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.