Greenwashing: A broken business model

Pede sen, Esben Rahbek Gje d um; Ande sen, Ki s i Rei an A icle G eenwashing: A b oken business model Jou nal o Business Models (JOBM) P o ided in Coope a ion wi h: Aalbo g Uni e si y, Aalbo g Sugges ed Ci a ion: Pede sen, Esben Rahbek Gje d um; Ande sen, Ki s i Rei an (2023) : G eenwashing: A b oken business model, Jou nal o Business Models (JOBM), ISSN 2246-2465, Aalbo g Uni e si y Open Publishing, Aalbo g, Vol. 11, Iss. 2, pp. 11-24, h ps://doi.o g/10.54337/jbm. 11i2.7352 This Ve sion is a ailable a : h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/319000 S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen: Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den. Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen. So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen (insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en, gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e. Te ms o use: Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal and schola ly pu poses. You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public. I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence. h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 11 Jou nal o Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 11-24 G eenwashing: A Business Model Pe spec i e Esben Rahbek Gje d um Pede sen1 and Ki s i Rei an Ande sen2 Abs ac Is g eenwashing a business model? The pape is a concep ual e o o ad ance he discussions o g eenwashing hough he lenses o business model hinking. We a gue ha he business model li e a u e can o e a use ul supplemen o exis ing concep ualisa ions o g eenwashing by linking alk-ac ion disconnec s o he unde lying business a chi ec u e. G eenwashing cha ac e izes o - ganisa ions ha delibe a ely disconnec he p omises o he s akeholde s (i.e. alue p oposi ion) om he o he elemen s o he business models. Mo eo e , we con end ha he concep o g een- washing can con ibu e o he business model li e a u e by d awing a en ion o o ganisa ions wi h impe ec business a chi ec u es, which ail o deli e on he alue p oposi ions communica ed o hei s akeholde s. This s udy pa es way o u u e esea ch in o how lawed business a chi ec u es cause g eenwashing and how business models can be ans o med o imp o e o ganisa ions’ ela- ionships wi h hei s akeholde s Keywo ds: G eenwashing, business models, sus ainabili y, decoupling, o ganisa ional hypoc isy, co po a e social esponsibili y Please ci e his pape as: Pede sen, E. R. G. and Ande sen, K. R. (2023), G eenwashing: A Business Model Pe spec i e, Jou nal o Business Models, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 11-24 1–2 Copenhagen Business School, Depa men o Managemen , Socie y and Communica ion, Dalgas Ha e 15, 2000 F ede iksbe g, e gp[email p o ec ed], k [email protected] ISSN: 2246-2465 DOI: h ps://doi.o g/10.54337/jbm. 11i2.7352 Jou nal o Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 11-24 12 12 In oduc ion The in eg a ion o social and en i onmen al is- sues wi hin he o ganisa ion and in i s ela ionship wi h ex e nal s akeholde s is o en ega ded as a key goal o co po a e sus ainabili y (Hengs e al., 2020). Howe e , i is widely acknowledged ha many companies pay only lip se ice o he sus ainabili y agenda. Inconsis ency be ween co po a e ‘ alk’ and ‘ac ion’ on sus ainabili y has led o accusa ions o g eenwashing, which can be b oadly de ined as: ‘(…) communica ion ha misleads people in o adop ing o e ly posi i e belie s abou an o ganiza ion’s en- i onmen al pe o mance’ (Lyon and Mon gome y, 2015, p. 226). G eenwashing is by no means ma ginal phenomenon (Kim and Lyon, 2015). On