CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,360Environmental Sustainability in BusinessCorporate Social Responsibility ReportingSustainable Supply Chain Management

Concepts and forms of greenwashing: a systematic review

Open access
de Freitas Netto, Sebastião Vieira, Sobral, Marcos Felipe Falcão, Ribeiro, Ana Regina Bezerra, Soares, Gleibson Robert da Luz·2020·Environmental Sciences Europe
DOI 10.1186/s12302-020-0300-3
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: The aggravation of environmental problems has led companies to seek the development and commercialization of green products. Some companies mislead their stakeholders through a phenomenon called greenwashing. Results: This paper aims to explore the phenomenon of greenwashing through a systematic literature review in search of its main concepts and typologies in the past 10 years. This research has followed the proceedings of a systematic review of the literature, based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). We identified a major classification of greenwashing: firm-level executional, firm-level claim, product-level executional, and product-level claim. Conclusion: It was possible to highlight and catalog the types of the phenomenon. A structure based on such type has been observed in the literature.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12302-020-0300-3

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A systematic qualitative content analysis was conducted on 72 sustainability reports from 2013 to 2017, involving 15 car manufacturers accused of unethical practices in measuring diesel vehicle pollutant emissions.

    “a systematic qualitative content analysis was conducted on 72 sustainability reports from 2013 to 2017, involving 15 car manufacturers accused of unethical practices in measuring diesel vehicle pollutant emissions.”

    From Greenwashing, Eco-label Confusion, and the Postponement of the EU Green Claims Directive (2025) · cites this paper as De Freitas Netto et al., 2020

    The Methods section describes a PRISMA-based systematic literature review, and the Results section says the authors reviewed 67 documents. That is a different study design and source material from the claimed qualitative analysis of 72 sustainability reports from 15 car manufacturers; no page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The neutralisation techniques reveal a clear disconnect between the level of institutional pressures on manufacturers and the optimistic or even mistaken discourse of most published sustainability reports.

    “they all reveal a clear disconnect between the level of institutional pressures on manufacturers and the optimistic or even mistaken discourse of most of the published sustainability reports.”

    From Greenwashing, Eco-label Confusion, and the Postponement of the EU Green Claims Directive (2025) · cites this paper as De Freitas Netto et al., 2020

    The Background describes growing stakeholder pressure on companies, while “Claim greenwashing” describes sustainability reports that twist the truth or project a positive image. “Greenwashing as decoupling” also describes a gap between corporate actions and positive communications. The review does not identify these as neutralisation techniques, establish a finding specifically about manufacturers, or say that most published sustainability reports are misleading. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • This gap highlights the tendency toward greenwashing and the concealment of negative events that could harm the corporate image.

    “This gap highlights the tendency toward greenwashing and the concealment of negative events that could harm the corporate image”

    From Greenwashing, Eco-label Confusion, and the Postponement of the EU Green Claims Directive (2025) · cites this paper as De Freitas Netto et al., 2020

  • The most prevalent configuration observed was 'head in the sand,' characterised by minimal recognition of external pressures and little or no questioning of internal practices.

    “The most prevalent configuration observed was 'head in the sand,' characterised by minimal recognition of external pressures and little or no questioning of internal practices”

    From Greenwashing, Eco-label Confusion, and the Postponement of the EU Green Claims Directive (2025) · cites this paper as De Freitas Netto et al., 2020

    The Greenwashing as decoupling section discusses external public pressures, but not a configuration called 'head in the sand' or questioning of internal practices. Searches for the quoted phrase and for configurations involving external pressures and internal practices found no passage reporting which configuration was most prevalent. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Four main neutralisation techniques include 'head in the sand,' 'self-proclaimed green leadership,' 'wait and see,' and 'start of a new era'.

