Is Greenwashing Dead? Welcome to the Age of Greenhushing

If you've ever second-guessed a sustainability claim before hitting 'publish', you're not alone.

This blog is for ESG leads, sustainability and supply chain managers, who are stuck in a now-familiar dilemma: speak up and risk being accused of greenwashing, or stay silent and risk being overlooked or worse, distrusted.

As ESG regulations tighten and stakeholder expectations rise, this isn’t just a messaging issue - it’s a strategic one. In this piece, we explore why greenhushing is on the rise, what it signals, and how your organisation can navigate the pressure to communicate less without disappearing altogether.

In the world of corporate sustainability, we’ve shifted from one extreme to another. For years, companies proudly advertised their environmental efforts, sometimes stretching the truth with a bit of greenwashing - the practice of overstating or misrepresenting sustainability credentials is under fire like never before. Regulators are cracking down on vague environmental claims, watchdogs are calling out half-truths, and consumers are asking harder questions. As one industry expert put it, “the era of unspecific environmental claims is over.”

But instead of leading to better transparency, that pressure has created something else: silence.

Across industries, companies are pulling back. ESG goals are being met, but not marketed. Climate action is happening, but off the record. Teams are choosing not to talk about their sustainability progress at all, fearing scrutiny, politicisation, or being labelled disingenuous.

It is not that greenwashing is gone. It is that a new response has taken its place.

Not long ago, corporate sustainability talk was full of grand promises - “100% natural,” “carbon neutral,” “eco-friendly”,  often with little proof. Those days are fast waning. Greenwashing has not died of natural causes; it is being killed off by regulation and consumer scepticism. In the UK, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) rolled out a strict Green Claims Code to ensure businesses prove their environmental claims. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has been quick to enforce it - high-profile examples include ads from major banks and airlines banned for glossing over their fossil fuel involvement.

Over in the EU, lawmakers are going even further. In March 2023, the European Commission proposed a Green Claims Directive to clamp down on exaggerated claims.

Making false environmental promises now carries real consequences - fines, reputational damage, and a loss of public trust.

Caught between rising disclosure standards and fear of backlash, some companies are choosing a different tactic: saying nothing at all. This approach, known as greenhushing, is when organisations deliberately withhold their sustainability initiatives from public view, often to avoid criticism or heightened scrutiny. Rather than risk being called out, companies stay silent, even when making genuine progress.

It is not an irrational response. In today’s polarised climate, any ESG claim can be dissected or politicised. Some leaders fear their goals will be judged as too little or their methods picked apart. Others avoid appearing overly progressive or risk backlash for not going far enough. The result: climate targets are met quietly, and positive impact stays off the record.

Globally, South Pole’s 2022 report found that one in four companies with science-based emission targets do not plan to publicise them.

When even industry leaders pull back from communicating progress, it creates a vacuum. Stakeholders are left guessing. And without visible role models, the entire ecosystem loses momentum.

So what is the answer? It is not louder greenwashing or complete silence. It is clear, honest communication, backed by credible data.

The tools to do this well already exist. Established frameworks such as TCFD, GRI and SBTi provide guidance. Verified metrics and third-party audits help build confidence. By leaning on these structures, companies can report with rigour and clarity, avoiding the traps of both overstatement and silence. Transparent communication signals confidence. It shows that you know where you stand, where you're heading, and that you're serious about the work ahead. Even imperfect disclosure, when honest, builds far more trust than silence.

For sustainability and ESG professionals, it is worth taking a step back and evaluating your organisation’s approach. Are you at risk of either greenwashing or greenhushing? Below is a quick self-checklist. These five questions will help you reflect on common challenges and ensure you are on the right track toward credible, confident ESG reporting:

Reflecting on these questions can highlight gaps in your current ESG strategy. If some of your answers make you uncomfortable, that is a sign to dig deeper. The good news: every one of these challenges is solvable with the right approach, tools, and mindset.

Greenwashing is not quite dead, but it is on life support, and good riddance to it. Greenhushing, meanwhile, is understandable as a reflex, but it is not a viable long-term solution. The organisations that will thrive in this new era are those that embrace authenticity, data-driven reporting, and measured transparency. Rather than shouting unverified claims or retreating into silence, they will quietly put in the work and let credible disclosures build their reputation over time.

For sustainability teams feeling caught between saying too much and not saying anything at all, it is worth remembering that you do not have to navigate this landscape alone. This is where partnering with the right experts can make all the difference

By grounding your sustainability strategy in solid data and clear-eyed honesty (with a nudge of expert support when needed), you can step out of the shadow of greenhushing and tell your story responsibly.

Ultimately, the death of greenwashing and the rise of greenhushing point to the same lesson: integrity in sustainability communications is paramount. Those who heed this lesson will not only avoid the pitfalls of ESG missteps, they will also build trust with their stakeholders and drive genuine impact. And that, at the end of the day, is what sustainable business is all about.

Obtaining precise emissions data may seem simple, but it's actually a challenging puzzle. One big problem? Reports from different industries are inconsistent. Different sources contribute to emissions, and not all companies have access to real-time monitoring technologies. Not every business can afford the cooperation and equipment needed to collect accurate data. Transparency is further complicated by the fact that Scope 3 emissions frequently involve several third parties. In order to resolve this, industries must collaborate, use more transparent tracking techniques, and support laws that enable data collecting. It’s a challenge, but better data means smarter climate strategies.

Now that we understand the framework for emissions, the methods to collect data, and the regulations, the next step is reduction.

Net zero is a state of equilibrium where the amount of carbon emitted into the environment is equal to the amount removed. Achieving this balance requires a strategic approach that addresses emissions across all greenhouse gas emission scopes – direct, indirect, and supply chain-related.

Trying to reach net zero without breaking emissions into Scope 1, 2, and 3 is like trying to navigate with your eyes closed. Without this clear categorisation, companies can’t see the full picture of where their emissions are coming from. That means efforts get unfocused. Businesses might tackle only what’s obvious, missing bigger, hidden sources of emissions. When that happens, true net zero becomes nearly impossible to achieve. As the World Economic Forum emphasises, “Urgent and coordinated global action is needed within the next decade to combat the growing climate change threat.”

Categorising anything improves efficiency, and emissions are no exception. Dividing GHG protocol emissions into Scope 1, 2, and 3 gives businesses the clarity they need to tackle their carbon footprint effectively. Each scope tells a different part of the story, and all are critical in their own way.

Of course, making sense of all that data, and turning it into measurable action, can be complex. KarbonWise makes it easier. With our integrated tools, you can simplify emissions tracking, improve data accuracy, and build a strategy-aligned path to net zero.

Ready to see the difference organised, reliable data can make?