“Climate-controlled” sausages. A new pair of pants labeled “recycled.” “Sustainable” flight tickets.
Big brands are increasingly using taglines like this to cater to their environmentally conscious customers. And they are increasingly under fire from courts and regulators for failing to keep their climate promises.
Researchers at the Grantham Institute for Climate Change and the Environment last year identified a “surge in 'climate washing' incidents” that take advantage of existing national laws and regulations. According to their tally, between 2020 and 2022, the most recent year for which statistics are available, the number of lawsuits challenging “the veracity of corporate climate change efforts” more than doubled. .
This year, this dynamic is playing out in several countries.
In Denmark, a national court in March told Danish Crown, the country's largest pork producer, that labeling its pork as “climate-controlled” was misleading, but Danish pigs were “It's more climate-friendly than the rest of the world,” he declared. ”
In March, the UK regulator, the Competition and Markets Authority, investigated the climate change claims of several fast fashion brands, saying it was misleading to stamp products with green leaves and call them “recycled” without specifying them. I concluded. How much of that content is actually recycled?
A Dutch court has banned KLM Royal Dutch Airlines from using the slogan “Flying Responsibly” in its advertising.
And in New York, state Attorney General Letitia James made a “comprehensive statement” about neutralizing emissions over the next few years, but failed to offer an “actionable plan”. He sued the multinational company JBS.
These cases reflect how campaigners are increasingly using a wide range of domestic and international law to slow climate change. They have sued governments for failing to protect their citizens' constitutional right to life, and sometimes, as in Germany, they have won. They have used human rights law to challenge governments and recently won a case in a European regional court. They are using international treaties like the Convention on the Rights of the Child to force governments to curb emissions.
Complaints about alleged greenwashing are currently gaining momentum.
Another database maintained since 2011 by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University School of Law shows that the largest number of climate change lawsuits filed against private entities (at least 77 in total) are based on misconceptions. It turned out that the advertisement was an invitation to
These complaints also reflect business imperatives. Companies selling everything from toothpaste to soup are trying to meet changing consumer demands.
In the United States, sales of consumer products labeled as green or sustainable are growing twice as fast as consumer products that are not, according to research from New York University's Stern School of Management. They say consumers are more likely to buy them than other consumers. product.
“This is a market opportunity, and companies should find a way to make a legitimate case,” said Tenji Whelan, director of New York University's Center for Sustainable Business.
Litigation can be a double-edged sword. Companies can be held accountable, but companies seeking to reduce emissions may be reluctant to promote themselves as such.
“The easiest thing for companies to do is to say, 'We're not going to say anything about it anymore, or we're going to downplay what we're doing because we can minimize the risk,'” said a representative for KLM Royal Dutch Airlines. said attorney Branda Kattan, who represented the person.Netherlands
JBS, the world's largest meat producer, is one of the companies most closely monitoring these incidents in the United States. In response to the latest charges from Ms. James's office, JBS told the New York Times that it disagreed with the allegations and said that “while reducing the use of resources and reducing the environmental impact of agriculture, It helps feed the population.”
A spokesperson for the Danish royal family did not respond to an email seeking a response to the Danish court's ruling. The website explains that “climate control” refers to steps pig farmers take to reduce emissions from their operations.
Airlines are popular targets for greenwashing lawsuits. Advocacy group sues more than a dozen airlines for allegedly violating European Union consumer protection laws, saying offset proposals are misleading because emissions reductions from offsets are “uncertain” did. (Airline industry groups responded to the complaint by saying that as airlines develop more efficient fleets and develop alternatives to jet fuel, which is a heavy pollutant, “offsets currently have a role to play, but the “The sexual nature will fade.'')
Meanwhile, three lawsuits are pending in U.S. courts against three different airlines over the use of terms such as “carbon neutral” and “sustainable.”
Energy companies are a relatively new target. In Canada, a climate change advocacy group called Client Earth launched an advertising campaign in April promoting what Fortis BC calls “renewable natural gas,” or methane recovered from livestock farms and landfills. filed a complaint against Fortis BC. Lawyers for the advocacy group Stand Environment Association argue that while most of the gas Fortis BC supplies to customers for home heating comes from fossil fuels, only a small portion comes from gas recovered from landfills and farms. , claims the ad is deceptive.
FortisBC issued a statement saying it disagrees with the plaintiffs' claims. “FortisBC takes climate change very seriously and is taking action to help BC meet its climate goals,” the statement said.
