The article in the url below discusses a term I had not seen previously – greenhushing:
"First, there was greenwashing — a term referring to deceptive marketing campaigns and other performative gestures by companies to make consumers and investors believe that they are environmentally responsible. Now, there is greenhushing. And it's also a problem. Firms engage in greenhushing when they are actively working to reduce their carbon footprint, produce less waste, manufacture less plastic, and build greater sustainability, but they don't tell anyone about their efforts."
While this is an interesting term, it is not a particularly surprising phenomenon. I have seen a similar approach to sustainability adopted by Walmart, for example, although the reason the firm does not advertise its (often industry leading) efforts is because of the perception that green products are more expensive (even when that is not the case). Crucially, the firm does not want the perception of higher prices among its customers to undermine its low cost strategy:
"It seems like a contradiction for companies to be 'doing good while doing well' and not blasting the news across every corner of the internet."
Frustrating. It only seems "like a contradiction" if you do not put much thought into what is meant by the phrase "doing good while doing well." In reality, it is stakeholder pressure that is determinative. The cornerstone of "doing good while doing well" suggests there is a level of "good" that is objectively known and agreed upon. But this is clearly ridiculous – what constitutes good behavior is both highly contested and a moving target. Thus, if a firm is feeling pressured by one stakeholder group (say, investors or the government) to perform in a certain way, while the opposite pressure is being applied by another stakeholder group (say, customers concerned about low prices), then it is immediately obvious why a firm would want to manipulate the message it conveys to these different groups by saying different things. As the article continues to note:
"If a company specifically states its ESG goals and reports its progress in hitting those targets, it could face pushback from stakeholders who find the plans aren't ambitious enough. … On the other hand, it could also face backlash from investors and politicians who believe ESG efforts undermine profits or run counter to prevailing values. For example, oil-rich Texas recently banned its municipalities from doing business with banks that have ESG policies against fossil fuels and firearms."
Another reason firms keep quiet about ESG, of course, could be that they know the foundations on which much of it is built are shaky:
"One of the biggest challenges for firms seeking to improve their environmental, social, and corporate governance is a lack of standards across those dimensions. Globally, there is no single method of data collection or measurement, which often leads to confusion — and greater incentive not to share information."
Take care
David
David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2023
Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/
Greenhushing: Why Some Firms Keep Quiet About ESG
By Angie Basiouny
November 8, 2022
Knowledge @ Wharton
