|
Grønvask viser sig ofte som et misforhold mellem de beløb, en virksomhed bruger på at markedsføre sig som grøn og så de beløb, man faktisk bruger på at drive virksomheden på bæredygtig vis. Eksempelvis brugte amerikanske forsyningsselskaber i 1969 otte gange så mange penge på at reklamere for deres forureningsbekæmpende tiltag som de brugte på selve tiltagene. Grønvask omfatter alt, fra at ændre navnet på en vare der indeholder skadelige kemikalier til et nyt, der giver associationer til noget grønt og naturligt, og til at bruge store summer på at få en stærkt drivhusgasudledende virksomhed til at fremstå som miljøvenlig. Man slører virksomhedens ikke-bæredygtige forretningsstrategi med grønvask.<ref>[https://www.corpwatch.org/article/brief-history-greenwash Joshua Karliner (marts 2001): A Brief History of Greenwash]</ref><ref>{{cite news|author=24/7 Wall Street |url= http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/03/top-10-greenwashing-compa_n_182724.html |title=Top 10 Greenwashing Companies In America |newspaper=Huffington Post |date=May 25, 2011 |access-date=December 14, 2020}}</ref> Highly public accusations of greenwashing have contributed to the term's increasing use.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Seele|first1=Peter|last2=Gatti|first2=Lucia|title=Greenwashing Revisited: In Search of a Typology and Accusation-Based Definition Incorporating Legitimacy Strategies|journal=Business Strategy and the Environment |volume=26|issue=2|pages=239–252|date=2015 |doi=10.1002/bse.1912}}</ref>
*InI 2009, ændrede [[McDonald's]] changedderes theeuropæiske colourlogo offra its European logos from yellow-andgul-redrød totil yellowgul-and-greengrøn; aen spokesmantalsmand explainedforklarede thatændringen themed, changeat wasvirksomheden "toønskede clarifyat [their]tydeliggøre virksomhedens responsibilityforpligtelse fortil theat preservationpasse ofpå naturalnaturens resources"ressourcer.<ref name="nbcnews.com">{{cite web|url= http://www.nbcnews.com/id/34111784/ns/business-us_business/t/mcdonalds-rolling-out-green-logo-europe/ |title=McDonald's rolling out 'green' logo in Europe |publisher=NBC News |date=2009-11-23 |access-date=2016-07-07}}</ref>
Similarly, [[carbon emission trading]] may feel good, but can be counterproductive if carbon is priced too low, or if large emitters are given "free credits". For example, [[Bank of America]] subsidiary [[MBNA]] offers Eco-Logique [[MasterCard]]s that reward Canadian customers with [[carbon offsets]] when they use them. Customers may feel that they are nullifying their [[carbon footprint]] by purchasing goods with these, but only 0.5% of the purchase price goes to buy carbon offsets, the rest of the [[interchange fee]] still going to the bank.<ref name=CashingIn>{{cite web|url= http://www.climatechangecentral.com/publications/enerclick/january-2008/cashing-environmental-cow |title=Cashing in on the Environmental |publisher=Climate Change Central |date=2009-11-13 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130115222626/http://www.climatechangecentral.com/publications/enerclick/january-2008/cashing-environmental-cow |archive-date=2013-01-15 |access-date=2017-12-02}}</ref>
Such campaigns and [[marketing communications]], designed to publicize and highlight organizational CSR policies to various stakeholders, can improve corporate reputation and brand image. But the proliferation of unsubstantiated ethical claims and greenwashing by some companies has made consumers more cynical and less trusting.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Jahdi |first1=Khosro S. |last2=Acikdilli |first2=Gaye |title=Marketing Communications and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): Marriage of Convenience or Shotgun Wedding? |journal=Journal of Business Ethics |date=August 2009 |volume=88 |issue=1 |pages=103–113 |doi=10.1007/s10551-009-0113-1 |s2cid=154891072 |issn=0167-4544 |language=en }}</ref>
<references />
==Eksempler==
*Many food products have packaging that evokes an environmentally-friendly image even though there has been no attempt to lower the environmental impact of their production.<ref>{{cite news|url= https://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/03/dining/03crun.html?_r=1 |title=Be It Ever So Homespun, There's Nothing Like Spin |last=Severson |first=Kim |date=2007-01-03 |newspaper=The New York Times|access-date=2009-01-28}}</ref>
*Published consumption figures tend to underestimate the consumption seen in practice by 20% to 30%.<ref>Real-world emissions as well as the fuel consumption under the MCC (Milan City Cycle) were much higher - almost double - those obtained under the European type approval test cycle, Ref: JRC>IES>>13202</ref><ref>{{cite web|url= http://www.edmunds.com/advice/fueleconomy/articles/105503/article.html |title="Real World" Fuel Economy vs. EPA Estimates |website=Edmunds |date=May 11, 2005 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090608131624/http://www.edmunds.com/advice/fueleconomy/articles/105503/article.html |archive-date=June 8, 2009 |access-date=March 23, 2018}}</ref> The reason is partly that official fuel consumption tests are not sufficiently representative of real-world usage. Automakers optimise their fuel consumption strategies to reduce the apparent cost of ownership of the cars and to improve their green image.
| 