he con a y, he li e a u e has epo ed p oduc g eenwashing o mo e han 90 pe cen (Delmas and Bu bano, 2011; Lyon and Mon gome y, 2015). Recen ly, he Eu ope- an Commission (EC) s a ed ha 42% o g een claims online we e exagge a ed, decep i e, o alse (EC, 2021). Google’s global su ey o o e 1,500 execu i es also eached he ollowing conclusion: ‘O e hal (58%) o execu i es say hei o ganiza ion is guil y o g eenwashing — con eying a alse imp ession o gi ing misleading in o ma ion ha says a company’s p oduc s o p ac ices a e mo e en i onmen ally iendly han hey ac ually a e. This is especially ue in No h Ame ica, whe e 72% o esponden s belie e ha hei o ganiza ion has o e s a ed i s sus ain- abili y e o s’ (Google, 2022, p. 5). The e o e, g een- washing equen ly appea s o be ‘business as usual’, a he han an excep ional case on he ou ski s o he business communi y. The pu pose o his s udy is o analyse g eenwashing h ough he lenses o business model hinking. Ex- an li e a u e on g eenwashing (see e.g. de F ei as Ne o e al., 2020; Siano e al., 2017; Yang e al., 2020) has made signi ican p og ess in ca ego ising di e - en ypes o g eenwashing ‘ alk’, bu has paid less a - en ion o he o igin o he o ganisa ional ‘ac ion’ o which he alk e e s ( o example, supply chain ela- ions, manu ac u ing p ocesses, dis ibu ion, e c.). Exis ing g eenwashing axonomies can bene i om a be e unde s anding o he business a eas ha a e he sou ce o misleading en i onmen al com- munica ion. In his ega d, business model li e a- u e has he po en ial o en ich he g eenwashing deba e by p o iding a amewo k o he unde lying business a chi ec u e ha enables alue c ea ion, alue deli e y, and alue cap u e (Lüdeke-F eund e al., 2020; Os e walde and Pigneu , 2010; Teece, 2010). G eenwashing li e a u e, in u n, can con ib- u e o business model hinking by d awing a en ion o he ple ho a o o ganisa ions wi h inconsis en , unbalanced, and b oken business models. Ul ima e- ly, g eenwashing can be ega ded as an indica o o o ganisa ions ha ail o align hei communica ed alue p oposi ion wi h hei unde lying ans o - ma ion sys em and s akeholde ela ionships. Fu - he mo e, g eenwashing emphasises he lack o anspa ency ha equen ly exis s be ween di e - en business model componen s. In e nal and ex e - nal s akeholde s o en ha e incomple e in o ma ion abou he en i e business model, making i easie o g eenwashe s o make alse claims abou he com- pany’s social and en i onmen al pe o mance. The emainde o his pape is s uc u ed as ollows: The nex sec ion p o ides a gene al in oduc ion o g eenwashing, i s co e cha ac e is ics, and ela- ionship wi h o he heo e ical concep s add essing alk-ac ion disconnec s, such as decoupling (C illy e al., 2016) and co po a e hypoc isy (Higgins e al., 2020). The concep ual in oduc ion is hen used as a sp ingboa d o p opose a new ca ego isa ion o g eenwashing om a business model pe spec i e. The ashion indus y is used as a b ie case example o demons a e he di e en componen s o g een- washing om a business model pe spec i e. The i- nal sec ion summa ises he p ima y indings o he s udy and sugges s u u e di ec ions o g eenwash- ing esea ch. G eenwashing and Rela ed Concep s Ex an li e a u e is di ided on he de ini ion o g eenwashing (Kassinis and Panayio ou, 2018; Seele and Ga i, 2017; Zha peykan, 2021). In gen- e al, g eenwashing can be de ined as he ac o misleading people in o holding a ou able opinions abou an o ganisa ion’s o i s o e ings’ en i on- men al pe o mance (Delmas and Bu bano, 2011; Lyon and Mon gome y, 2015). G eenwashing akes many shapes and o ms, anging om he selec i e use o ague sus ainabili y claims o ou igh lies Jou nal o Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 11-24 13 13 abou a p oduc ’s o an o ganisa ion’s sus ainabili y pe o mance (Gacek, 2020; Lyon and Mon gome y, 2015; Siano e al., 2017). G eenwashing is no an un- in en ional e o , bu a he a delibe a e a emp o mislead s akeholde s. The Volkswagen scandal, in which he manu ac u e manipula ed he emission da a o hei ca s, is a well-known example (Au and e al., 2018; Lane, 2016; Siano e al., 2017). O e he yea s, mo e speci ic ypes o g eenwash- ing ha e eme ged, such as CSR-washing (Pope and Wæ aas, 2016), blue washing (misuse o Uni ed Na- ions Global Compac ; Be line and P akash, 2015), and SDG washing (misuse o SDGs; He as-Saiza - bi o ia e al., 2022). Fu he mo e, o e lapping con- cep s like window-d essing and smoke-sc eening a e some imes used as synonyms o g eenwashing o desc ibe selec i e disclosu e o a ou able en i- onmen al in o ma ion ha ails o p o ide an ac- cu a e accoun o a p oduc ’s o company’s ac ual en i onmen al pe o mance (Pede sen, 2006). Las , schola s ha e coined e ms o desc ibe he an ido e o g eenwashing, which occu s when a company in- en ionally unde -communica es i s en i onmen al p ac ises. Fo ins ance, he concep o b ownwash- ing implies concealing he cos o sus ainabili y ac- i i ies h ough excessi e modes y (Kim and Lyon, 2015). G eenhushing (Fon e al., 2017) and s a egic silence (Ca los and Lewis, 2018) a e wo o he e ms used o desc ibe companies ha unde epo a he han o e epo hei en i onmen al pe o mance. G eenwashing c osses a a ie y o academic dis- ciplines (Lyon and Mon gome y, 2015). Theo e i- cally, se e al o he concep s also add ess he gap be ween o ganisa ional alk and ac ual beha iou . Se e al p e ious s udies ha e examined decoupling, which was i s used o desc ibe how o ganisa ions p o ec ed hei co e ope a ions om ex e nal ex- pec a ions by symbolically adop ing ‘ine icien ’ poli- cies and s uc u es (Meye and Rowan, 1977). In his con ex , decoupling e e s o a disconnec be ween policy and implemen a ion, which allows he o gani- sa ion o con inue daily ope a ions while mee ing a ple ho a o ex e nal expec a ions (B omley and Powell, 2012; Hengs e al., 2020). Decoupling has also been used in he s udy o sus ainabili y and g eenwashing, o example, when oil companies di e a en ion away om c ises and en i onmen- ally ha m ul business ac i i ies (B omley and Pow- ell, 2012; Kassinis and Panayio ou, 2018). Schola s ha e also discussed means-ends decoupling, which occu s when he e is an elemen o consis ency be- ween wha is said and wha is done, bu he la e has li le o do wi h he o ganisa ion’s co e goals and p ocesses (B omley and Powell, 2012). Fas ashion companies, o example, o ganise means-ends de- coupling by compa men alising hei ci cula econ- omy ac i i ies om hei co e business p ac ises (S ål and Co ellec, 2021). Howe e , decoupling can only be desc ibed as g eenwashing when an o gani- sa ion ac i ely ies o mislead s akeholde s abou i s sus ainabili y p ac ises o imp o e epu a ion, a ac esou ces, o hide con o e sial ac i i ies (C illy e al., 2016). Decoupling can also be a esul o si ua ions in which he ela ionships be ween alk and ac ual beha iou is complex, ambiguous, and unce ain, and i is unclea wha ac ions will allow he company o deli e on i s p omises (ibid.). In he wo ds o Hi onaka and Scho e (2002, p. 215): ‘In ce ain cases, decoupling may be he p oduc o s a egic ac ion. Howe e , i may also e lec al uis ic o no ms-based ac ion, o e en incom- pe ence, acciden o chance (…). Whe he o no s a egic ac ion is in ol ed is an empi ical ques- ion, no some hing ha should be p esumed.’ O ganisa ional hypoc isy is ano he s eam o li e a- u e add essing he alk-ac ion disconnec (B un- sson, 1993, 2002). Ex an li e a u e on hypoc isy assumes ha alk-ac ion consis ency is di icul o achie e, o example, due o a lack o knowledge, esou ces, ime, and easibili y (B unsson, 1993). O - ganisa ions a e con on ed wi h mul iple, and no always consis en , s akeholde demands, necessi- a ing he o ganisa ion’s se ing o a ious in e es s h ough a ious ypes o alks and ac ions (Ch is- ensen e al., 2020). Fu he mo e, alke s and doe s may di e in o ganisa ions, esul ing in inconsis - ency in wha is said and done. In he wo ds o B un- sson (1993, p. 496): ‘(…) people who a e ee o exp ess ideas wi hou ha ing o ake ac ion can o en a o d o de end iews ha a e mo e mo al, beau i ul o ue, and less easible, han he iew ha he ac o s ha e o be guided by’. While he e m hypoc isy is commonly Jou nal o Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 11-24 14 14 associa ed wi h a lack o mo al in eg i y, schola s con en ha some inconsis ency be ween alk and ac ion is una oidable and a no mal o ganisa ional p ac ise (Ch is ensen e al., 2020; Higgins e al., 2020). In some cases, hypoc isy may e en c ea e oppo uni ies o change ha would no ha e been possible o he wise (Cho e al., 2015). In summa y, hypoc isy and g eenwashing o e lap only when dis- c epancies be ween alk and ac ion a e oo ed in de- cep i e a emp s o mislead s akeholde s abou he o ganisa ion’s sus ainabili y pe o mance. The e is also a small bu g owing s eam o li e a- u e on o ganisa ional bullshi , which can be de ined as co po a e he o ic ha c ea es a posi i e image o someone o some hing ega dless o he ac ual o ganisa ional eali y. F om being mos ly associ- a ed wi h spoken language, he concep o ‘bullshi ’ has ecen ly been subjec ed o schola ly inqui y in managemen and o ganisa ion li e a u e (Mo gan, 2010; Spice , 2013). A bullshi ing company is dis in- guished by i s gene al dis ega d o he u h and o - ganisa ional eali y (F ank u , 2005; Mo gan, 2010; Spice , 2013). In he wo ds o Spice (p. 657): ‘(…) a good po ion o alk and ex in o ganisa ions seems o be undamen ally ‘emp y’, bea ing li le ela ionship wi h he eali y o wha goes on in he o ganisa ion’. Bullshi can hus be de ined as alk and ex ha is unconce ned wi h u h (Spice , 2013, p. 664). How- e e , no all o ganisa ional bullshi is a delibe a e a emp o mislead i s s akeholde s. Fo ins ance, co po a e ja gons like ‘dis up ion’, ‘ esilience’, and ‘agili y’ a e no always abou plo ing agains o h- e s o onesel . While bullshi ce ainly bene i s he bullshi e , some ’emp y alk’ and ‘ho ai ’ in o gani- sa ions can also be socially accep able codes ha e lec membe ship in a communi y ega dless o i s p oximi y o he u h. Unlike a g eenwashing o - ganisa ion, which in en ionally misleads s akehold- e s abou i s en i onmen al p ac ises, a bullshi ing o ganisa ion is simply unconce ned abou he u h and o ganisa ional eali y (Mo gan, 2010, p. 1577). Ac- co ding o F ank u (2005, p. 13): ‘The ac abou himsel ha he bullshi e hides (…) is ha he u h- alues o his s a emen s a e o no cen al in e es o him; wha we a e no o unde s and is ha his in en ion is nei he o epo he u h no o conceal i . This does no mean ha his speech is ana chically impulsi e, bu ha he mo i e guiding and con olling i is unconce ned wi h how he hings abou which he speaks uly a e.’ In summa y, a numbe o e ms in he managemen and o ganisa ion li e a u e add ess gaps be ween an o ganisa ion’s communica ion and i s ac ual p ac ises. G eenwashing di e s om he concep s desc ibed abo e in ha i ocuses exclusi ely on en i onmen al issues and emphasises delibe a e e o s o mislead cus ome s o o he s akehold- e s. Howe e , as s a ed by Seele and Ga i (2017), g eenwashing canno be ully unde s ood unless he indi iduals o g oups accusing he o ganisa ion o g eenwashing a e aken in o accoun (ac i is s, media, consume agencies, and so on). Jus as one o ganisa ion may ha e an incen i e o g eenwash, ano he o ganisa ion may ha e an incen i e o ac- cuse o he s o g eenwashing, o example, by blam- ing hem o no doing enough o o ailing o ‘walk he alk’. The e o e, a g eenwashing analysis mus conside bo h he accused and he accuse . A Business Model Pe spec i e on G eenwashing Business model hinking o e s an in e es ing pe - spec i e o unde s and g eenwashing and alk- ac ion gaps mo e b oadly. As p e iously s a ed, al hough exis ing g eenwashing axonomies p o ide a de ailed o e iew o di e en ypes o misleading en i onmen al communica ion, hey a ely add ess he connec ion be ween he communica ion and he unde lying business cha ac e is ics (e.g. manu- ac u ing ac i i ies, inpu ma e ials, o supplie e- la ionships). In his ega d, he a ious amewo ks p oposed by ex an li e a u e o con en ional and sus ainable business models can be used o b oad- en he gene al unde s anding o g eenwashing (Johnson e al., 2016; Lüdeke-F eund, 2009; Os e - walde and Pigneu , 2010). These amewo ks sha e he goal o ou lining he undamen al building blocks equi ed o c ea ing, deli e ing, and cap u ing Jou nal o Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 11-24 15 15 alue. Howe e , while he li e a u e on con en ional business models ocuses on he company and i s cus ome ela ionships, he li e a u e on sus ain- able business models adop s a b oade and mo e ho- lis ic app oach, emphasising economic, social, and en i onmen al alue as well as a b oade ange o s akeholde ela ionships (F euden eich e al., 2020; Pede sen e al., 2018). Acco ding o Lüdeke-F eund e al. (2018, p. 147): ‘A sus ainable business model is abou c ea - ing signi ican ly inc eased posi i e e ec s and/ o signi ican ly educed nega i e e ec s o he na u al en i onmen and socie y h ough chang- es in he way a company and i s ne wo k c ea e, deli e , and cap u e alue.’ The inclusion o social and en i onmen al conce ns in o business model hinking has led o he expan- sion and edesign o exis ing business model y- pologies, such as he iple laye ed business model (Joyce and Paquin, 2016), beyond-p o i business models (Os e walde and Pigneu , 2010), and he sus ainable business model can as (Bocken e al., 2018). Acknowledging he di e ences be ween hese amewo ks, we ocus on i e common build- ing blocks: he alue p oposi ion, he cus ome in e ace, he business ans o ma ion sys em, he inance and accoun ing sys em, and he non- ma ke s akeholde en i onmen (Lüdeke-F eund, 2009; Os e walde and Pigneu , 2010). These i e building blocks esemble he co e s uc u al as- pec s o a business model as iden i ied by ex an li e a u e (e.g. Mo is e al., 2005; Pe ic e al., 2017) and allow o he inclusion o social and en i on- men al dimensions. Value p oposi ion is a he hea o any business model, desc ibing how a company’s business ac- i i ies gene a e a se o bene i s o cus ome s and o he s akeholde s (Lüdeke-F eund e al., 2019; Os e walde and Pigneu , 2010, p. 22). In his ega d, companies can engage in g eenwashing by delibe a ely c ea ing a misalignmen be ween he communica ed p omises and he ealised ben- e i s. In simple e ms, he alue p oposi ion does no co espond wi h he unde lying business eali- ies. Cus ome in e ace is conce ned wi h he ela- ionships ha companies o m wi h hei cus ome segmen s. Companies may eso o g eenwashing by a ac ing en i onmen ally conscious cus ome segmen s h ough misleading ma ke ing. The