Sustainability Communications: How to Avoid Greenwashing and Greenhushing
Written by Jack Linnett (Co-founder & CEO)
Sustainability communications are becoming a high-stakes balancing act.
Brands and marketplaces face growing customer demand for sustainable products and services. At the same time, regulators across the UK, Europe and the US are increasing scrutiny of environmental claims and taking action against misleading green marketing.
This creates a difficult position for businesses.
Say too little, and they risk missing commercial opportunities, losing contracts or allowing competitors to claim the sustainability advantage.
Say too much without robust evidence, and they risk greenwashing allegations, regulatory action, reputational damage and potential legal liability.
The solution is not to stop communicating about sustainability.
It is to build greater confidence in the data behind every claim.
What is greenhushing?
Greenhushing is the practice of deliberately reducing or avoiding public communication about sustainability progress, often because a business is concerned about scrutiny or being accused of greenwashing.
A recent Reuters report found that 85% of surveyed organisations had intentionally reduced their public sustainability communications, despite recognising progress internally. The same report found that 98% had missed out on a contract opportunity or lost business because they could not substantiate their sustainability credentials.
This creates a damaging paradox:
Businesses are staying quiet about sustainability because they fear getting claims wrong, while simultaneously losing opportunities because they cannot demonstrate their sustainability performance clearly.
Greenhushing is therefore not just a communications issue. It is a data, governance and commercial issue.
Why sustainability claims are becoming riskier
Environmental claims are no longer treated as simple marketing language.
Words such as “sustainable”, “eco-friendly”, “green”, “responsible” and “low carbon” can influence purchasing decisions. As a result, businesses are increasingly expected to demonstrate that their claims are accurate, clear, specific, current and supported by appropriate evidence.
In the UK, the Competition and Markets Authority’s Green Claims Code sets out principles for making environmental claims. The CMA also has powers under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act to enforce consumer protection law and impose significant penalties for misleading claims, including fines of up to 10% of global annual turnover in serious cases.
The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority also requires authorised firms to ensure sustainability-related claims are fair, clear and not misleading.
In the EU, consumer protection rules and proposed green claims requirements are increasing expectations around the substantiation, verification and communication of environmental claims. In the US, environmental marketing claims are also subject to consumer protection and advertising rules.
The specific rules vary by market and sector. The overall direction is clear: Sustainability claims need evidence that can withstand scrutiny.
The commercial opportunity is real
The regulatory pressure is only one side of the equation.
Customers, procurement teams, investors and commercial partners increasingly want to understand how businesses perform environmentally. Sustainability credentials can influence brand preference, supplier selection and access to new contracts.
Research cited in the Reuters report found that 93% of respondents believe customers would be willing to pay a premium for a genuinely sustainable product or service.
This suggests a significant opportunity for brands and marketplaces that can communicate credible progress.
Reliable sustainability data can support:
Stronger brand positioning.
More confident product and category messaging.
Improved responses to procurement requirements.
Better customer engagement.
More credible investor and stakeholder communications.
Clearer differentiation from competitors.
Greater visibility across sustainability-focused search and discovery journeys.
However, this opportunity is only available when businesses can prove what they are saying.
The problem with siloed sustainability data
In many organisations, sustainability information is spread across multiple teams and systems.
The sustainability team may hold emissions, waste, packaging or supply chain data.
The marketing team may be developing campaigns and product messaging.
The legal team may be reviewing claims and assessing regulatory risk.
Sales and procurement teams may need to respond to customer questionnaires or contract requirements.
When these teams work with disconnected data, several problems emerge:
Claims take longer to review and approve.
Teams use inconsistent definitions and measurements.
Marketing cannot easily access the evidence behind a claim.
Legal teams have to investigate data manually.
Sustainability progress is difficult to compare over time.
Businesses miss opportunities to use environmental performance in go-to-market activity.
The issue is not necessarily that the organisation lacks data.
It is that the data is difficult to interpret, compare, verify and share.
From sustainability data to shared knowledge
The most effective organisations are moving beyond sustainability data collection.
They are making environmental performance useful across the business.
That means creating a shared source of information that allows sustainability, marketing, legal, sales and leadership teams to work from the same underlying evidence.
For this to work, sustainability data needs to be:
Comparable
Businesses need to compare performance across products, suppliers, categories, competitors and reporting periods.
Traceable
Teams need to understand where data came from, how it was calculated and what assumptions were used.
Accessible
Relevant stakeholders should be able to easily find and interpret information without relying on hidden data.
Current
Environmental claims can become inaccurate when data, products, suppliers or methodologies change.
Usable
Data needs to support real business decisions, not just sit inside a reporting document or spreadsheet.
This is the foundation for more confident sustainability communications.
How Earthmark helps businesses communicate with confidence
Earthmark helps remove the friction between sustainability, marketing and legal teams.
By making environmental performance data easier to understand, compare and share, Earthmark helps businesses turn sustainability information into practical commercial insight.
This can support businesses to:
Substantiate environmental claims with credible evidence.
Identify the sustainability strengths and weaknesses of products and brands.
Compare environmental performance more confidently.
Strengthen brand and category positioning.
Give marketing teams access to clearer sustainability information.
Help legal teams assess claims more efficiently.
Share progress consistently across sales and go-to-market channels.
The result is a more joined-up approach to sustainability communications.
Instead of sustainability being treated as a separate reporting function, it becomes a shared business capability.
The future of sustainability communications
The companies best placed to benefit from sustainability demand will not necessarily be those making the boldest claims.
They will be the companies able to communicate clearly, consistently and credibly.
That requires closer collaboration between the teams responsible for data, compliance, communications and commercial growth.
The future belongs to organisations that can:
Measure environmental performance consistently.
Make the data understandable across the organisation.
Connect claims to evidence.
Compare performance fairly.
Communicate progress without overstating it.
Turn sustainability information into customer and commercial value.
Greenhushing is not a sustainable long-term strategy.
Neither is unsupported green marketing.
The opportunity lies between the two: credible, evidence-based sustainability communication supported by trusted data.
That is how businesses can reduce greenwashing risk, build confidence across internal teams and turn environmental performance into a genuine competitive advantage.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between greenwashing and greenhushing?
Greenwashing is communicating misleading, exaggerated or unsupported environmental claims. Greenhushing is deliberately reducing or avoiding sustainability communications because of fear of scrutiny or potential greenwashing allegations.
Why are sustainability claims subject to greater regulatory scrutiny?
Environmental claims can influence consumer, procurement and investment decisions. Regulators are therefore increasingly focused on whether claims are accurate, specific, verifiable and not misleading.
How can businesses substantiate sustainability claims?
Businesses should maintain clear evidence for each claim, including the underlying data, calculation method, scope, timeframe, assumptions and relevant comparisons. Claims should also be reviewed by the appropriate sustainability, legal and marketing stakeholders.
Why should sustainability and marketing teams share data?
Shared data helps marketing teams communicate progress accurately and helps legal teams review claims more efficiently. It also reduces the risk of inconsistent messaging across websites, product pages, campaigns, sales materials and customer responses.
How does comparable sustainability data support growth?
Comparable data helps businesses understand performance against products, suppliers, categories or competitors. This can strengthen positioning, support procurement conversations and help customers make more informed decisions.
What is the role of Earthmark?
Earthmark helps businesses make environmental performance data easier to understand, substantiate, compare and share across sustainability, marketing and legal teams.
Want to turn sustainability data into confident commercial messaging?
Discover how Earthmark helps businesses substantiate claims, compare environmental performance and share sustainability insights across the organisation.
Source for data used in this article.