Looking for help with your ESG messaging? Get in touch.
by Tara Greenman-Sparrow, ESG Lead at Speed Communications
Sustainability has become a harder conversation for businesses to navigate.
Greenlash – the backlash against sustainability initiatives – isn’t new, but it has become more prominent over the past 12–18 months. Politicians are reshaping policy, ESG appears to be becoming less of a focus for some investors, and businesses are becoming increasingly cautious about how visibly they talk about their environmental commitments.
On the surface, it might look as though sustainability itself is slipping down the corporate agenda. But the reality is more nuanced.
Environmental and carbon reduction commitments remain important to businesses. In fact, 90% of European companies recently removed from the scope of the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive plan to continue or expand their sustainability reporting. In the UK, 79% of business leaders say they will pursue net-zero regardless of political uncertainty.
What is changing is the way those commitments are being framed.
Sustainability is increasingly being embedded into wider business strategy – linked to managing risk, building resilience and supporting long-term growth – rather than treated as a standalone set of environmental targets. This creates a communications challenge…
As scrutiny of green claims increases, businesses are understandably becoming more cautious about what they say.
At the same time, the ESG conversation itself is evolving. Sustainability professionals increasingly need to speak the languages of strategy, finance and operations, connecting environmental commitments to the wider priorities of the business.
Against that backdrop, saying less can appear to be the safest option. This is where greenhushing comes in – businesses deliberately reducing how much they communicate externally about sustainability, often because they are concerned about accusations of greenwashing or about claims being picked apart. That caution is understandable, but silence has consequences too.
If businesses stop talking about genuine progress, stakeholders have less visibility of the work taking place. It can leave room for competitors to lead the conversation and make it harder to demonstrate how sustainability contributes to wider business priorities.
There are signs that this is already having an impact. Trust in sustainability messaging has fallen from 79% to 65% since 2022, while consumer recall of sustainability messaging has fallen from 49% to 36%. The Power Briefing also highlights research from INTA suggesting that greenhushing can affect not only brand reputation, but bottom-line performance.
The answer to greenlash, then, isn’t to disappear from the conversation, but to communicate more carefully.
The regulatory direction makes this increasingly important. Businesses need to be specific about their sustainability goals, the actions they are taking and the measurable progress they are making against them. Evidence should be accessible and robust enough to support what is being said – not simply persuasive enough to make a good marketing message.
This is now becoming a compliance issue as well as a communications one. In the UK, the CMA’s Green Claims Code and the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 place greater scrutiny on environmental claims. From 27 September 2026, the EU’s Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition rules also apply, strengthening protections against greenwashing and raising the bar around environmental claims and sustainability labels.
For businesses operating across these markets, that makes substantiation increasingly important.
Evidence is only part of the equation. Different stakeholders care about sustainability for different reasons, so a single corporate sustainability message is unlikely to work equally well for everyone. Investors may be interested in resilience. Supply chain partners may be focused on compliance. End users may care more about how environmental choices affect price, quality and performance.
Effective sustainability communications therefore need to connect environmental progress to the things each audience actually values. That shift also reflects the broader evolution of ESG. The conversation is moving away from sustainability as an isolated corporate virtue and towards what it means for how organisations operate, compete and manage risk.
Sustainability communication cannot rely on a single annual announcement. If the subject disappears from view for long periods, audiences have little sense of whether commitments are translating into progress. Going quiet can erode trust, affect reputation and create space for other businesses to differentiate themselves.
That doesn’t mean communicating for the sake of it. It means creating a consistent rhythm of credible updates – showing what has changed, what has been achieved and, where appropriate, what remains to be done. The strongest sustainability communications are likely to be grounded in progress rather than perfection.
Credible external communication starts internally. Sustainability needs to be embedded in how the organisation operates, with goals and milestones reflected in decision-making, priorities and employee engagement.
That matters commercially as well as culturally. The briefing highlights that 70% of Gen Z and Millennials consider a company’s environmental credentials when evaluating a job. Embedding sustainability into the culture and behaviours of the organisation can therefore support employee engagement and recruitment while helping the business move towards its ESG ambitions.
It also makes external communications more credible. Businesses have a much stronger story to tell when sustainability is visible in what they actually do rather than sitting solely within a communications strategy.
The response to greenlash shouldn’t be greenhushing. In a more complex communications environment, the businesses best placed to maintain trust will be those willing to share progress, back their claims with evidence and connect sustainability to tangible value – even when scrutiny increases.
The objective isn’t to talk louder – it is to communicate with greater substance.
Sustainability remains relevant to investors, consumers, partners and employees. Businesses need to take those audiences with them, explaining not only the commitments they have made, but the progress they are making and why it matters.
Because saying less may feel like the safest option. But when the work is real, evidenced and relevant, staying silent can carry a cost of its own.