Green claims: how to spot possible greenwashing while you shop

Ever got the feeling a product wasn’t as eco-friendly as its packaging made out? We looked at a sample of 1,000 online retail listings containing green claims and identified many that were vague, unsubstantiated or overblown. Here we delve into some examples we found.

Eco-friendly, natural, sustainable, kind to the planet, biodegradable...these buzzwords influence well-intentioned shoppers, often increasing our willingness to spend a little extra. That’s not a problem if those claims are backed up.

But a 2021 European Commission study found that more than 50% of environmental marketing claims were vague, unfounded and misleading. The UK has a Green Claims Code: guidance set by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) to try to combat this. 

We carried out research in October and November 2024 to see how well companies are sticking to it. We trawled through 20,000 online product listings using AI software trained to find green buzzwords, and then our researchers looked at a sample of 1,000 listings containing green claims to identify any that were vague, unsubstantiated or overblown. We found many examples demonstrating how green marketing claims can be confusing or potentially misleading. Nearly two-thirds of products failed our checks for at least two principles of the code, indicating they’re less likely to comply. 

Live more sustainably - get our free Sustainability newsletter to make changes for you and the planet

What is greenwashing?

There’s no legal definition, but environmental law charity ClientEarth defines corporate greenwashing as the use of ‘public messaging to appear more climate friendly and environmentally sustainable than [a company] really is. It’s also a technique used by certain companies to distract consumers from the fact that their business model and activities actually do a lot of environmental damage.’ 

Although many of the examples we found may not deliberately greenwash or fall under that umbrella, and may be guilty simply of omitting information in their listings, the pervasive nature of unsubstantiated green terms in product marketing contributes to an overall erosion of consumer trust. Where products are sold through third-party retailers – a branded food being sold by a supermarket, for example – it may not be clear who wrote the product descriptions. 

Brands usually do provide approved marketing wording, but retailers may make edits, and updates made by the brand can take time to trickle through. In some cases, the text used may vary between retailers from what is found on the brands’ own websites. However, we found that in at least some of our examples where wording was problematic on one retail site, the same issue came up on other sites as well.

The Green Claims Code principles

The Competition and Markets Authority’s Green Claims Code has six key principles to help businesses comply with the code. 

Green claims should: 

• Be truthful and accurate 
• Be clear and unambiguous 
• Not omit or hide important information 
• Make fair and meaningful comparisons 
• Consider the full life cycle of the product 
• Be substantiated.

The CMA has powers to investigate companies or sectors that it thinks aren’t adhering to the code. It has previously carried out an investigation into some fashion brands. The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCC) has recently given the CMA more direct enforcement powers, including the ability to impose financial penalties of up to 10% of a business’s global turnover. How the CMA will use this power remains to be seen.

Investigating common green claims

We've grouped some of the examples we found in our online research into categories according to the types of green claim they make: unsubstantiated claims; vague language; focusing on only one element of a product; not clarifying when a claim is based on carbon offsetting and making a green claim based on something that’s already an industry standard. We found these claims across all sorts of product categories, demonstrating that you can come across these marketing practices no matter what you’re buying, from groceries to furniture.

See examples of these practices, plus our glossary of green terms to look out for, below. 

Unsubstantiated claims

The Green Claims Code says: 'Claims are less likely to mislead where the supporting evidence is publicly available, and it is clear where and how consumers can verify the claims.'

This issue arises when a product makes a specific sustainability claim that isn’t backed up with any evidence. The space available for product descriptions might be limited, particularly on third-party retailer websites, but if green claims aren’t fully explained, there should be links to further details elsewhere on the manufacturers’ own websites.

Examples we found include:

• Tech21 iPhone 15 Pro Max phone case (listed on Argos website)

‘With our innovative bio-spice formula, over 60% of this case breaks down into the earth once you’re finished with it, leaving no trace of microplastics.’

The description here didn’t explain what bio-spice is, or what comprises the other nearly 40% of the case and what happens to that when it’s disposed of. The brand’s website has a sustainability section, but doesn’t give any further information on what ‘bio-spice’ is apart from that it is biodegradable. There is no supporting evidence for its claim, either in the product description or elsewhere on its website. ‘Bio-spice’ is not a well-known term and, in our view, should be explained.

• Smirnoff Red Label Vodka (listed on Ocado website)

‘Filtered ten times through seven columns of environmentally sustainable charcoal.’

In this listing, it’s unclear what ‘environmentally sustainable charcoal’ means in this context. No further explanation is given in the product listing that we checked, and there are no links to any supporting evidence.

