The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is to scrutinise the environmental claims made by the consumer goods group Unilever, which is known for brands including Cif, Dove and Hellmann’s.
The move is part of the CMA’s wider investigation into greenwashing and follows concerns around how the FMCG giant is marketing certain products, within some brands, to customers as ‘environmentally friendly’.
The CMA’s initial review uncovered a “range of concerning practices”, including certain statements and language used by Unilever that appear to be vague and broad, and may mislead shoppers regarding the environmental impact of the products. There are also claims focusing on a single aspect of a product that may suggest it is ‘environmentally friendly’ as a whole.
Unilever’s use of colours and imagery – such as green leaves – may also create the overall impression that some products are more environmentally friendly than they actually are, the CMA said. There are also suspicions over the company’s claims of recyclability.
Unilever said it was “surprised and disappointed” by the investigation. The CMA has written to the company, which will need to provide evidence to back up all of the claims being made. How the case unfolds will depend on what the evidence shows.
Possible outcomes include securing undertakings from Unilever that commit the firm to change the way it operates; taking the company to court; or closing the case without further action.
The CMA said it has seen some positive changes in the FMCG sector since announcing its compliance review, including amendments to and removal of some green claims made by a number of suppliers. However, it warned that further investigations may be on the way as it assesses green claims across the FMCG sector, including food and drink.
Writing for Footprint recently, Dominic Watkins from law firm DWF warned that next year the risks associated with making green claims could rise further.
“Over the last year, it has become increasingly challenging to make green claims, and that is unlikely to get any better,” he explained. “Gone is the time where the principle that advertising claims must be supported by substantiation is enough: you must do more than just making your claim clear and supporting it with evidence.”
