After greenwashing and greenhushing, ‘green squashing’ is the new buzzword among marketers. We explain what it means and its consequences for sustainability.
With the world’s consumers getting wise to the practice of greenwashing, there’s a new phrase that’s doing the rounds in marketing circles that’s threatening to reduce many companies’ efforts to increase their sustainability. ‘Green squashing’ describes the action of rolling back a company’s commitments to sustainability while the conversation about the environment is quieter.
A study by the Chartered Institute of Marketing (CIM) has found that marketers are increasingly conscious of the risks of their business being accused of greenwashing or greenhushing, leading to a reduction in environmental values and commitments.
“The data shows that we’re at risk of moving into a third phase of sustainability communications,” said CIM Chief Executive Chris Daly. “We had greenwashing, followed by greenhushing, and we’re calling this next phase green-squashing. Our members believe that brands are more likely to take advantage of the green-hushing environment to quietly row back on their sustainability commitments.”
Increased ESG Pressure
Released just before the COP29 climate change summit in Azerbaijan, the research found that 44% of marketers think the event is no longer an important date for their calendar, suggesting that it has become more political than actionable.
However, two thirds (64%) of respondents think that their own company doesn’t do enough to communicate its environmental, social and governance (ESG) record, with nearly nine in 10 (87%) supporting the idea of a global framework for guidance on best practice on ESG communications.
The desire for more clear guidance comes as around two-thirds (66%) of marketers are conscious of the risks of their brand being accused of greenwashing, greenhushing or both. Four in five (80%) say they are facing more pressure both internally and externally to back up their sustainability claims with evidence.
“Marketing has a critical role to play in driving the sustainability agenda forward, with marketers feeling increasing pressure to communicate and evidence their brand’s sustainability credentials,” said Daly. “It’s vital that the conversation around environmental claims is professional.”
Zero-Sum Game
Like greenwashing and greenhushing, the act of green-squashing has the potential to be highly damaging not only for the environment but for the businesses that carry it out. Coordinated action to combat climate change and the catastrophic impact it’s having on communities around the world needs to come from all sides – government, consumers and business – and companies pulling back on their commitments to the environment will help no one.
What’s clear from the research is that official guidance on the reporting and communication of ESG information is required for all companies so they can fully understand what’s expected of them. This will lead to consumers, clients and potential business partners being able to easily identify which businesses are sticking to the guidance and which are shirking their responsibilities. Once this happens, the words greenwashing, greenhushing and green-squashing won’t be required.
For more information about the Chartered Institute of Marketing, go to cim.co.uk
ANZ
Brazil
America Latina
France
Germany
Italy
Portugal
Nordics
North America
South Africa
United Kingdom
