Bite Size Comms

According to an article in the FT, many investment firms are removing the word sustainable from their communications. This follows the large banks putting sustainability on their risk registers. Deutsche Bank has just been fined USD 19 million for its misleading ESG claims. The EU is about to ban the use of the term ‘climate neutral’. Why is this greenhushing (note the use of this new term) taking place? It is all about reputation. A Board-level concern, that for some reason hasn’t really been applied to the sustainability marketing and comms models. Populace interest in calling out companies for greenwashing, aided by a very keen Advertising Standards Authority in UK and Securities and Exchange Commission in America, to name and shame companies for greenwashing claims. The ASA recently called out Lufthansa for not adding the word ‘intends’ to its website statement about being carbon neutral by 2050. Big companies have decided to be risk adverse by not mentioning sustainability. Greenhushing.

What is the solution to this conundrum that something that is intrinsically good for the planet and its people – sustainability – is regarded as a dirty word? Three thoughts. Firstly, there needs to be a legal definition of sustainable and associated terms. Secondly, companies need to be ready for the massive change to global ESG auditing from 2024, something pushed by new US and EU laws. They are not ready. Thirdly, reputation needs to be considered as an integral part of sustainability if we want companies to truly adopt the principles

[Image: Unsplash]