Greenwashing: the illusion of sustainability
Greenwashing: the illusion of sustainability
I wrote extensively about greenwashing in Treewilding: Our Past, Present and Future Relationship with Forests because it’s so pervasive and reduces our progress towards a flourishing future. Greenwashing is everywhere. First coined in 1986 by environmentalist Jay Westerveld, the term describes how companies manipulate public perception to appear eco-friendly while engaging in harmful environmental practices. Early examples include Chevron’s multi-million-dollar ad campaigns featuring cuddly animals, distracting from the fact that the company was the largest corporate polluter in the USA at the time. Over the decades, greenwashing has evolved, from oil giants rebranding themselves as environmental stewards to food and beverage companies slapping nature-inspired labels onto products that are anything but sustainable. Coca-Cola’s Life drink, Innocent’s misleading ‘Little Drinks, Big Dreams’ campaign, and bottled water brands marketing themselves as pristine while generating massive plastic waste are just a few modern examples.
img: Ayoade (2023)
Tree planting has also become a corporate greenwashing tool, used to offset environmental damage while avoiding real change. Many businesses market tree planting as a climate solution, yet poorly planned afforestation schemes—often involving non-native species like eucalyptus—can harm ecosystems, deplete water resources and even displace Indigenous communities. The truth is, there isn’t enough land on Earth to plant our way out of the climate crisis. Instead of meaningful decarbonisation, corporations use offset schemes as a smokescreen, delaying the urgent shift away from fossil fuels.
So how do we see through the greenwashing haze? It starts with a healthy dose of scepticism. Greenwashing isn’t just clever marketing—it’s a psychological trap. It works by hijacking cognitive biases, exploiting the way our brains naturally process information to make misleading claims feel truthful. But understanding these mental shortcuts gives us the power to resist them. One major bias at play is the halo effect—our tendency to let one positive trait influence our overall perception of something. If a brand touts a single green initiative, like switching to recycled packaging, we might assume the entire company is environmentally responsible, even if it continues to pump out pollution. To counter this, pause and ask whether a company’s sustainability claims extend beyond isolated efforts. A genuinely eco-conscious business will embed sustainability throughout its supply chain—not just in its marketing.
The availability heuristic is another bias that greenwashing exploits. Our brains are wired to make decisions based on the most immediate and emotionally compelling information rather than digging deeper. That’s why companies use evocative nature imagery—lush forests, crystal-clear water or happy animals—to create an instant association between their brand and environmental responsibility. But beautiful packaging doesn’t equal sustainable practice. To counter this, look beyond what’s being shown and focus on what’s missing—is there concrete evidence of environmental impact reduction? Are third-party certifications backing up their claims?
Emotional appeals are also a powerful persuasion tool. Greenwashing often plays on guilt (‘buy this product to help the planet’) or hope (‘we’re working towards a greener future’), tapping into our emotions to bypass rational analysis. Neuroscience suggests that when we feel emotionally invested in a cause, we’re more likely to overlook contradictions. The key here is balance—allow emotions to motivate action, but always pair them with critical thinking. If a company claims to be eco-friendly, demand specifics—numbers, reports, independent audits, not just feel-good slogans.
Practising cognitive reappraisal—reframing how we interpret information—can also help. Instead of taking sustainability claims at face value, train yourself to ask: What is this company not saying? If an oil company promotes its tree-planting programme but doesn’t mention reducing emissions, that’s a red flag. If a brand highlights its recyclable packaging but ignores its massive plastic production, that’s another.
Mindfulness techniques, including deliberate slow thinking, can also help counter greenwashing. Many of our daily choices are made on autopilot, and greenwashing relies on this automatic, surface-level decision-making. Slowing down and taking an extra moment to research before purchasing disrupts the mental shortcuts greenwashing preys on.
Finally, one of the best defences against greenwashing is collective awareness. When misleading claims go unchallenged, companies are emboldened to continue. Calling out greenwashing—on social media, in product reviews or through advocacy groups—creates public accountability. The more consumers resist, question and demand transparency, the harder it becomes for corporations to deceive. Greenwashing thrives in cognitive blindspots, but neuroscience gives us some tools to illuminate them. By recognising our biases, questioning narratives and norms and making informed choices, we can see past the illusion—and shift the balance towards genuine sustainability.
