Many companies around the world are making long-term commitments to reduce their impact on the environment and are taking concrete steps to get there.  How can companies promote their sustainability efforts, though, without engaging in greenwashing?  A recent decision from the UK's Advertising Standards Authority -- which looked at advertising by Etihad Airways -- wrestles with this issue.  

Etihad's Advertising

Etihad ran two sponsored posts on Facebook that promoted its sustainability efforts.  Both posts had the same text, which read, "We understand the impact that flying has on the environment.  What's why we're taking a louder, bolder approach to sustainable aviation."  Each post then had a different video.  In one video, Etihad promoted the fact that it had won an award for "Environmental Airline of the Year for 2022" in the Airline Excellence Awards.  In the other video, along with promoting the award, Etihad highlighted some of its sustainability efforts, such as cutting back on the use of single use plastics and flying modern and efficient planes that have a "smaller footprint." 

The ASA challenged the ads, questioning whether Etihad's "sustainable aviation" claims exaggerated the environmental benefits of flying with the airline. 

Etihad defended the advertising, arguing that the posts were only promoting its long-term sustainability efforts and would not be understood to be communicating that the airline did not cause any adverse environmental impact. Etihad said that promoting its "approach to sustainable aviation" would be widely understood by consumers "as a long-term and multi-faceted process."  

The ASA ultimately determined, however, that Etihad violated the ASA's advertising code because "the claim exaggerated the impact that flying with Etihad would have on the environment."  Here's why. 

First, while the ASA acknowledged that the airline had described some of its sustainability efforts in the videos, the "sustainable aviation" claim in the posts themselves were not qualified.  The ASA explained, "we considered such qualifying information was material to consumers' understanding of the claim, and without it being made clear in the initial text, consumers would understand the 'sustainable aviation' claim to be about Etihad's whole business." 

Second, while the ASA recognized that Etihad had made commitments to reduce its environmental impact over the long term, the ASA didn't think that the posts themselves clearly communicated that the reference to its "approach to sustainable aviation" was about its commitment to reach "net zero" carbon emissions by 2050.

Finally, the ASA said that even though Etihad is taking steps to reduce its environmental impact, the ASA didn't believe that Etihad -- or anyone else, really, in the aviation industry -- could substantiate an absolute green claim such as "sustainable aviation." 

Some Important Lessons

The ASA's decision provides some guidance that should be useful to advertisers around the world about how to talk about a company's sustainability efforts without engaging in greenwashing.  Here are a few key take-aways. 

General "sustainability" claims are going to be difficult -- if not impossible -- to substantiate, since most commercial activities are going to have some adverse impact on the environment.  If you're going to talk about a company's sustainability efforts, at a minimum, the claim should be qualified, to explain specifically what you mean.

If you're going to make a qualified sustainability claim, make sure the qualifying information you include is clear and conspicuous, and in close proximity to the claim.  Information that explains your sustainability efforts somewhere else -- even a click away -- may be missed by consumers. 

And, when talking about your sustainability efforts, don't assume that consumers will understand that you're talking about your plans for the future.  If you're making an aspirational claim -- such as about your commitments to reduce emissions to a certain level by a particular date -- it's important to be clear about that.  There's a big difference between what you're doing now and what you're planning to do in the future.