    “Four main neutralisation techniques include 'head in the sand,' 'self -proclaimed green leadership,' 'wait and see,' and 'start of a new era'”

    From Greenwashing, Eco-label Confusion, and the Postponement of the EU Green Claims Directive (2025) · cites this paper as De Freitas Netto et al., 2020

    The Claim greenwashing section lists firm-level forms such as dirty business and ad bluster, but does not identify the four named neutralisation techniques. Searches for “head in the sand,” “self-proclaimed green leadership,” and “start of a new era” found no passage in our copy addressing that classification. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 32

  1. Antunes D, Santos A, Hurtado A (2015) The communication of the LCA: the need for guidelines to avoid greenwashing. Espacios 36(5):1
  2. Baum L (2012) It's Not Easy Being Green … Or Is It? A content analysis of environmental claims in magazine advertisements from the United States and United Kingdom. Environ Commun 6(4):423-440. https ://doi. org/10.1080/17524 032.2012.72402 2 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Chang C, Chen Y (2013) Managing green brand equity: the perspec- tive of perceived risk theory. Qual Quant 48(3):1753-1768. https ://doi. org/10.1007/s1113 5-013-9872-y · DOI
  4. Chen Y, Lin C, Chang C (2013) The influence of greenwash on green word-of-mouth (green WOM): the mediation effects of green perceived quality and green satisfaction. Qual Quant 48(5):2411-2425. https ://doi. org/10.1007/s1113 5-013-9898-1 · DOI
  5. Chen Y, Chang C, Yeh S, Cheng H (2014) Green shared vision and green creativity: the mediation roles of green mindfulness and green self- efficacy. Qual Quant 49(3):1169-1184. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1113 5-014-0041-8 · DOI
  6. Contreras-Pacheco O, Claasen C (2017) Fuzzy reporting as a way for a company to greenwash: perspectives from the Colombian real- ity. Probl Perspect Manag 15(2):525-535. https ://doi.org/10.21511 / ppm.15(si).2017.06 · DOI
  7. Elkington J (1994) Towards the sustainable corporation: win-win-win business strategies for sustainable development. Calif Manag Rev 36(2):90-100. https ://doi.org/10.2307/41165 746 · DOI
  8. Fernando A, Sivakumaran B, Suganthi L (2014) Nature of green advertise- ments in India: are they greenwashed? Asian J Commun 24(3):222-241. https ://doi.org/10.1080/01292 986.2014.88553 7 · DOI
  9. Fieseler C, Fleck M, Meckel M (2010) Corporate social responsibility in the blogosphere. J Bus Ethics 91(4):599-614. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1055 1-009-0135-8 · DOI
  10. Grimmer M, Bingham T (2013) Company environmental performance and consumer purchase intentions. J Bus Res 66(10):1945-1953. https :// doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusr es.2013.02.017 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Guo R, Zhang W, Wang T, Li C, Tao L (2018) Timely or considered? Brand trust repair strategies and mechanism after greenwashing in China- from a legitimacy perspective. Ind Mark Manag 72:127-137. https ://doi. org/10.1016/j.indma rman.2018.04.001 · DOI
  12. Guo R, Tao L, Gao P (2014) The research on greenwashing brands' rebuild- ing strategies and mechanism of brand trust after biochemical and other pollutions. Biotechnology 10(9):3270-3279
  13. Guo R, Tao L, Yan L, Gao P (2014) The effect path of greenwashing brand trust in Chinese microbiological industry from decoupling view. Indian J 10(7):1827-1831
  14. Hartmann P, Apaolaza-Ibáñez V (2009) Green advertising revisited. Int J Advert 28(4):715-739. https ://doi.org/10.2501/s0265 04870 92008 37 · DOI
  15. Kim E, Lyon T (2015) Greenwash vs. Brownwash: exaggeration and undue modesty in corporate sustainability disclosure. Organ Sci 26(3):705-723. https ://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0949 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Majláth M (2017) The effect of greenwashing information on ad evalua- tion. Eur J Sustain Dev. https ://doi.org/10.14207 /ejsd.2017.v6n3p 92 · DOI
  17. Markham D, Khare A, Beckman T (2014) Greenwashing: a proposal to restrict its spread. J Environ Assess Policy Manag 16(04):1450030. https :// doi.org/10.1142/s1464 33321 45003 06 · DOI
