Our team recently joined the ASA for a strategic session to understand their 5 year roadmap and 2024 priorities and what it means for advertisers. In this article, they share the latest ASA Green Claims Code insights brands need to know:
The UK Advertising Standards Agency is working closely with businesses, consumers and other regulators (including the Financial Conduct Authority) to tackle greenwashing and ensure that consumers are not misled when trying to make sustainable purchasing decisions.
AI assisted regulation is here
The ASA are already using AI to assist in advertising regulation.
They are increasingly using AI to identify ads which may be problematic (especially online) and to support compliance work.
Over the next five years, the ASA intends to invest more in preventative and proactive work than reactive complaints casework.
It is predicted that this AI system will process at least 10 million ads next year.
Responsibility to the planet is one of the ASA’s core strategic priorities, and therefore one of the most important priorities for the advertising industry.
The Green Claims Code and rules for communicating your sustainability efforts and credentials have been getting progressively clearer and stricter in recent years, and the regulators continue to develop them. This is likely to be one of their key focus areas for AI enforcement, so brands of all sizes, across all sectors, should ensure they are up-to-speed with the regulations and applying them to any marketing and advertising communications.
The use of AI means that the regulator can move from a complaints-based model of enforcement to a more proactive approach, by scanning ads with a sustainability focus and flagging potential issues which can then be reviewed by a human. This increases the risk that non-compliant green claims will be discovered and banned. It’s likely that they will prioritise scanning ads from problematic industries where non-compliance is high, and by subject, so brands should consider their level of risk and prioritise regulatory compliance.
Greenwashing vs Greenhushing
The ASA recognise that the underlying science behind sustainability is complex, sometimes contested and unclear, and being sustainable looks different in different industries. When businesses are managing long international supply chains, being sustainable can be extremely complex, and the transition to better practices takes time.
As regulators have got stricter about greenwashing, we have seen a rise in ‘greenhushing’ – companies avoiding talking about their sustainability at all, either out of fear of getting it wrong, or to avoid scrutiny.
However, consumers are increasingly becoming more aware of the complexities of sustainability, and want to make greener choices, so they expect to see brands’ sustainability credentials. As reporting regulation comes into force, like the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), businesses will be required to be more transparent about their efforts.
The ASA’s briefing was clear – businesses should embrace the complexity. Non-compliance usually arises when companies are too broad-brushed, too bombastic, too vague, or under-evidenced in their claims.
Better qualified, realistic claims are seen to be more credible, trusted by the end consumer, and less likely to fall foul of the regulations.
If in doubt, the regulator’s advice was to be cautious, be specific and don’t try to go too big.
The greenwashing vs greenhushing debate is over-simplistic, and brands do not have a choice between misleading claims or no claims at all. Businesses need to recognise the leadership role that advertising plays in education, awareness and behaviour change, and embrace the challenge of making complex claims.
Green halo claims are no longer accepted
“Green halo” claims are no longer acceptable – big claims where the green activity is only a small part of the overall business. The regulator is taking a really tough line on this and adverts must now be clear about what percentage the activity is within the whole business.
There is a way for companies (even in high-carbon industries like banking) to adapt, be honest, accurate and informative of where companies are in their sustainability journey. Research has shown that this transparent, journey-based approach is liked and trusted by consumers, and businesses that engage in frank discussions about their journey will be seen as the thought leaders of the green transition.
Key takeaways
- All companies should prioritise measuring and communicating their sustainability efforts across the business
- Broad-brushed claims like “sustainable” and “eco-friendly” are increasingly becoming unacceptable – brands should be more specific.
- Consumers have good observation skills, but detailed knowledge of sustainability is still low and when it comes to green claims, they are prone to misunderstanding. You can’t assume that your consumers will see your claims the same way you do.
- It’s not just the language you use, it’s the imagery you use too. Research shows that green colour and nature images automatically make people see products as more environmentally friendly and feel warmer towards them, with higher levels of trust. Regulators are currently doing research into how to regulate this, and brands should be cautious about how their imagery could be constituted as a green claim.
- From April 2024 green disposal claims (like “recyclable”) will be actively investigated. Enforcement action on these will begin from January in areas where the ASA has already issued guidance (such as “100% recyclable” where the product isn’t)
Download your free guide to the Green Claims Code here.
This article has been prepared for general informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice.
To get more insights like these direct to you inbox, sign up to our regulatory insights series:
