messages emerging from the third consecutive COP conference to come from an oil and gas-producing nation.
There are certainly wider political implications when considering COP in a greenwashing context, and these are beyond the scope of marketing. However, more than half (56%) of marketers we surveyed ahead of the debate were concerned enough about the overall risks of greensquashing to feel that those mixed messages were impacting their progress.
There is also a desire for guardrails that set a benchmark for establishing green credentials, reflected partly by the overwhelming (87%) support they give to a global framework for guidance on best practice on environmental, social and governance (ESG) communications.
Still, greensquashing doesn’t just risk a few bruised reputations; it jeopardises the trust brands have established with customers and stakeholders, and undermines our very profession. At the heart of the Global Professional Marketing Framework, to which we all subscribe, is the commitment to impact – the benefits our marketing activities have on our business, the economy and society. Professional marketers used to investing in long-term brand awareness understand the long-term risks of gains today at the expense of a sustainable tomorrow.
CIM’s suite of sustainable marketing training courses provide a firm foundation of insights, case studies and practical advice for marketing professionals navigating the ESG landscape.
- 0 views