Greenhushing is the New Greenwashing


CS

Chris Schneidmiller

Share


Greenhushing is the New Greenwashing Icon

Image Source: JESHOOTS.COM/Unsplash

Climate advocates have for decades raised concerns about “greenwashing”—corporations’ practice of claiming sustainability advances that outstrip their actual contributions to aiding the environment or controlling climate change. But the term has a newer and lesser-known companion—“greenhushing,” in which companies say little or even nothing about their sustainability activities.

Greenhushing might sound harmless as long as businesses are still committing to sustainability, but it comes with its own risks, environmental advocates say. Given the pace of climate change and its globally devastating impacts, environment-minded companies must serve as examples to their counterparts, notes Renat Heuberger, former CEO of climate consultant South Pole. But that cannot happen if the business world goes quiet in this realm.

“The main risk of greenhushing is that some companies may be tempted to stop acting sustainably if they feel that they cannot communicate their actions freely,” says University of Surrey sustainability marketing professor Xavier Font, who has studied the practice extensively.

The term dates back at least to the last decade. In 2017, Font and colleagues from the United Kingdom and Egypt applied the word to the tourism industry, where businesses worried about making their clients feel bad about their “hedonistic” approach to the environment.

“Greenhushing selectively communicates fewer pro-sustainability actions by businesses than are practiced; based on a perception of customers’ rights to consumerism,” they wrote in an article in the Journal of Sustainable Tourism. That definition has remained consistent, even removed from the tourism context. The emissions data company Zevero describes greenhushing as “the practice of deliberately under-communicating, downplaying, or avoiding publicizing sustainability efforts. Unlike greenwashing, which overstates impact, greenhushing is what happens when companies stay silent, even when they’re making progress.”

“It is possible that greenhushing has been happening for just as long as greenwashing, just that we did not have evidence for it,” Font says. “But there have always been people who have been doing the right thing and then decided not to communicate it because moralizing is not something that society really likes. Making environmental claims can come across as patronizing and worthy, and those companies that do not see a clear customer demand or other benefits they just find the easier to not stick their head above the parapet.”

The practice is widespread. In a 2022 survey of more than 1,200 large corporations, South Pole found that one-fourth did not plan to publicly discuss their “science-based” targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. More recently, an analysis of the 50 largest companies in the United States determined that nearly three-fourths had not retreated from climate commitments, but that a significant number did not intend to openly address those efforts, the Financial Times reported in June 2025.

With President Donald Trump back in the White House, part of the reasoning for this silence is not hard to parse. Trump is infamously antagonistic to efforts to reduce climate change, which he has called a hoax. Corporations now are left to avoid catching his administration’s attention in the way that large universities have this year.

“(Companies) are being careful about where they put out their messaging around their environmental or climate efforts,” Brian Bueno, sustainability practice leader for consulting firm Farient Advisors, which conducted the company analysis, told the Financial Times. “They’re sharing less information than they would otherwise.”

As an example, the Financial Times noted that Google parent company Alphabet no longer highlighted sustainability among its “core values” in its 2024 annual filing. Any mention of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) activities had also been stripped from the report, even though Alphabet was not stepping back from its climate goals, according to the article.

There are other reasons for greenhushing, from attempting to avoid heightened scrutiny of corporate sustainability activities to worries that consumers will question the efficacy of products that are advertised as green-friendly, Jason Jay, director of the Sustainability Initiative at the MIT Sloan School of Management, told the World Economic Forum.

Adds Font: “There is legislation that prevents companies from making claims that cannot be verified. … So it would not be surprising if many of these corporations will only make claims that they can substantiate, and they will clearly direct those claims to specific stakeholder groups that may respond well to those while avoiding making more generalized claims.”

Individuals influence this realm. “Pester power is key here: Ask uncomfortable questions, and remember that what determines whether you are sustainable is not how you answer surveys, but how you spend your money and how you behave,” Font says. “Should make sure that you choose to buy from companies that can make verifiable claims. These will provide the commercial need for other companies to up their game with the quality and verifiability of their claims.”

There are many ways to influence corporate direction on sustainability and the climate, including divesting from fossil fuels, investing in stocks and mutual funds focused on sustainability, and reviewing eco-friendly businesses. Find Earth Hero’s full list of climate actions here.

Related Topics