Most of us have at one time or another popped something into our recycling bin in the hope that it will be recycled. I know I have. It’s called ‘wishcycling’ – and no, it doesn’t really help those who are trying to process the millions of tonnes of rubbish into something useful again.
The phrase came to mind this week as the term greenwishing started to creep through my socials. Greenwashing we have all heard of, but what on earth is greenwishing?
The definition is becoming more widely used, with sustainability platform, Greenly, summing it up as “often used by companies which have altered their business models to be in line with green ethics, but in a mindless manner – meaning the company has set unrealistic goals for themselves.”
Other definitions suggest that greenwishing is “unintentional greenwashing” – for example where a company hopes to meet certain sustainability commitments but, in reality, does not have the ability to do so…. think of it as a mix of blue sky thinking and greenwashing.
Greenwishing is driven by the pressure to set ambitious sustainability goals – companies can find themselves committing to targets that they cannot realistically achieve, perhaps because of financial, technological, or organisational constraints.
Which explains why the term keeps cropping up. Glasgow hosted the global climate talks (COP26) in 2021 at which there was a surge in climate commitments made by companies. For a few weeks my inbox was cluttered with media statements from companies who had made new lofty promises to the planet.
Four years on and the wheels have mostly come off as businesses wonder how on earth they can manage the first checkpoint on this ‘race to net-zero’ – significant reductions to their total greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. That’s only five years away and most of the so-called ‘big food’ companies and supermarkets are (well) off track.
Thirst for change
Later this summer, Wicked Leeks will be revisiting the supermarket’s pledges and progress. However, it’s the manufacturers that are setting the pace – in back-pedalling. In December, Coca-Cola announced changes to a range of green targets – the one for reductions in carbon had vanished and when it does reappear the deadline will be five years further into the future. Its much-hyped target on reusable packaging has also been binned (packaging is responsible for a fair chunk of greenhouse gas emissions for drinks companies).
“I would say we should be disappointed,” Richard Wielechowski, lead analyst on petrochemicals and plastics at Planet Tracker, an NGO, said of Coca-Cola’s – and before them Unilever’s – U-turns. “We should interrogate the reasoning. Is it all just profit-driven or greenwashing? Or is it that they’re ambitious and the ambitions have just not been fulfilled?” he asked during an Innovation Forum webinar earlier this year.
If the answer is both, then maybe it is actually greenwishing. Chief sustainability officers I speak to tell me how much pressure there had been from their board to commit to carbon reductions simply because their competitors were. This drove momentum and it was a dream for campaigners and investors alike. “[…] after COP26 I couldn’t imagine a better place to be than in asset management – matching capital with the commitments made”, said Macquarie Asset Management CSO Kristina Kloberdanz in an interview with EY.
Since then the mood has changed. Net zero is a bit of a nightmare. Cost of living. Geopolitics. War. (Renewed) climate scepticism. All have played their part as more companies follow Unilever and Coca-Cola’s lead and slow down or U-turn. They’ve also woken up to the scale of change needed and that to achieve net zero you must ensure everyone involved – from farm to fork – plays their part in reviving biodiversity, regenerating soil, and mitigating climate change.
For companies built on increased sales of (largely) unhealthy foods, made at the cheapest possible price and packaged in single-use materials (think companies like Coca-Cola and PepsiCo) is it a leap too far?
PepsiCo’s PR bubble pops
The maker of Doritos, Gatorade, Quaker Oats and of course Pepsi, is the latest corporate food and drink behemoth to crush hopes that this decade represented a watershed moment in the fight against climate change and the start of a new circular approach to packaging.
Last month, PepsiCo “refined” its environmental targets. Like Coca-Cola it has also dropped its reusable packaging target and watered down the ones relating to use of recycled plastic. Its net-zero deadline is now 10 years later (2050) and the carbon reductions have all been altered. They are still aligned with science-based targets to reduce emissions by 1.5C but there is an awful lot of work for the company to do to get there.
Looking at its new climate transition plan PepsiCo’s total greenhouse gas emissions in 2022 – its new baseline for reductions – were a little over 40MtCO2e. Factoring in company growth those will jump by around 10% come 2030, but it has committed to bring them down to closer to 25MtCO2e by then.
That’s some leap, so do we have faith in the fizzy drinks giant? Looking at its last reported emissions in 2023, which show they had fallen just 4% since 2015, my glass of cola is definitely half empty.
Indeed, the big food and drink manufacturers are relying heavily on regenerative agriculture (which opens up another can of greenwashed worms, as reported by Wicked Leeks in November last year) to help meet their reduction targets. PepsiCo sources more than 35 crops – including potatoes, corn and oats – from 60 countries, and farming makes up over a third of its total carbon emissions. “We estimate that regenerative agricultural efforts in partnership with farmers in our supply chain have the potential to eliminate at least 3 million metric tons of GHG emissions [3MtCo2e] by the end of the decade,” PepsiCo said.
Is that wishful thinking too?
This is the first in our WL GLOSSARY series by regular contributor, David Burrows, which looks to break down the woolly, misleading, and mendacious terms, language & logos in our food system – and provide citizens with information that they can use to make more empowered choices.
In the midst of all this doom and gloom about the environment, here in France, major supermarkets started an 18 month trial of the old trusted glass bottle system with a deposit. They have installed huge containers in the car parks where you return the bottles and get your refund. Have to say it’s a great feeling of doing something for the planet by hardly without lifting a finger ! Also worth mentioning that drinks are much cooler from glass bottles and keep cool for longer.