A new communications guide is urging companies to speak more openly about their sustainability efforts, as experts warn that a growing trend of “greenhushing” risks undermining corporate climate action.
Launched by advertising network Creatives for Climate and non-profit business network B Lab, the “greenshouting” guide aims to help brands communicate sustainability progress confidently and credibly at a time when many firms are pulling back from public disclosures.
The guide comes amid rising concern that corporate silence is allowing misinformation to spread and slowing momentum on sustainability.
“When responsible voices go quiet, less credible narratives fill the space,” said Maria Correa, strategic advisor at Creatives for Climate, during a webinar marking the launch.
Corporate sustainability communications have faced increasing scrutiny in recent years, driven by concerns over greenwashing – where companies overstate environmental claims. This has distorted markets, delayed meaningful action and eroded public trust, Correa said.
“
We cannot claim to be a sustainable company. The best we can do is to be responsible.
Corley Kenna, chief impact and communications officer, Patagonia
The sustainability ‘doom loop’ – reduced communication lowers public awareness, weakens the perceived value of sustainability, and ultimately dampens investment and impact [click to enlarge]
But speakers argued that the pendulum may now be swinging too far in the opposite direction. After years of a “purpose boom”, some companies are opting to say less about sustainability to avoid criticism – a trend known as greenhushing.
Correa warned this is creating a “doom loop”: reduced communication lowers public awareness, weakens the perceived value of sustainability, and ultimately dampens investment and impact.
“That silence is creating a void where misinformation spreads faster than truth,” she said. “It transfers power, dismantles accountability and quietly stalls systemic change.”
This retreat is happening despite pockets of progress. Around 85 per cent of the world’s largest companies are still expanding sustainability efforts, while 89 per cent of people globally want stronger corporate climate action, figures shared during the webinar showed. Separately, Eric Lim of United Overseas Bank said last year that talk of an “ESG backlash” has not slowed the growth of sustainable finance in Asia.
Greenshouting ‘dials’
Tom Tapper, co-founder of United Kingdom-based creative agency Nice and Serious, outlined various “dials” of greenshouting, or methods for communicating sustainability effectively. These include:
Simplicity
Avoid technical jargon. Clear, accessible language builds trust and engagement.
Abundance
Focus on what sustainability enables – better products, experiences or value – rather than what consumers must sacrifice.
Culture
Align messages with current cultural moments to increase relevance and reach.
Disruption
Challenge industry norms where appropriate, especially when offering tangible solutions.
Greenhushing to greenshouting
The guide introduces “greenshouting” as a tool to overcome greenhushing, defined as communicating efforts “openly, accurately and courageously”, said Sarah Schwimmer, co-lead executive at B Lab.
“If greenwashing is saying more than you are actually doing, and greenhushing is doing a lot without talking about it, then greenshouting is simply telling compelling stories about what you are doing right now,” she said.
The guide includes case studies, legal guidance and tools to help companies navigate sustainability communications while avoiding exaggerated claims.
Schwimmer suggested that sustainability communication is becoming as important as policy or innovation in driving climate action.
“From now until 2030, pro-climate narratives will matter as much as policy or innovation. This [greenshouting] is so much more about a communication choice. It’s a collective influence and resilience strategy,” Correa said.
Andy Wilson, founder of Singapore-based consultancy Early Majority and former sustainability lead at Ogilvy Asia, said the greenshouting framework is particularly relevant in Asia, where companies have been integrating sustainability into products and operations but have been reluctant to communicate progress.
“It shifts the dialogue from future commitments like net zero 2050 to tangible progress,” Wilson said, adding that the guide should encourage brands that have made real progress to communicate their wins with confidence.
However, he cautioned that the term “greenshouting” could be misinterpreted by businesses as encouraging over-claiming. “From a marketing perspective, ‘shouting’ might be seen as over-credentialising,” he told Eco-Business, noting that this could deter more cautious firms in the region.
Vulnerability cuts through
Case studies shared during the webinar highlighted honesty and transparency as a strategy to cut through the risk of greenwashing.
Companies that communicate both progress and shortcomings, such as outdoor gear brand Patagonia, tend to build stronger credibility, experts said. This includes publishing detailed impact reports, sharing data and acknowledging criticism.
Patagonia’s head of impact and communications Corley Kenna noted that imperfection is part of its communications approach.
Patagonia’s “Worn Wear” campaign encourages customers to trade in their used garments. Image: Patagonia
“We are a complicated and messy company – and we are the first ones to say that. But being open, honest and humble about where we’ve missed the mark is an important part of what makes us a little bit better.”
“It’s also how we help to push our industry and the business community forward,” she said.
Patagonia is seen as a benchmark for how brands communicate sustainability, building a reputation around transparency, activism and consistency between claims and action.
Patagonia’s ‘Don’t buy this jacket’ campaign listed the environmental impacts of buying the garment. Image: Patagonia
The company, which famously urged its consumers ‘Don’t buy this jacket’ in a campaign in 2011, regularly uses its platform to advocate for environmental causes. Last Black Friday sales season in November, it donated 100 per cent of its sales to environmental groups. It also campaigns for the protection of public lands in the United States.
Kenna suggested that speaking openly about sustainability is not a risk for brands with credible claims. “Greenshouting is good business,” she said, arguing that customers increasingly expect brands to take visible, values-driven positions.
At a time when consumers feel systems are failing them, companies going quiet on climate only deepens scepticism rather than protects reputations, she said.
Another brand that is well known for its sustainability communications is snack brand Tony’s Chocolonely, which claims to be “an impact company that makes chocolate”.
The company’s sustainability lead Chris Oskum said the brand tackles heavy topics – poverty, child labour and deforestation in the cocoa supply chain – but avoids dry or overly technical messaging.
Key to its communications is its “Fair Report,” which combines financial performance, data and progress against impact goals. Oskam said that even this detailed, “nitty gritty” report is designed to be engaging and on-brand, rather than dense and inaccessible.
While transparent about challenges in the cocoa sector, Tony’s Chocolonely avoids overly negative framing. Its approach combines transparent reporting, positive storytelling and a sense of agency, showing audiences how they can contribute to its mission of ending exploitation in the cocoa supply chain.
You are enjoying free access to this article, thanks to the support of our strategic partner, National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre (NVPC) and the Company of Good.
Join the movement of leaders shaping impact. Find out more about what it takes to be nationally recognised as a Company of Good.
