Global fashion brands in 2023 are under renewed pressure to get their houses in order. This is as regulators get tough on greenwashing in an industry that is, according to the United Nations Framework on Climate Change, worth more than $2.5 trillion and that lags in putting its profits towards a true transition to green. The fashion industry is responsible for over 8% of all carbon emissions and 20% of global wastewater.
Activists are calling for still greater vigilance and more concrete regulatory frameworks for the industry so that misleading marketing and green spin are met with actual consequences and penalties. Their calls have been matched with a ramping up of awareness campaigns and growing media coverage focused on bolstering consumer education to spot false green advertising. Ultimately, it’s to get consumers to make informed choices and spend their money accordingly, while encouraging producers to transition to ethical production and sustainability.
While South Africa currently has no laws explicitly against greenwashing, the European Union Commission has this year moved ahead to outline its 2030 goals for the textile industry. The goals include an explicit focus on halting greenwashing. Greenwashing is regarded as false, unsubstantiated claims that are more marketing spin than transparent, traceable credentials. Local law firm Webber Wentzel defines greenwashing as “the act of misleading the public about an organisation’s environmental or sustainability practices or deceiving the public about how eco- (and ESG-) friendly a product or practice is.”
The claims can relate to everything from carbon emissions, water usage, fabric composition, material sourcing, production, and ethical trade agreements. Organisations and businesses use greenwashing to convince the public, such as customers, investors, or regulators, that an organisation, whether a juristic person or the government, is making positive environmental or sustainability choices when this is not the case, according to Webber Wentzel.
Greenwashing is regarded as false, unsubstantiated claims that are more marketing spin than transparent, traceable credentials. The claims can relate to everything from carbon emissions, water usage, fabric composition, material sourcing, production, and ethical trade agreements.
The EU Commission has proposed regulatory measures that will prevent companies from “making vague environmental claims if environmental excellence cannot be demonstrated” as well as only being allowed to display sustainability labels – public or private – if these claims are “based on an independent third-party certification system or established by public authorities,” as outlined in a report by the law firm, Linklaters.
The emergence of more stringent measures and increased public exposure of transgressing companies are long overdue, watchdog and activist groups say. It’s because the industry has not only been unable or unwilling to self-correct over the past two decades, but has also in some cases been guilty of deliberately exploiting the deepening climate crisis and consumers’ growing concerns over the state of the environment to push products.
International watchdog organisation Changing Markets Foundation has in several recent reports repeatedly slated fashion brands, such as the likes of H&M and Zara, over misleading statements about their green credentials. The watchdog body has also found “greenwashing to be rife” not just across fast fashion brands but in high-end luxury brands too.
The Guardian reported last year that the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has, since 2020, been investigating green claims in the fashion industry because of the sector’s significant economic footprint and its outsized negative impact on the climate emergency. The CMA found 40% of companies it investigated guilty of misleading shoppers.
In the USA, the Fashion Sustainability and Social Accountability Act, introduced in the New York State Assembly in October 2021, has come under fire for being too protective of industry interests. The Act sets out for companies with over $100 million in revenue to “map out at least 50% of their supply chains and disclose impacts such as greenhouse gas emissions, water footprint, and chemical use”. But at a high margin of $100 million and only 50% disclosure that act has been criticised for allowing “too much wriggle room” to be sufficiently transparent, several US media have reported.
In November last year the Sustainable Apparel Coalition, an industry alliance of more than 280 global brands, retailers, manufacturers, NGOs, academics, and industry bodies in the apparel and footwear industry, was also left scrambling when its tool for measuring sustainability, the Higg Index came under scrutiny. Developed over 12 years and used by over 20 000 companies, the Higg Index was flagged by the Norwegian Consumer Agency in the middle of the year for being in a damning conflict of interest by prioritising the agendas of fossil fuel companies through the promotion of fuel-based synthetic materials.
These may be signs that the days of “dirty business as usual” for the fashion industry are running low but the industry still looks to be desperately trying to navigate the coming legislative changes and mounting consumer backlash instead of shifting to sustainability as a necessary transition and adaptation to the realities of a planet under pressure.
The industry still looks to be desperately trying to navigate the coming legislative changes and mounting consumer backlash instead of shifting to sustainability as a necessary transition and adaptation to the realities of a planet under pressure.
Even The Business of Fashion’s State of Fashion 2023 report comes off as a warning more than an urgent call to clean house. It states: “New and emerging regulations along with heightened consumer awareness of fashion’s contribution to the climate crisis mean that brands will need to be hyper-vigilant about how they talk about their sustainability-related initiatives and achievements to ensure they are not “greenwashing,” which could potentially lead to reputational damage or costly fines.”
But the likes of South African designer Lara Klawikowski take a firmer position. She says a clearer distinction between what ethical fashion is and what greenwashing is, will be information that resonates with consumers who are becoming more conscious shoppers. Lara says, “There is definitely a lot of greenwashing and many designers and creators do take advantage of the lack of knowledge consumers have about what the term ‘sustainable’ really means. Far too often it is applied to products that are not sustainable.”
Many designers and creators do take advantage of the lack of knowledge consumers have about what the term ‘sustainable’ really means.
While South Africa doesn’t have regulations, the local Advertising Regulatory Board and the Consumer Protection Act enable consumers to lodge complaints when they suspect an advertiser or marketer of greenwashing.
- Advertising Regulatory Board: A consumer or competitor concerned about unqualified claims and statements about environmental matters can lodge a complaint with the ARB requesting that the environmental claims be investigated.
- Consumer Protection Act, 2008: This act regulates marketing practices by prohibiting the marketing of goods through false, misleading, or deceptive representations of fact regarding the goods or services. It provides statutory remedies for the enforcement of consumer rights.
As the 2019 Changemaker winner of the Twyg sustainable fashion awards and a sustainable designer who embraces the principles of slow fashion, Lara has to believe that the tide is turning for fashion to become more sustainable.
And ultimately change comes with consumer power and where consumers, especially the Gen Z cohort, choose to put their money. The European Union has leveraged this youth muscle with its Instagram campaign launched in January 2023 called “ReSet the Trend”. Targeting the Greta Thunberg generation and other influencers, the social media initiative will focus on sustainably and the call to ditch the fast fashion addiction.
Meanwhile Danish luxury brand, Ganni, took another track by simply being a bit more honest with customers. They posted on their Instagram page: “Why we are not a sustainable brand…” followed with an explanation that read, “the ambition is still to one day become a truly sustainable fashion brand and the dream is still that ultimately this will differentiate us from other fashion brands. But until we get there we still identify as a responsible brand that isn’t sustainable yet. Not as an excuse but as an ambition that drives us every day to become a better version of ourselves on our journey towards sustainability.”
It’s a small dose of honesty but a good enough place as any to fade out greenwashing in an industry that needs to do better.
- Cover image: Photo by Monstera on Pexels