business ans o ma ion sys em includes he in a- s uc u e ha allows an o ganisa ion o ans o m inpu s in o ou pu s. Key esou ces, co e ac i i ies, and s a egic pa ne ships a e he c i ical compo- nen s o he business ans o ma ion sys em (Os- e walde and Pigneu , 2010). The economic, social, and en i onmen al impac s o a business model a e assessed by an o ganisa ion’s inance and ac- coun ing sys em. The impac s include no only he cos s and e enues, bu also he in ended and un- in ended consequences o s akeholde s, socie y, and he en i onmen . O ganisa ions can use his business model block engage in g eenwashing by publishing sus ainabili y epo s ha conceal sig- ni ican en i onmen al impac s in he ups eam supply chain. Finally, he non-ma ke s akeholde en i onmen encompasses all ela ionships ha an o ganisa ion main ains wi h s akeholde s o he han hose di ec ly in ol ed in he co e business ac i i ies. Non-ma ke s akeholde s include egu- la o y au ho i ies, labou ma ke o ganisa ions, communi y g oups, and non-go e nmen al o gani- sa ions. Companies may engage in g eenwashing by exagge a ing hei pa icipa ion in sus ain- abili y ini ia i es (e.g. ce i ica ions, labels, and mul i-s akeholde ini ia i es) ha equi e minimal commi men o co e only a ac ion o business ac i i ies. Figu e 1 depic s how g eenwashing can mani es i sel in a ious componen s o a busi- ness model. A company, o example, can make de- cep i e en i onmen al measu emen s o i s supply chain ac i i ies o mee speci ic s anda d c i e- ia, which can hen be used as inpu in misleading ma ke ing ac i i ies and audulen sus ainabili y epo s. Fu he mo e, a business model is made up o mul iple ac o s who can collabo a e in g een- washing ac i i ies. Fo example, companies can collabo a e wi h business pa ne s o de elop low- le el en i onmen al s anda ds designed o mislead cus ome s and he gene al public. Jou nal o Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 11-24 16 16 Figu e 1: G eenwashing om a business model pe spec i e. ⑦ ⑧ Value p oposi ion Business ans o ma ion sys em Cus ome in e ace Finance and accoun ing sys em Non-ma ke s akeholde en i onmen G eenwashing examples: 4. The company a ac s g een segmen s wi h misleading claims and labels. 5. The company makes i di icul o cus ome s o e alua e he en i onmen al oo p in o he p oduc s and se ices. 6. The company claims sus ainabili y while locking cus ome s in o cos ly ela ionships (e.g. equen upda es and epu chases). G eenwashing examples: 1. The company alsely claims ha ma e ials a e sus ainable. 2. The company only communica es pe iphe al sus ainabili y p ojec s de ached om co e ope a ions. 3. The company ac i ely wi hholds in o ma ion abou he sus ainabili y pe o mance in he supply chain. Company bene i s o s akeholde s Key esou ces Co e ac i i ies S a egic pa ne ships Segmen s Channels Rela ionships P i a e sec o s akeholde s Public sec o s akeholde s Ci il socie y s akeholde s Economic alue Social alue En i onmen al alue ⑥ ① ② ③ ⑤ ④ G eenwashing examples: 7. The company delibe a ely igno es impo an en i onmen al impac s in hei sus ainabili y epo ing. G eenwashing examples: 8. The company subsc ibes o sus ainabili y ce i ica ions and labels wi hou changing pe o mance Figu e 1: G eenwashing om a business model pe spec i e. Jou nal o Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 11-24 17 17 Case example: G eenwashing in he ashion indus y The ashion indus y is a high-p o ile, consume goods sec o wi h a signi ican social and en i onmen- al oo p in (Pede sen and Ande sen, 2015; Pede sen e al., 2018). The ashion indus y has engaged in a wide ange o social and en i onmen al ini ia i es o