• Jay-Be Simply Kids Foam-free Shorty Size Mattress (listed on Argos website)

‘Made from recycled plastic bottles, Jay-Be e-Fibre has already prevented more than 65 million bottles from entering our oceans or landfill.’

Although using recycled polyester can have environmental benefits compared to using virgin material, the product description and brand website don’t provide any evidence that these plastic bottles would have otherwise ended up in landfill or the ocean. Indeed, being recycled into more plastic bottles or other products is more likely, as it’s the destiny of 75% of PET plastic bottles, according to the British Plastics Federation. This rate will vary between countries.

Vague language

The Green Claims Code says: 'The terms used in a claim and the meaning they convey to consumers should be clear.'

At best, vague statements confuse consumers and make it difficult to make informed choices. At worst, they give the impression that a product, or the business behind it, is better for the environment than it is. Below are some of the examples we found.

• Chad Valley Wooden Puzzles (listed on Argos website)

‘Classic wooden toys look great around the house and of course are much more kind to the environment.’

We think this claim is unlikely to comply with the Green Claims Code because there’s no information about what environmental aspects are being compared. The example we saw didn’t give any information about the provenance of the wood. Timber can be unsustainable; for reassurance that wood is responsibly sourced, look out for FSC certification.

• HP Inkjet Cartridge (listed on Argos website)

‘The environmental choice. Print with confidence – designed with the planet in mind for easy recycling and less waste.’

In our view, the claim ‘the environmental choice’ may not be compliant with the code’s principle that ‘comparisons must be fair and meaningful’ as it isn’t clear what this choice is being compared to, or how. Printer cartridge recycling is relatively common, either at retailers, recycling centres or via postal services. HP told us it would remove the reference to the ‘environmental choice’ and ‘designed with the planet in mind’ from the Argos website.

• Waken Toothpaste (listed on Ocado website)

‘Waken to our sustainable PepperMint toothpaste… This wonderfully effective PepperMint toothpaste gel is sustainable.’

Waken’s toothpaste comes in recyclable aluminium packaging, so it does have sustainable packaging, but the retailer’s product description we checked gives no information about what makes this toothpaste ‘sustainable’, which, in our view, is not compliant with the code principle that claims must be clear and unambiguous. Waken told us that this is an old product, and its new products do not use this wording. It plans to review all retailer product descriptions quarterly in future.

• Birds Eye Chicken Shop Salt & Pepper Chicken Goujons (listed on Tesco website)

‘For a sustainable tomorrow’ 

The ‘For a Sustainable tomorrow’ slogan is included in several Birds Eye product descriptions we saw online. The retailer’s product description for Birds Eye’s chicken goujons includes a link to its sustainability strategy, which leads you to its sustainability report. But there’s nothing in the product description or the report explaining why chicken is part of a ‘sustainable tomorrow’, although the report does cover chicken welfare. Raising intensively reared chickens can have significant environmental impacts, so we think this claim is vague at best. 

We spoke to NGO Changing Markets, which agreed with our assessment. It told us that intensive poultry production can be linked to ‘serious environmental harms – from high water use and ammonia pollution to manure runoff that degrades local ecosystems'.

Focusing on one element

The Green Claims Code says: 'Cherry-picking information is likely to make consumers think a product, service, process, brand or business as a whole is greener than it really is.'

Businesses should consider the overall impact of all the components of the products they are marketing before highlighting certain environmental claims. Watch out for generally applied claims that really only apply to one part of the product. 

• Argos Home Patsy Fabric 2 Seater Clic-clac Sofabed (listed on Argos website)

‘FSC-certified meaning the materials used for this product are responsibly sourced’

This statement is also on lots of other furniture product descriptions on Argos.co.uk. FSC certification can only apply to wood (or other forest-sourced materials). There is no information provided about how other materials in the sofa bed, such as polyester and foam, are responsibly sourced. If these materials are not responsibly sourced, we think this statement could be misleading.

• Berryworld Blueberries (listed on Ocado website)

‘Grown with care for the planet and people, they’re the berry best choice for a guilt-free treat. Plus, our new paper-topped, recycled punnets are 100% recyclable.’

This statement focuses on the growing and packaging aspects of the process, while ignoring the transportation of these products. Outside of the UK berry-growing season, some of the berries come from Morocco, South Africa or Zimbabwe, and a proportion will be air-freighted to the UK, which can have a significant emissions impact. According to Our World in Data, air transport of food can generate around 50 times more emissions than sea transport. Calling them a ‘guilt-free treat’ could give consumers a more positive environmental picture than the reality.

Not clarifying offsetting claims

The Green Claims Code says: 'Carbon offsetting can be used by companies but they should be clear that they are doing this.'

