What’s Green and Silent? Unpacking Green-Hushing

You’ve likely heard of greenwashing, but have you heard of its antithesis—green-hushing? In this article, Daisy Culleton explores what this new term means for us and the environment.

In recent years, the term greenwashing—which refers to businesses exaggerating their commitment to sustainability—has become somewhat of a social buzzword. Sadly, the term has earned its place in contemporary vocabulary due to the number of companies that have been found guilty of the practice.

According to Shout Out UK, in 2024, four in ten large UK businesses deceived consumers about the environmental impact of their products or services. Among those convicted were key household brands such as Unilever, Zara, and repeat offender H&M—which was sued in 2023 over its not-so-conscious ‘Conscious Collection’.

A group of protestors, in Bristol, who called themselves the ‘Greenwash Busters’. Photo Credits: Stay Grounded on Wiki Commons.

However, as of late, a new term has emerged in the eco-scene as a direct result of the public's growing awareness of greenwashing. While not yet as firmly rooted in the modern-day lexicon as ‘greenwashing,’ the term 'green-hushing' is equally—if not increasingly—important. As the word 'hush' implies, the term describes when a company chooses not to communicate its environmental goals and achievements. This deliberate under-reporting stems from a fear of falling foul of increasingly strict regulations and of being labelled greenwashers. By concealing their green actions, these companies hope to stay under the radar and avoid the greenwashing witch hunt.

Xavier Font, professor of sustainable marketing at the University of Surrey, emphasised this sentiment, defining green-hushing as “the deliberate downplaying of your sustainability practices for fear that it will make your company look less competent or have a negative consequence for you.”

So where did the term originate? The term entered public discourse in October 2022 when Swiss climate solutions provider South Pole spotlighted the growing trend in its annual report, Net Zero, and Beyond: A Deep-Dive on Climate Leaders and What’s Driving Them. The study surveyed 1,200 companies with net-zero targets across 12 countries and multiple sectors. It found that, despite setting science-based emission reduction targets, 1 in 4 companies did not plan to publicise them—believing the risks of doing so outweighed the benefits.

On the surface, green-hushing appears less harmful than greenwashing, which reduces the chance for real environmental change by misleading customers. Yet, while it involves less dishonesty, green-hushing still results in serious consequences for the environment. Transparency is known to inspire action, so when companies limit the availability of information on their climate performance, they are less likely to feel motivated to compete against one another by setting greater environmental targets. This connection was made by South Pole, which noted in the study: “If reporting on climate performance is hushed … how will a 'race to the top' ever be incentivised?”

Renée Morin, Chief Sustainability Officer at eBay, also echoed this concern in the press release that accompanied the report, stating: “Corporate climate action is a necessary and welcome ingredient to slowing the climate crisis. If more businesses lead from the front by speaking openly about their goals, this will spur the many others out there who have yet to set company targets—ideally ones aligned with science.”

So, if a brand falls quiet on its environmental goals in 2025, will you call them out for green-hushing, or will you stay silent too?

About the author: Daisy Culleton is an American Studies and History graduate from the University of Nottingham. She has a keen interest in both Art and Environmental History.