Today, it’s not enough to look sustainable. You have to be sustainable. And prove it.
Brands that decorate their campaigns with words like “eco,” “carbon neutral,” “conscious,” or “planet-friendly” without real actions to back them up are fueling a problem far worse than a weak campaign: greenwashing. This green façade not only erodes public trust—it slows real progress, discredits genuine efforts, and deepens collective cynicism. As Alba Guzmán, Creative Director at ROSAPARKS, puts it: “Exaggerating your role in the solution is a way to sabotage the credibility of the entire sector.” Below, we explore real-world cases identified as greenwashing—many of them discussed by Alba Guzmán during the Impact Talk hosted by Devera—and what we can learn from them to avoid making the same mistakes.

Coca-Cola: 100% recycled? Not quite.

Where’s the problem? In extreme simplification. By failing to explain the real conditions of recycling, the brand sends a misleading message: that buying the bottle is a circular, impact-free act—when it’s not.
As Pablo Sánchez from Skills4Impact points out:

“Only sharing what’s going well isn’t transparency. What builds trust is also showing what’s missing, what’s not working.”

Adidas: climate goals without a roadmap

Adidas announced its plan to be climate neutral by 2050. The issue? No explanation of how, no roadmap, and no measurable actions.

These kinds of declarations—with no public plan, no metrics, no visible progress—come across as empty promises. In an era of climate crisis, storytelling without storydoing is obvious… and penalized.
Max Bensimon, purpose and sustainability expert, sums it up:

“The true value of an impact-driven brand lies in what it does, not what it says.”

KLM and Ryanair: “fewer emissions”… without saying how

Both airlines claimed to be “the least polluting,” but failed to back it up with clear data, methods, or context. Regulatory authorities in several countries have already fined such messages for being misleading.

This case reflects a common pattern: claiming “we’re more sustainable” without saying in what way, compared to what, or based on what source.
Today’s consumers aren’t satisfied with labels—they want facts, clarity, and traceability.
As Sébastien Borreani from Devera explained at the event:

“Only if we decode climate data properly can we make responsible decisions. Sustainability needs data people can understand.”

MSC Cruises: fossil fuels with a green marketing spin

MSC promoted its liquefied natural gas (LNG) fleet as “clean and responsible,” even though LNG is a fossil fuel that emits large amounts of methane—one of the most harmful greenhouse gases.

There was no direct lie, but key information was left out. Omitting relevant truths is also greenwashing. It’s easier to talk about tech progress than about the ongoing harm.
Pedro Olazabal of Zubi Group made a powerful point:

“Sustainability is like a river: you can place stones in it, but the water keeps flowing. Even if there’s progress, if it’s not communicated honestly, it floods with distrust.”

Primark: future plans framed as current achievements

Primark announced its commitment to equality and inclusion as if it were already a reality. In fact, those programs were merely projected for 2030.

This is a common mistake: presenting intentions as achievements. But consumers aren’t easily fooled anymore. They want to know what’s being done now, not just distant promises.
Alba Guzmán said it clearly:

“Say you’re starting. Be honest about your stage in the process. Don’t dress it up.”

Lavazza: “compostable” pods… but not at home

Lavazza launched coffee pods promoted as “home compostable,” when in reality they only break down properly in specialized industrial facilities—not in a standard home compost bin.

These messages might be technically debatable, but they’re socially misleading. They play on consumers’ goodwill, making them believe they’re making a positive choice when they’re not.

The most dangerous side effect: cynicism

Beyond legal penalties, greenwashing has a much more toxic effect: it destroys collective credibility. As Guzmán noted in the talk:

“When a consumer feels deceived by one brand, they begin to distrust them all. And that slows the shift toward more sustainable models.”

That’s the real danger of greenwashing: it discredits even those who are genuinely doing things right.

What can brands do to avoid it?

• Only speak about what’s already happening.

• Explain how impact is measured—and what the limitations are.

• Show real progress, without exaggerating achievements.

• Skip the spin: add context.

• Align your narrative with internal culture and decisions.

Because, as Max Bensimon said:

“Saying less, but telling the truth, is worth much more.”

In summary

Greenwashing is no longer just a communication mistake. It’s irresponsible—especially in a time when we can’t afford to lose momentum. If brands want to lead the change, they must start with the truth. Even if they’re still far from perfect impact.

Because perfection isn’t what people expect. What they expect is consistency, honesty, and real steps toward a fairer future.

Curious to discover more cases?
Check out the full Impact Talk recording and decide for yourself.

Make your impact speak louder than words

In today’s world, credibility comes from data, not declarations. At Devera, we help you transform your sustainable actions into transparent, trackable, and actionable insights — so you can communicate honestly and stay ahead of evolving regulations.
Let’s make it visible — book your demo today.