GREENWASHING - HOW COMPANIES UNETHICALLY USE THE FASHION ON ECOLOGY

GREENWASHING

- HOW COMPANIES UNETHICALLY USE THE FASION ON ECOLOGY

Nowadays, organic products have taken over markets all around the world. Products with the prefix „eco” can be found in almost every store. However, each of us should think whether all of them really are eco-friendly. Using this prefix, large companies try to approach customers unethically, taking advantage of their willingness to change the environment and the ecological trend to make more profits.

In reality it is nothing more than a PR based on pseudo-ecological activities, which aim to encourage people to purchase. Due to the growing global environmental awareness, consumers declare that they prefer to pay more for a product if it contributes to saving the environment, which is what large concerns exploit. According to the „Green Generation Report” research on what Polish people think about ecology, 56% of them believe that it is a conscious choice and a sense of responsibility, while the remaining 44% believe that it is a fashion that will soon be forgotten. Greenwashing is monitored by many global organizations, such as Greenpeace, which have been trying to detect illegal marketing activities for years. The average consumer is rarely able to judge which activities are non eco-friendly and which are carried out in good faith, as the line between them is sometimes very thin. The best way to tell the difference is to ask yourself who is really green and who is just looking for a way to make money.

Among the companies accused of greenwashing is Volkswagen, which has committed emissions scams. Volkswagen has admitted that it has equipped 11 million of its own diesels with anti-emissions devices. Automobile factories such as BMW, Ford, Mercedes-Benz and Chevrolet have faced similar allegations in recent years. MercedesBenz has even seen a class action lawsuit in which plaintiffs challenged BlueTEC technologies that sell cars as „clean diesel” or „earth-friendly”, while in fact, they release nitrogen oxides that exceed the norm by over 65 times more than allowed by the EPA. Concerns that convince about the eco-friendliness of cars do nothing but persuade their customers to make further purchases. There is no such thing as an ecological car, the only ecological mean of transport is a bicycle, but even during its production, harmful substances are being released.

A company that has been creating the wrong impression of commitment to the environment for years is BP. In their marketing campaigns, they focus on deceiving people that they are moving towards renewable energy, while more than 96% of planned investments are in gas and oil.

In 2010, the company contributed to the largest oil spill in the history of the United States. The disaster took place on April 20 in the Gulf of Mexico, resulting in the deaths of 11 rig workers,

17 injured, and about 4 million barrels of crude oil leaked into the sea. The leakage was estimated at 800,000 liters per day. The total amount of oil was approximately 900 million liters and covered an area of nearly 150,000 square kilometers. Two days after the explosion, the platform sank. Near the end of July 2010, the oil spill from the underwater well was finally stopped. As a result of the contam„ ination of the water, millions of marine organisms in the bay had died. The shores of several American states were contaminated, and the oil leak could reach the western borders of Florida, the shores of Texas and the Florida Keys. The fire and its consequen- ces were determined as the greatest environmental disaster in US history. BP has spent more than 65 .bln USD on cleaning costs, fees and fines.

BP is not an isolated case in this industry, but nevertheless no one rivals their extensive „green” advertising campaigns. This event took effect not only in terms of economy, but also in terms of tourism and real estate. Many tourists have massively canceled their holidays, while many hotels on the coast of Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama saw an increase in bookings due to the large number of people being hired to deal with the consequences of the disaster. Property prices plummeted, prompting state officials to demand a current market value property tax, which meant losses of millions of dollars for each affected county. BP spent more than 65 bln USD on cleaning costs, fees and fines. Some of the owners of the company suggested that the name Amoco should be retrieved so that the company would not be associated only with the oil spill. Ultimately, the company stuck with the BP name and has been trying to improve its PR since then, convincing consumers about the alleged change in behavior, which in fact has changed only a little.

There are many other ways to green cheat. An example of a brand that has appealed to consumers in a street marketing campaing is Palmolive. In Warsaw, the company placed banners at bus stop with the slogan „A little bit of nature to feel fully yourself” and „A composition of air-purifying plants”. The problem is that the plant placed on the ad didn’t really clean anything anymore because it was dead. It was not an effective PR for the company as people quickly realized that it had nothing to do with ecology and that the people responsible for the advertisement had little knowledge of the plant used.

Contemporarily, the fate of the planet largely depends on giant companies, which have been setting global trends for years. Despite the growing environmental awareness, many companies do not seem to care about the fate of the Earth and contribute to massive deforestation as well as water and air pollution. On the other hand, thanks to many organizations taking up the task to check the ecological authenticity of companies, the situation might start changing for the better as conscious consumers will be able to see through the often deceitful advertisements. In 2015, the Sustainable Development Agenda was created, which is a common agenda aiming peace and prosperity for people and the planet. It was adopted by all member states of the United Nations, which committed themselves to complying with it by 2030. It is based on 17 Sustainable Development Goals, which show that eradicating global poverty must go hand in hand with strategies that improve public health and education, reduce inequalities and stimulate economic growth. The plan also includes fighting climate change and protecting the planet.

Aleksandra Grzelińska Międzynarodowe stosunki gospodarcze Uniwersytet Łódzki aleksandra.grzelinska9@gmail.com

Bibliography:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5. https://www.truthinadvertising.org/six-companies-accused-greenwashing/ https://www.geekweek.pl/news/2020-02-13/gotowe-eksplozja-platformy-wiertniczej-deepwater-horizon-duzo-powazniejsza-niz-sadzilismy/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_effects_ of_the_Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill https://eizba.pl/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/ GreenGeneration_WspolnieNaRzeczZiemi.pdf https://plus.gloswielkopolski.pl/greenwashing-czyli-uwaga-na-ekosciemy-firm-ktore-probuja-udawac-ze-sa-ekologiczne/ar/c1-14728086 https://sdgs.un.org/goals