*Greenwashing? That’s how you recognize it!*

[*https://news.economie.fgov.be/209362-greenwashing-zo-herken-je-het*](https://news.economie.fgov.be/209362-greenwashing-zo-herken-je-het)

*Some companies implicitly or explicitly claim that they do more for the environment than they actually do. So they make their products or services appear “greener” than they actually are: they are greenwashing. They do this to persuade consumers to buy their products or services. However, this unfair commercial practice is prohibited. There are fines of up to 80,000 euros (to be multiplied by the surcharges).*

​

*How do I recognize greenwashing?*

*is promoted while it is only present in limited quantities. A* ***natural ingredient*** *such as vinegar, lemon, or sweet almond*

*You see* ***vague or ambiguous words and terms*** *that are not clearly defined in the message, such as “pure nature”, “non-polluting”, “good for the planet”, “ecological”, “nature-friendly”, “sustainable”, “protects the environment”, etc.*

*are* ***Misleading images*** *used such as images, colors, signs, logos and symbols that create a false impression. For example, a symbol or color that clearly evokes nature on the packaging of a household product, which in fact has no or only a minimal positive effect on the environment.*

*The* ***product bears an environmental label*** *. It looks like an official label that has been certified by a competent and independent body while the producer has made it himself.*

*An* ***irrelevant action is highlighted*** *: An environmentally friendly action taken by the company is being praised, but it has nothing to do with the product being advertised.*

***The information is unbelievable*** *: alarm bells should go off if a company uses an ecological argument to promote a product that is harmful to health. Tobacco advertising, for example, should never cite an environmental benefit as tobacco cultivation requires a lot of water, uses toxic chemicals and encourages deforestation.*

*There is* ***insufficient or missing information about the environmental benefit*** *: for example, if it is stated that “100% recycled material” is used, it should be clear whether this refers to the packaging, the entire product or a specific substance. If a manufacturer indicates that his washing machine uses, for example, 30% less energy, it must be clarified that this energy saving only applies if the eco program is used.*

​

Did you spot clear or funny cases of local greenwashing in Belgium?

4 comments

  1. I work in the print-industry, and can give alot of examples.

    Alot of companies sell paper products saying it’s ‘recycled’ or ‘eco’. Which nowadays just means that it **looks** recycled. Alot of those papers still have 30% new fibers in it. But it does cost more than normal ‘FSC’ paper.

    FSC-label. We print exclusively on FSC-paper, but we can’t print the logo on our products. Because it costs money. If you want to print the FSC label, you need to apply for it. The organization sends someone over to look at the size and revenue, then you receive a quote to be able to use the logo. No-one checks wether the paper that it’s printed on is really FSC.

    I once stumbled upon a printing company that claimed to be ‘green’ and ‘eco-friendly’. Why? All employees came to work by bike!

  2. Recent one: Brussels Airlines. After buying tickets, you are asked to pay an extra (not mandatory) to compensate the CO2 impact of your flight. Basically, they want the customer to pay for somehting that they will take credit for.

  4. Ecocheques: in some stores you can just buy literally any product while it was originally meant for products with high sustainable or ecologic value.

    People are forced to consume with their yearly ecocheques (and early replacing of products in good working condition)

Leave a Reply