  18. Marquis C, Toffel M, Zhou Y (2016) Scrutiny, norms, and selective disclo- sure: a global study of greenwashing. Organ Sci 27(2):483-504. https :// doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2015.1039 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Milgrom P, Roberts J (1986) Relying on the information of interested par- ties. Rand J Econ 17(1):18. https ://doi.org/10.2307/25556 25 · DOI
  20. Nyilasy G, Gangadharbatla H, Paladino A (2014) Perceived greenwashing: the interactive effects of green advertising and corporate environmental performance on consumer reactions. J Bus Ethics 125(4):693-707. https :// doi.org/10.1007/s1055 1-013-1944-3 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Pearson J (2010) Turning point. Are we doing the right thing? Leadership and prioritisation for public benefit. J Corp Citizensh 2010(37):37-40. https ://doi.org/10.9774/gleaf .4700.2010.sp.00006 · DOI
  22. Roulet T, Touboul S (2014) The intentions with which the road is paved: attitudes to liberalism as determinants of greenwashing. J Bus Ethics 128(2):305-320. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1055 1-014-2097-8 · DOI
  23. Scanlan S (2017) Framing fracking: scale-shifting and greenwashing risk in the oil and gas industry. Local Environ 22(11):1311-1337. https ://doi. org/10.1080/13549 839.2017.13458 77 · DOI
  24. Seele P, Gatti L (2015) Greenwashing revisited: in search of a typology and accusation-based definition incorporating legitimacy strategies. Bus Strategy Environ 26(2):239-252. https ://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1912 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Siano A, Vollero A, Conte F, Amabile S (2017) "More than words": expand- ing the taxonomy of greenwashing after the Volkswagen scandal. J Bus Res 71:27-37. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusr es.2016.11.002 · DOI
  26. Siegel F (2014) The poverty of environmentalism. Gale Academic Onefile 51(3):258-261
  27. Tateishi E (2017) Craving gains and claiming "green" by cutting greens? An exploratory analysis of greenfield housing developments in Iskandar Malaysia. J Urban Aff 40(3):370-393. https ://doi.org/10.1080/07352 166.2017.13556 67 · DOI
  28. TerraChoice (2010) The sins of greenwashing: home and family edition. http://sinso fgree nwash ing.org/findi ngs/the-seven -sins/. Accessed 15 June 2018
  29. Vollero A, Palazzo M, Siano A, Elving W (2016) Avoiding the greenwashing trap: between CSR communication and stakeholder engagement. Int J Innov Sustain Dev 10(2):120. https ://doi.org/10.1504/ijisd .2016.07554 2 · DOI
  30. Walker K, Wan F (2011) The harm of symbolic actions and green-washing: corporate actions and communications on environmental performance and their financial implications. J Bus Ethics 109(2):227-242. https ://doi. org/10.1007/s1055 1-011-1122-4 · DOI
  31. Wolniak R (2015) Reporting process of corporate social responsibility and greenwashing. In: 15th international multidisciplinary scientific geocon- ference SGEM2015, ecology, economics, education and legislation. https ://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2 015/b53/s21.063 · DOI
  32. Zhang L, Li D, Cao C, Huang S (2018) The influence of greenwashing perception on green purchasing intentions: the mediating role of green word-of-mouth and moderating role of green concern. J Clean Prod 187:740-750. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclep ro.2018.03.201 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
de Freitas Netto, S. V., Sobral, M. F. F., Ribeiro, A. R. B., & Soares, G. R. D. L.
Affiliations
Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco (BR)
Corresponding author
Sobral, Marcos Felipe Falcão
ORCID
Venue
Environmental Sciences Europe
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2020-02-11
Volume
32
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 2190-4715 (ISSN-L)
  • 2190-4707
DOI
10.1186/s12302-020-0300-3
OpenAlex
W3029489574
Cited by
1,360
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 322 · 2025: 347 · 2024: 358 · 2023: 207 · 2022: 89 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 6 · 2018: 1
FWCI
9.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Environmental Sciences Europe (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
CAPES (001)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Environmental Sustainability in Business
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
Keywords
greenwashing, green products, corporate environmental claims, green marketing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review