The climate in imminent peril is often attributed to the negative results of mass production. Thus, companies, especially those with global spheres of influence, are held to a higher standard of accountability. But instead of being transparent about their supply chain and operations, many of them resort to misleading the public with false claims of environmental responsibility—a practice identified as “greenwashing” by the United Nations.
Greenwashing as a marketing tactic enables corporations worldwide to show face as sustainability leaders while ultimately leaving no mark on environmental preservation. Matters are made worse when considering that the Philippines is one of the most vulnerable countries to climate change as one that is highly exposed to natural disasters. Despite this, many companies based here are eager to profit by engaging in greenwashing.
Behind a green mask
Greenwashing in the Philippines manifests in various forms, from loud pledges toward sustainability to deceptive marketing that overstates a product or service’s extent of environmental friendliness.
John Leo Algo, the national coordinator for Aksyon Klima Pilipinas, observes that local greenwashing campaigns use sponsored content, advertisements, and articles in media outlets to promote themselves as “environmental champions.” Many employ buzzwords and catchphrases in marketing campaigns to place a green mask over environmentally harmful products. A recent example is Lazada’s LazEarth campaign. In celebration of Earth Day, the e-shopping giant sold everyday plastic-packaged and hard-to-recycle goods such as Casio watches or Nike polyester shirts under the “sustainable products” section of its store. By carelessly labeling environmentally harmful products as sustainable, it becomes greenwashing.
Algo stresses how greenwashing initiatives fail to convey the complexity of environmental issues because economic advantages are always prioritized by these capitalist institutions. “They’re gonna emphasize…job creation [and] profitability to communities,” he explains. Through these promises, consumers are duped into supporting unethical businesses and overlooking the damage they inflict on the environment.
According to Jove Benosa, a project officer with the EcoWaste Coalition, greenwashing could also encompass wider corporate strategies involving direct interactions with the public and the environment; He observes a disparity between these strategies and their practical implications. Examples include Unilever’s Misis Walastik program, which promotes the recycling of sachets while the company itself is a major contributor to the persistent sachet economy in the country. Likewise, mining companies launch tree planting initiatives—but only after they have destroyed a mountain and its forests at a faster rate than new trees can grow.
This approach does not address the urgent climate crisis; it merely offers a way for corporations to shirk their responsibility to protect the environment. Instead of ending the practices that created these issues, these corporations create useless band-aid solutions that go against the true spirit of climate action.
Money in the wrong places
Algo posits that a primary motive for greenwashing is reputation—to maintain a green face and cash in on the sustainability bandwagon. Greenwashing makes companies palatable to the conscientious public to maximize profits over attempting to transition to more sustainable business models.
Benosa adds that the corporations take advantage of the country’s lack of effective policies or monitoring mechanisms against greenwashing. In fact, the government itself has also participated in greenwashing.
Algo states that the government is not “putting the money in the right places,” explaining that the government is still holding onto fossil fuels and packaging natural gas and nuclear energy as part of the nation’s green energy mix, instead of accelerating the deployment of cleaner and safer forms of renewable electricity. He emphasizes that the government has also used combating climate change as an excuse to push infrastructure projects such as flood control projects and land reclamation projects, many of which damage local ecosystems, especially mangroves, without effectively mitigating disasters.
Distorted messaging
With greenwashing practices running rampant at a time when sustainability is considered trendy, concerned citizens are easily misled into believing that they are contributing to the fight against climate change. When proven otherwise, this may increase the public’s skepticism toward environmental campaigns, making it difficult for genuinely sustainable initiatives to gain traction.
At the same time, Algo explains that greenwashing also hurts the nation’s capacity to achieve its climate objectives. For instance, the Philippines is looking to slash its greenhouse gas emissions by 75 percent. Big energy corporations have proposed for this initiative the legalization of carbon capture, use, and storage (CCUS) systems. In reality, CCUS increases carbon emissions due to the large amount of energy required to accomplish its objectives.
The most concerning thing about these greenwashing practices is that they undermine the country’s ability to overcome climate change. At the end of the day, when climate initiatives fail and the effects of global warming worsen, it is not these companies or the government who will disproportionately suffer from the consequences but the poorest and most vulnerable members of society.
Going beyond branding
Knowledge and awareness are always key to addressing the public perception of greenwashing corporate initiatives. By becoming more well-informed about these practices, people can pressure companies into either exercising real sustainability or at least canceling an environmentally harmful project. Though San Miguel Corporation eventually rescinded the decision, their Pasig River Expressway project, which aimed to build an elevated expressway over the entirety of the Pasig River, was initially canceled because of public outcry.
The media, civil society organizations (CSOs), and other stakeholders can also conduct awareness campaigns to bring this issue to the public. Benosa reveals that even within environmental CSOs, the problem of greenwashing is also seen as an afterthought compared to other environmental issues. While information is an important tool against greenwashing, this should only be the first step in solving the issue. For long-term strategies, the government has to implement measures to ease the burden on consumers. As Algo mentions, companies in the Philippines usually wait for the government to act before enacting their own climate policies. If they truly value sustainability, then they have to send a clear message to these companies: Prioritizing profits over the environment will not
be tolerated.
This article was published in The LaSallian‘s June 2024 issue. To read more, visit bit.ly/TLSJune2024.
