Sustainability has become a crucial focus for individuals and organizations alike, as efforts to protect the environment and address climate change continue to grow. Alongside these efforts, various terms and concepts have emerged, reflecting different approaches, challenges, and behaviors related to sustainability practices.

In this blog, we will explore three key terms that have gained prominence in the context of sustainability—pencucian hijau, greenhushingdan greenwishing.

What is Greenwashing?

Pencucian hijau occurs when a company or organization makes misleading claims about the environmental benefits of its products, services, or practices. This is typically done to present a more environmentally-conscious image to consumers, investors, or the general public. However, these claims are often exaggerated, unsubstantiated, or even false, creating a disconnect between stated intentions and actual sustainability efforts.

The motivations behind greenwashing are often linked to the growing demand for environmentally sustainable products and services. With consumers increasingly prioritizing sustainability in their purchasing decisions, businesses may use greenwashing as a marketing strategy to attract this audience without implementing genuine eco-friendly changes. This not only undermines trust but also hampers progress toward meaningful environmental solutions.

Examples of greenwashing can be seen in areas like vague product labeling, the use of terms such as “natural” or “eco-friendly” without evidence, or promoting minor sustainability efforts to overshadow harmful business practices. Recognizing and addressing greenwashing is key to ensuring transparency and fostering accountability, ultimately driving real progress in sustainability.

Here are some common signs of a company which is greenwashing:

• Lack of transparency in sourcing or production practices.
• No independent certifications or verifications for claims.
• Highlighting one small green feature (e.g., recyclable packaging) while ignoring significant environmental impacts (e.g., high carbon emissions from production).
• Overstating the environmental benefits of products or services without clear evidence or documentation.
• Not producing or publishing sustainability reports that adhere to recognized frameworks like GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) atau SASB (Dewan Standar Akuntansi Keberlanjutan).

Regulators Against Greenwashing

Greenwashing has become a major concern for regulators worldwide as it undermines transparency and investor trust. In response, authorities are implementing stricter rules to ensure companies disclose accurate ESG data and hold those making misleading claims accountable. These efforts aim to improve the quality of sustainability reporting and reduce the risks associated with inflated or unverifiable ESG claims.

In the United States, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has introduced measures like the “Names Rule,” requiring 80% of a fund’s assets to align with its ESG-related name [1]. Proposed climate disclosure rules would also integrate ESG reporting into financial statements, subjecting them to audits for greater accountability. These initiatives seek to minimize vague or misleading sustainability claims.

In Europe, the Peraturan Pengungkapan Keuangan Berkelanjutan (SFDR) requires financial products to classify their ESG ambitions, providing investors with clearer comparisons using standardized impact indicators. Similarly, the United Kingdom’s Sustainability Disclosure Requirements [2], influenced by the Satuan Tugas Pengungkapan Keuangan Terkait Iklim (TCFD), aim to improve ESG reporting and transition planning. Together, these frameworks represent a global push toward transparency and credible sustainability claims.

What is Greenhushing?

Greenhushing refers to the deliberate underreporting or withholding of information about a company’s sustainability practices or environmental goals. Unlike greenwashing, which involves exaggerating or fabricating claims, greenhushing occurs when organizations stay silent about their efforts, often to avoid scrutiny, criticism, or accusations of not doing enough. This practice can stem from fear of public backlash or regulatory challenges if their initiatives are perceived as inadequate or inconsistent.

While greenhushing may seem harmless, it creates significant challenges for transparency and accountability. By keeping sustainability efforts private, companies make it harder for stakeholders—such as investors, consumers, and regulators—to assess their environmental impact or compare their actions against industry benchmarks. This lack of disclosure undermines collective progress toward sustainability goals, as it restricts access to valuable data that could drive innovation, collaboration, and industry-wide improvements.

Greenhushing also poses risks for companies themselves. In an era where consumers and investors increasingly demand transparency, staying silent can lead to reputational damage or missed opportunities to demonstrate leadership in sustainability. Moreover, as regulations like the Petunjuk Pelaporan Keberlanjutan Perusahaan (CSRD) and others mandate detailed ESG disclosures, companies that engage in greenhushing may struggle to meet compliance requirements, facing penalties or loss of stakeholder trust.

