Corporate Greenwashing: Capitalism Under the Veneer of Sustainability

A few weeks ago, my mom surprised me with a new pair of Levi jeans. As grateful and happy as I was to have a new pair of pants, I couldn’t help but be concerned with the environmental impacts of the purchase. I’m not the only one; according to a 2021 EcoPrint survey, 77% of Americans experience concern over the ecological effects of the products they buy. 

In recent years, it has become profitable for companies to appeal to this concern through many facets of their marketing. Many products, ranging from moisturizers to disinfectant sprays, now have words like “eco-friendly”, “plant-based”, “natural”, and “green” slapped on their carefully designed, aesthetically “earthy” packaging. Shades of browns and greens, drawings of leaves and nature, and rough textures reminiscent of the outdoors aren't hard to find. And this marketing is effective. When deciding between two similar products, my choice (like many others) is dictated by how they appear. Unfortunately, while these decorations and declarations are attractive to consumers, there’s not much substantiating them. Instead, these brandings are merely a ploy to rake up profits rather than an act of commitment towards improving the environment. 

During the first inspection of my new Levi’s, I felt hopeful. On the inner tag of my pants were the words “Water<Less” which seemed to imply that these jeans were made with less water than others. Unfortunately, upon further research, I realized that these words were not as promising as they sounded. Like countless others, I had experienced a false sense of comfort because of a marketing strategy known as greenwashing: making false or misleading marketing statements about a product's environmental benefits or practices for financial gain. 

Greenwashing is a relatively new term, first coined in the 80s by Jay Westerfield, an environmentalist, in reference to a hotel policy he had encountered: reusing towels to cut laundry costs but claiming that doing so was for the more eco-conscious reason of saving water. According to Westerfield’s account, the resort impressed onto customers that the ocean is a valuable resource and encouraged them to “Help us to help our environment” by reusing towels. Ironically, this policy was in place while the hotel expanded and built bungalows in the fragile coral reef ecosystems nearby. 

Although this was the first official use of the term, this wasn’t the first use of the marketing strategy. In the 80s, the oil company Chevron aired ads in an attempt to appear environmentally conscious called “People Do”, where workers help cute, endangered animals find shelter or water. These portrayals sharply contrasted the company’s true treatment of wildlife, as they were made while the company violated the Clean Air Act (which regulates emissions and controls air pollution) and Clean Water Act (which governs water pollution and ensures the cleanliness of U.S. waterways), and had a history of spilling oil into protected wildlife areas. 

This concept goes back even further to the 1960s and the rise of nuclear power, though in a slightly different way. Due to the concerns of anti-nuclear activists about its safety, nuclear plant divisions began putting out advertisements where they claimed to be a clean, safe, and eco-friendly source of energy. While some of these assertions were admittedly true, the numerous nuclear accidents around the U.S. and the harmful effects of waste exposed some of these plants’ environmentally unsustainable practices, making this the first instance of greenwashing.

When I first turned to research my new Levi’s, I discovered that “Water<Less” is a phrase that represents Levi’s efforts towards lowering water usage. An article posted on Levi’s website in 2018 explains their efforts regarding water. “Our designers challenged themselves to get the same looks we all love, but using less water in the finishing stage.” For context, the finishing stage requires only 1% of the water consumed in a jean’s lifecycle. 

To add insult to injury, underneath the words “Water<Less” on the inner tag of those jeans was a second marketing ploy. Listed is “care for our planet: wash less, wash cold, line dry, donate or recycle”, encouraging owners to take steps towards sustainability through their treatment of the jeans. Given that Levi’s ultimately uses almost 3,000 liters of water and emits 20 kilograms of carbon dioxide in the production of each garment, it's not consumers who need to be worried about how caring they are. 

The worst part is that changes in water usage during clothing production could have a massive impact on the environment. Even with those marginal changes, from 2011 to 2020, Levi’s saved 3 billion liters of water with Water<Less. Imagine the savings that would result from the company dedicating itself to being more sustainable in other areas of production. While Levi’s is at least doing something towards becoming more sustainable, its marketing surrounding the changes is misleading, and the changes themselves aren’t enough.

So what do we do? If companies lack transparency regarding the sustainability of their products, how can we make good decisions as consumers? Unfortunately, we shoulder most of the burden when it comes to shopping in an environmentally conscious manner. We can and should do our best to research and choose brands that have our planet’s best interests in mind. But, as Levi’s has demonstrated, that’s much easier said than done. It can be difficult to comb through all of the misleading claims, leading many to make seemingly responsible purchases only to discover that things are a little more complicated afterward. Truthfully, I didn’t return my new jeans despite their environmental impact. I believed Water<Less uncritically until it was too late. So, while it’s imperative to do research, the most important thing we have to do is recognize greenwashing when it occurs and call out companies when they participate. In the words of actor and sustainability advocate Colin Firth, “The clothes we wear say something about who we are. Let’s make sure they’re saying the right thing.” 

Logan Ignacio is a high school Sophomore in Seattle, Washington. Her favorite political topics to study include climate activism, political science, and issues concerning teens and young adults. In her free time, Logan enjoys playing sports, reading, and watching video essays.