e he yea s, including expe imen s wi h new ma- e ials, de elopmen o new ake-back sys ems, and es ing o new ashion en al models (A igo, 2022; H ass and Pede sen, 2019). Despi e hese e o s, non-go e nmen al o ganisa ions, jou nalis s, public agencies and communi y g oups con inue o accuse ashion b ands o g eenwashing. In e ms o he alue p oposi ion, he concep o sus ainable ashion has been ejec ed by some s ake- holde s as an oxymo on o a con adic ion. Speci ically, he as ashion business model has been de- sc ibed as incompa ible wi h he concep o sus ainabili y. The e o e, G eenpeace Ge many (among o he s) calls o he ashion indus y o ‘slow he low’, con ending ha ashion b ands a e ‘hijacking ci cula i y o g eenwashing’ and s a ing ha , ‘small pilo p ojec s and ancy ci cula “ oken” p oduc s, used mainly o ma ke ing pu poses o e en g eenwashing, a e no enough and will no make a di e - ence’ (G eenpeace Ge many, 2021, p. 24-25). In e ms o he business ans o ma ion sys em, ashion b ands ha e o en been c i icised o he lack o anspa ency ega ding hei supply chain and misleading claims abou he sus ainabili y o hei p od- uc s. Fo ins ance, a company like Canada Goose has been unde a ack o decei ing consume s abou hei u and apping me hods (Bu ns, 2012). Fu he mo e, due o a disconnec be ween i s sus ainabil- i y commi men s and co e business ac i i ies, he Chinese online as ashion e aile SHEIN has been accused o social o se ing (Ka aosman and Ma shall, 2022). In e ms o cus ome in e ace, ashion b ands ha e equen ly been accused o making misleading sus- ainabili y claims o consume s. Fo example, he No wegian Consume Agency (NCA) cha ged H&M wi h misleading ma ke ing o hei ‘conscious collec ion’ (NRK, 2019). Ano he company being accused o g eenwashing is Zalando, an online ashion pla o m ha has been c i icised o using sus ainabili y labels (ASHIFT, 2021). In e ms o he inance and accoun ing sys em, ashion b ands’ epo s can be opaque and only dis- close pa ial in o ma ion. Fo ins ance, a ashion b and may employ ques ionable me hods o assess he en i onmen al impac o hei ope a ions. Fo example, when he NCA banned he use o Higg Index ‘sus ainabili y p o iles’ in consume ma ke ing, he ques ion o how o accoun o sus ainabili y was b ough o he o e on (Shend unk, 2022). In e ms o non-ma ke s akeholde en i onmen , ashion b ands may o e sell ce i ica ions and pa ne ships wi h public and p i a e pa ne s, despi e doing li le o ensu e sus ainabili y in hei business ac i i ies. Fo ins ance, he Changing Ma ke s Founda ion (CMF) examined 10 common ce - i ica ion schemes and concluded: ‘As he ashion indus y is one o he leas egula ed sec o s in he wo ld, hese schemes pa ially exis as a genuine a emp o mo e owa ds sus ainabili y in he absence o en i onmen al legisla ion. Bu hey also enable he p oli e a ion o “g eenwashing” on a ema kable scale.’ (CMF, 2022, p. 9). Jou nal o Business Models (2023), Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 11-24 18 18 G eenwashing, om a business model pe spec i e, is a delibe a e misalignmen be ween he communica ed alue p oposi ion and he unde lying building blocks o he business model. G eenwashing o ganisa ions challenge he assump ions abou logic, consis ency, and cohe ence ha equen ly unde pin business model hinking. Ideal business models po ay com- panies as ha ing a cohe en logic and a easonable i be ween hei a ious building blocks. A emp s o o mula e business model a che ypes, ypologies, and con igu a ions become mo e di icul when an o ganisa ion’s business model is impe ec , unbal- anced, and b oken. A business model ha assumes consis ency be ween indi idual building blocks, how- e e , may ail o e lec he ac ual complexi y and ambigui y ha cha ac e ise eal-li e o ganisa ions. As discussed ea lie , g eenwashing appea s o be he no m a he han he excep ion. Ex an li e a u e on g eenwashing, decoupling, hypoc isy, and o ganisa- ional bullshi conside companies as less in eg a ed and mo e agmen ed han business model schola s assume. Mo e esea ch in o impe ec business mod- els wi h inconsis ency be ween he a ious business model componen s could bene i he business model li e a u e in he u u e. The co e elemen s o g eenwashing also p o ide c i ical insigh s in o business models in p ac ise. In a g eenwashing company, decision-make s acknowl- edge he impo ance o social and en i onmen al is- sues and how hey bene i s akeholde s. O he wise, hey would ha e no eason o exagge a e he com- pany’s social and en i onmen al pe o mance. The ac o g eenwashing he e demons a es how he co e o a business model, he alue p oposi ion, can eas- ily be manipula ed. Fu he mo e, g eenwashing indi- ca es ha , in he eyes o some decision-make s, he pe cei ed cos s o deli e ing on g een p omises o s akeholde s ou weigh he bene i s. O he wise, hey would keep hei p omises o he s akeholde s a he han decei e hem. The widesp ead use o g een- washing sends he oubling message ha many ac- o s ind he business model o g eenwashing mo e appealing han he business model o sus ainabili y. Mo eo e , g eenwashing occu s when decision-mak- e s a e con iden ha s akeholde s will no de ec hei oppo unis ic beha iou . I decision-make s we e awa e ha he g eenwashing would be exposed, hey would be less likely o engage in hese ac i i ies. In his ega d, g eenwashing d aws a en ion o he ac ha ew ac o s ha e a comple e unde s anding o he en i e business model, including he supply chain, business ope a ions, accoun ing p ac ises, and cus- ome ela ions. A lack o anspa ency abou he ‘ eal’ business model c ea es a conduci e a mosphe e o g eenwashing. Acco ding o Mag e a (2002, p. 4), a business model is essen ially a s o y abou how an o ganisa ion wo ks. G eenwashing companies u n he business model in o ic ion by ab ica ing he link be ween he alue p oposi ion and he unde lying o - ganisa ional in as uc u e o imp ess s akeholde s. Conclusions G eenwashing companies ail o keep hei sus ain- abili y p omises o hei s akeholde s. Based on ex- is ing ypologies in he business model li e a u e, we p opose a new amewo k o ca ego ising alk- ac ion disconnec s ega ding sus ainabili y issues in his s udy. G eenwashing can be conside ed as an indica o o o ganisa ions wi h b oken business models ha delibe a ely decouple di e en business model componen s. In gene al, his s udy d aws a - en ion o o ganisa ions wi h inconsis en business models, which appea o be a common occu ence in he con ex o co po a e sus ainabili y. Whe he he alk-ac ion disconnec is a delibe - a e a emp o mislead o he s (i.e. g eenwashing) o a consequence o some hing else is an empi ical ques ion ha emains a majo challenge o g een- washing esea ch, which is complica ed by a num- be o measu emen issues (Hummel and Fes l-Pell, 2015). Se e al empi ical s udies on g eenwashing a e e ospec i e and based on con en analysis o co po a e communica ions (Lyon and Mon gome y, 2015, p. 231). Speci ically, schola s s uggle o g asp he in en ional componen o g eenwashing. O he concep s used o desc ibe alk-ac ion disc epancies a e easie o ope a ionalise as hey do no equi e knowledge o he mo i a ion unde lying he alk-ac- ion disconnec s. Mo e esea ch in o he p ac ise o g eenwashing is equi ed in he u u e, e en hough his will be a di icul ask as g eenwashing compa- nies seldom p o ide access o he o ganisa ion.