Greenwashing and why we have to remain vigilant

In recent years, the architecture and construction industries have faced scrutiny over greenwashing - the practice of making misleading claims about the environmental benefits of a product, service, or practice. While some concerns about greenwashing are valid, it's essential to recognise the substantial efforts many companies are now making to implement genuine sustainability practices, but we still have to be vigilant, writes John Ridgeway.​

Leading firms are taking concrete steps to ensure their environmental claims are transparent and verifiable. Morgan Sindall Construction in the UK, for example, became the first tier 1 contractor to endorse The Anti-Greenwash Charter, committing to radical transparency in their sustainability communications. Their green claims policy emphasises authentic representation and measurable carbon reduction outcomes, aiming to prevent inflated or unsubstantiated claims.

Many architectural practices are also pioneering designs that prioritise sustainability by addressing both operational and embodied carbon emissions. A growing number of projects now incorporate low-carbon materials and repurpose existing structures, demonstrating a commitment to reducing the environmental impact of the built environment. ​

Manufacturers are developing innovative materials to reduce carbon footprints. We are seeing cement alternatives, for example, that reduces emissions by 85% compared to traditional methods. This innovation, along with many others, represents a significant advancement in addressing the substantial carbon emissions associated with conventional cement production. ​

On a broader scale, projects like Stockholm Wood City in Sweden exemplify the industry's move towards sustainable urban development. This initiative aims to create the world's largest timber-built city, utilising wood's carbon-storing capabilities to reduce the environmental impact of construction. Such projects highlight the potential of sustainable materials in large-scale developments. ​

This is just a fraction of what’s happening in the construction industry to enhance the environment. However, despite the clear momentum towards sustainable building practices, the construction and architectural industries still face significant challenges in fully eradicating greenwashing and ensuring genuine environmental accountability. As the demand for eco-friendly buildings grows, so too does the temptation - or in some cases, the inadvertent tendency - to overstate the environmental performance of buildings, materials, or design strategies.

The problem with vague or misleading claims

One of the most pressing issues is the lack of standardisation in how sustainability claims are communicated. Phrases like “eco-friendly,” “sustainable,” or “green” are frequently used in marketing materials without sufficient evidence to back them up. These generalised terms can mislead stakeholders, investors and consumers, particularly when not accompanied by third-party certifications, lifecycle assessments, or measurable performance data.

In a sector where sustainability is increasingly becoming a competitive advantage, there's a risk that some players may prioritise optics over impact. This creates uneven playing fields—where genuinely sustainable companies may be overshadowed by those who are more aggressive with their marketing than their methodologies.

To combat this, regulatory bodies and watchdog organisations are making their voices heard. They are becoming more vocal about the reputational and financial risks associated with unverified environmental claims. In their view, failure to provide accurate, quantifiable sustainability information can lead to loss of stakeholder trust, lawsuits, or even exclusion from procurement frameworks that now demand even stricter environmental compliance.

In the EU, the Green Claims Directive, proposed in 2023, aims to crack down on unsubstantiated or misleading environmental claims. This means businesses - including those in construction - will be required to justify their green marketing statements with certified evidence, such as peer-reviewed studies or independent lifecycle assessments. While the directive is still under debate, its core message is clear - sustainability claims must be clear, substantiated, and verifiable.

In the US, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is in the process of updating its “Green Guides,” which offer guidance on environmental marketing claims. These changes are expected to reflect new concerns about carbon neutrality, recyclability, and renewable energy sourcing - terms that are often misunderstood or misused in construction marketing.

In parallel with regulatory action, the pressure from investors and clients is also forcing construction firms and developers to take green issues more seriously. Environmental performance is now a key criterion in many investment decisions, particularly in public infrastructure and large-scale real estate development.

However, one of the challenges here is the fragmented landscape of standards. While frameworks like GRESB, LEED, BREEAM, and WELL Building Standard exist to measure various sustainability factors, not all companies adopt or disclose them. Moreover, the data reported is not always auditable, consistent, or directly comparable, which further opens the door to greenwashing - intentional or otherwise.

Third-party verification and lifecycle thinking

A key solution is the growing adoption of third-party certification schemes and product Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs). Certifications such as LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) and Passive House are now widely recognised as credible indicators of sustainability, provided they are pursued with rigour and transparency.

Construction product manufacturers, meanwhile, are being encouraged - or in some cases required - to publish EPDs that disclose the full environmental impact of their products across their lifecycle. This “cradle-to-grave” approach allows architects and engineers to make informed decisions not just based on how a material performs during use, but also how it is sourced, manufactured, transported and disposed of.

Technology also offers powerful tools in the fight against greenwashing. Digital platforms now allow for real-time tracking of carbon emissions, building energy performance and material sourcing. Building Information Modelling (BIM), when integrated with sustainability data, can allow for dynamic modelling of environmental performance throughout the design and construction phases.

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning tools are also being explored to identify inconsistencies in sustainability claims across large portfolios of buildings or infrastructure projects. For example, an AI-powered tool could cross-reference a building’s performance metrics with its stated green credentials to highlight discrepancies.

Another long-term challenge is educating end-users - whether clients, tenants, or investors - about what real sustainability looks like. Misconceptions still abound. A building with a green wall and solar panels might look “green,” but if it uses carbon-intensive concrete, lacks energy efficiency, or was constructed with unsustainable practices, the overall impact may be far less positive than it appears.

Empowering clients with better questions to ask - like whether embodied carbon has been calculated or what operational energy targets are in place - can help push the industry towards more meaningful sustainability outcomes.

All this means that while the construction, architectural and engineering industries have made commendable strides in embracing sustainability, the journey is far from over. Greenwashing remains a serious risk - not just to brand reputations, but to the integrity of climate goals that hinge on reducing the built environment’s massive environmental footprint.

The future lies in greater accountability, measurable data and collaborative transparency. By embracing clear standards, third-party verification and lifecycle thinking, the industry can rise above performative “green” marketing and build a legacy of environmental responsibility that is as credible as it is commendable.