While carbon offsetting can be used by companies to feed into environmental claims,  they should be clear that they are doing this. If carbon-neutral or negative claims are not clear about offsetting, consumers could be misled into thinking that the products themselves generate no (or few) emissions, when this is unlikely to be the case.

• Harrringtons Turkey & Vegetable Complete Dog Food (listed on Tesco website)

‘CO2 Carbon Negative Cooking. From the UK’s first carbon negative pet food manufacturer.’

There was no information in Tesco’s product description that this claim is in part achieved through carbon offsetting, and customers aren’t signposted to further details. Harringtons’ impact report on its website explains that its carbon negativity is based only on the emissions from its factory, offices and employees (scope 1 & 2 emissions) and not those created by its supply chain (scope 3), which will be far greater.

Stating an industry standard as an environmental benefit

The Green Claims Code says: 'Businesses should not claim an environmental virtue from something which is an ordinary feature.'

One common example of this is the claim that packaging contains 30% recycled plastic – manufacturers must pay a levy on packaging that doesn’t meet this standard, so the green claim is incidental compared to the real matter of avoiding an increased cost.

• Mr Organic Chickpeas (listed on Ocado website)

‘Zero air miles’

A tiny proportion of our food is imported to the UK by air. Usual air freight includes highly perishable items such as fresh berries, green beans, asparagus, premium meat and seafood. Mr Organic’s claim could suggest that its canned chickpeas have a specific virtue, when in fact it’s very unusual for any canned or jarred products to travel by air. Mr Organic told us it has recently rebranded its products to no longer use this claim.

What the brands said

• Tech21 said it was already reviewing its messaging, but that its biodegradable cases don’t require specialised disposal facilities and break down into organic matter.
• Argos said it takes its role as a responsible retailer very seriously and is reviewing all product descriptions.
• Smirnoff said the wording used wasn’t current, and it is taking steps to ensure third-party websites have the latest versions. 
• Jaybe said that while it can prove it has recycled more than 200m plastic bottles, it acknowledges that it can’t say with certainty that they would have ended up in landfill or the ocean had it not, so it will review the claim as part of its ongoing commitment to transparency.
• Birdseye said its ambition and commitments, ‘For a sustainable tomorrow’, are set out on the product description with the Sustainable Path URL, which can be found on its website with its sustainability strategy and report.
• Berryworld said it understood the phrase ‘guilt-free’ might be confusing and would remove it. It added that the majority of its blueberries are road or sea-freighted. 
• Harringtons said it recognises that Scope 3 emissions represent the largest share of its total carbon footprint, and it is an area they are actively addressing by gathering robust data to begin a comprehensive decarbonisation strategy across its supply chain.
• Ocado said that it works closely with suppliers to ensure the information provided for its website is accurate and has training and toolkits for colleagues to make sure they are compliant and up to date with the evolving regulatory landscape.
• Tesco referred us to the British Retail Consortium, which told us it has set up the BRC Provenance Green Claims Forum so the industry can share expertise on how it markets sustainability information.

Our green claims glossary

• Biodegradable Everything is theoretically ‘biodegradable’ eventually – even plastic. This term should be accompanied by certification that the product has been tested to break down in a specific time period and/or conditions. 
• Compostable. This means something should break down in an industrial compost environment, not at home. But this type of waste isn’t typically collected by local authority recycling. Only products carrying the home compostable certification logo will break down in home compost heaps. 
• Carbon neutral This usually suggests a company is offsetting some of its emissions, not that it produces no emissions. Offsetting can be a valid way of reducing emissions, but only once actual emissions have been reduced as much as possible. 
• Eco-conscious, environmentally friendly, green, natural. There are no legal definitions or regulations associated with the use of any of these terms. 
• Plastic-free This can sometimes be marketing jargon. Question whether the product would ordinarily have been expected to contain plastic.
• Recycled Look for a percentage given for recycled content, as it can sometimes be a very small amount. This information should be included on packaging.
• Recyclable Many things are technically recyclable, but that doesn’t mean local authorities will collect them or even that large-scale recycling facilities exist. If no further details are on the packaging, check the rules in your local area at recyclenow.com

What needs to change

Which? believes that everyone should be able to trust that the green claims they see are genuine, clear and accurate.

The fact that so many businesses may be struggling to comply with the Green Claims Code suggests there is work to do for regulators – they could, for instance, provide more support to well-intentioned businesses struggling to comply. 

But we think some businesses could do better and take more responsibility for ensuring their environmental claims are clear and accurate. There must also be strong enforcement of the rules with action against those who are deliberately misleading consumers.

Read more about our research and our findings in our report 'how green are green claims'.