What is Greenwishing?

Greenwishing refers to the practice of setting overly ambitious sustainability goals without having a realistic plan or the necessary resources to achieve them. While it often stems from genuine intentions to address environmental or social challenges, greenwishing can mislead stakeholders by creating an unrealistic picture of a company’s commitment to sustainability. This can result in unmet expectations and harm the credibility of the organization.

One key characteristic of greenwishing is the announcement of aspirational goals, such as achieving nol bersih emissions or adopting circular supply chains, without a clear roadmap, measurable targets, or progress updates. These lofty objectives may sound promising but often lack the strategic planning and operational changes required to make them achievable. This creates a gap between intention and execution, leaving stakeholders uncertain about the company’s actual environmental impact.

Greenwishing can hinder real progress in sustainability. By focusing on distant, vague goals instead of actionable short-term steps, companies risk prioritizing aspirations over tangible results. This not only delays meaningful change but can also lead to resource misallocation, as efforts may be spent promoting aspirations rather than implementing practical solutions.

For companies, greenwishing also carries reputational and regulatory risks. As stakeholders and regulators increasingly demand accountability and transparency in ESG practices, failing to demonstrate progress toward announced goals can result in loss of trust and compliance challenges. To avoid greenwishing, organizations must align their ambitions with realistic plans, measurable metrics, and ongoing transparency.

Greenwashing vs. Greenhushing vs. Greenwishing: Key Differences Summarize

Understanding the distinctions between greenwashing, greenhushing, and greenwishing is essential for businesses striving to build genuine and sustainable ESG strategies. Below are summarized key differences:

Term	Definisi	Key Characteristics	Risks/Implications
Pencucian hijau	Misleading stakeholders about the environmental benefits of a company’s actions or products.	Overstating or fabricating sustainability claims without substantive actions to back them.	Loss of trust, reputational damage, potential legal and regulatory consequences.
Greenhushing	Deliberately under-communicating sustainability efforts to avoid scrutiny or backlash.	Avoiding public discourse about environmental initiatives despite pursuing them internally.	Missed opportunities for stakeholder engagement and diminished transparency, which may lead to skepticism.
Greenwishing	Setting ambitious sustainability goals without realistic plans for achieving them.	Aspirational commitments to ESG practices that lack feasible and actionable strategies or measurable progress.	Reputational risk, loss of stakeholder trust, and challenges in regulatory compliance for unfulfilled goals.

How to Communicate Sustainability Effectively?

To ensure sustainability efforts are meaningful and well-received, it is crucial to align communication strategies with actionable goals and transparent practices:

• Deliver Unified and Cohesive Messages: Ensure that all sustainability-related communications, from reports to marketing materials, align seamlessly. Consistency in language and intent strengthens your credibility and eliminates potential confusion.
• Refine and Tailor Your Messaging: Continuously assess your sustainability messages for clarity, accuracy, and relevance. Customize content for your target audience to make it engaging while staying authentic and transparent.
• Emphasize Accountability and Progress: Highlight your sustainability progress with specific milestones and results, and commit to regular updates. Transparency about ongoing improvements reinforces your dedication to long-term goals.
• Focus on Authentic Engagement: Share meaningful insights into your sustainability journey, including the challenges you face. By being open about both successes and hurdles, you foster trust and encourage stakeholders to engage constructively.
• Showcase Impact Over Intentions: Shift the focus from promises to tangible results. Highlight the measurable environmental and social impacts of your sustainability initiatives, demonstrating accountability and building credibility with stakeholders.

Pikiran Akhir

Navigating the complexities of sustainable practices involves striking a balance between ambition and authenticity. Avoiding pitfalls like greenwashing, where claims are exaggerated or unsubstantiated, is essential for maintaining trust. Equally, greenhushing—silence about sustainability efforts—can prevent meaningful engagement and hinder progress. Meanwhile, greenwishing, where intentions outpace concrete action, underscores the importance of aligning goals with achievable results. By fostering transparency, measurable impact, and genuine dialogue with stakeholders, organizations can build credibility and truly contribute to a more sustainable future.

Referensi:

[1] https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2023-188

[2] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sustainability-disclosure-requirements-implementation-update-2024