And the common practice — where products are marketed as being environmentally friendly or “green,” even if they may not be as sustainable as they claim — is very effective, particularly with individuals who are concerned about the environment according to a recent study by a global consulting firm.

To combat its effects, it is important to be aware of its tactics and to do research to determine the true environmental impact of products.

Research has repeatedly demonstrated that companies and brands can benefit from presenting themselves as environmentally conscious.

Satellite imagery reveals that deforestation rates in these areas are significantly lower compared to adjacent lands. This is no coincidence: Indigenous Peoples, who steward over 30% of the Amazon, traditionally engage in sustainable forest management, combining agroforestry and low-impact agriculture.

Despite their crucial role, these communities often find themselves overlooked, receiving less than 1% of international climate assistance.

In recent years, however, efforts to preserve the Amazon have seen significant investment. The international community has committed $2.7 billion to rainforest conservation.

The LEAF Coalition—a global initiative for forest conservation—has mobilised over $1.5 billion through the purchase of high-quality carbon credits. Ensuring that these funds reach communities like the Shuar people of Ecuador, who have a deep understanding of the forest, is a pressing challenge.

One influential figure in this struggle is Tuntiak Katan, a member of the Shuar people. His vision, sparked by a childhood hallucinogenic ritual, has led him from the depths of the Amazon to the global stage, advocating for Indigenous rights.

As the general coordinator of COICA, representing Indigenous Peoples across the Amazon Basin, Katan emphasises the need for partnership in forest management.

The road to sustainable solutions is fraught with complexities. In Katan’s home village of Tuutinentsa, the recent construction of a road brought essential services but also the threat of deforestation. Katan points to ancient low-impact forestry practices, like the aja, as a model for sustainable living: “If we take care of the forest, it will take care of us.”

Further north, in the remote enclave of Ichu Urku, another example of sustainable practice emerges.

Here, Juan Carlos Jintiach leads a farm cooperative, Asociacion Wiñak, which supports over 263 Indigenous families by selling crops like wayusa and cacao. This model, combining agroforestry and ecotourism, demonstrates how economic forces can align with forest preservation.

Jintiach, also an advocate for Indigenous rights and a Nobel Peace Prize nominee, has faced threats due to his opposition to illegal mining. Despite the risks, he remains committed to defending the rights of Indigenous peoples and the forest.

Contrasting with these stories of resilience and stewardship are regions like Lago Agrio, scarred by oil exploitation and deforestation.

Yet, hope flickers even here. The A’i Cofán community, having endured decades of environmental degradation, has taken a stand to protect its territory. Young leaders like Ramiro Ortiz are dedicated to preserving their culture and monitoring extractive activities.

The fight for the Amazon is not only about conservation; it’s about the right to a sustainable livelihood. Initiatives like LEAF are creating markets for carbon credits, potentially providing forest communities with the means to thrive while preserving their environment.

The narrative of the Amazon is multi-layered, involving ancient wisdom, modern challenges, and the global imperative to combat climate change. It’s a story where Indigenous communities are not mere victims but active agents of change; demonstrating that the path to a sustainable future lies in respecting and learning from those who have lived in harmony with nature for centuries.

In the face of overwhelming environmental challenges, the resilience and innovation of these communities offer a glimmer of hope. Their story is not just about preserving a rainforest; it’s about redefining our relationship with the planet.

It’s a reminder that in the fight against climate change, every action counts, and everyone—especially those closest to nature—has a crucial role to play.

Menno D.T. de Jong, a communications professor at the University of Twente in the Netherlands, noted that expressing a commitment to sustainability can be advantageous for businesses, as it often involves making claims that are hard to verify or prove.

This makes it difficult for consumers to determine the accuracy of claims or evaluate their validity. Even when presented with all the facts, some consumers may still not fully understand or believe that a company’s green claims may not be entirely true.

When confronted with third-party information that contradicts a company’s environmental claims, consumers may not necessarily believe that the brand is lying outright.

Behavioral Insights Team, a global consulting firm, recently conducted a study to understand the susceptibility of consumers to greenwashing and whether they can learn to be more skeptical.

In an experiment conducted in Australia, approximately 2,400 participants were shown advertisements for three fake energy companies. The study aimed to determine the effectiveness of greenwashing and whether individuals could become more discerning in evaluating environmental claims.

One advertisement highlighted a company’s supposed environmental efforts, showing a woman in a gray blazer standing in front of a skyscraper with the caption “Our offices are green.” However, the ad did not provide any information about whether the company produces and sells fossil fuels.

A second ad featured a woman in a red blouse and three hanging light bulbs, asking the viewer “How can you save energy?” and providing a carbon footprint calculator. This ad did not make any claims about the company, but rather shifted the responsibility of energy conservation to the consumer.

The third energy company ad focused on job creation, but made no mention of the environment.

It’s worth noting that all three of these companies were fictional and created specifically for the experiment.

In the experiment, more than half of the subjects (57%) believed that the companies featured in the first two advertisements (the one with the green office claim and the one with the carbon footprint calculator) had superior “green credentials” compared to the third energy company that emphasised job creation.

Ravi Dutta-Powell, who worked on the study, commented that “we assume everyone is rational, that an educated consumer interrogates the market. That’s not happening.” The results of the experiment suggest that consumers may be easily swayed by greenwashing, despite their level of education.

The subjects of Dutta-Powell’s experiment were randomly selected to receive interventions designed to protect them against misinformation.

One group was provided with information about greenwashing in general, while another group was invited to create a misleading marketing campaign for a fictional energy company, effectively allowing them to experience the perspective of a greenwasher.

A third group, serving as the control, received no prior information and was simply shown the fake advertisements. These interventions were meant to test the effectiveness of different methods of increasing skepticism towards greenwashing.

The results showed that the two groups that received the intervention were slightly more skeptical. However, the difference was relatively minor. It is unclear how long the effects of the intervention would persist.

In France, companies that make “carbon neutral” claims will be required to provide verifiable evidence to support these claims starting in January 2023. This regulation aims to increase transparency and help consumers make more informed decisions about the environmental impact of products.

Norway’s consumer protection agency recently cautioned the fast fashion company H&M that the tool it was using, the Higg Materials Sustainability Index, was insufficient as a basis for the environmental claims made in its marketing efforts.

The agency has urged the company to provide additional evidence to support its environmental claims.

In addition, a British government agency recently launched investigations into three fashion brands to examine their environmental claims more closely. These actions demonstrate a growing trend towards increased scrutiny of companies’ environmental claims in order to ensure that they are accurate and not misleading to consumers.

The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is examining investment funds that claim to have strong environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics. In a statement released this spring, the SEC emphasised that companies offering investments must fully and accurately disclose what they are selling and act in accordance with their disclosures.

In other words, the regulator expects companies to be transparent and honest about their environmental claims.

The SEC is working to strengthen standards for greenwashing — we’ll see how that pans out as we venture deeper into 2023…