In the 1980s, environmentalist Jay Westerveld penned an essay criticising the hotel industry’s habit of placing placards in bathrooms encouraging guests to re-use their towels in order to save water, when little to no environmental effort was being made by the hotel itself. In his essay, Westerveld coined the word ‘greenwashing’ – the coordinated effort by companies to spruik environmental claims when, in reality, the company or product is less than environmentally focused.
Despite being a favoured method of spin for advertisers even before the ‘80s, greenwashing has reached a new pinnacle in the past decade. “Organisations started to see that being ‘green’ or claiming sustainability was a key differentiator they could use to market themselves against competitors,” says Suzie Barnett, previous executive director at the Green Building Council of Australia. “It was naivety that was driving it at first, but then in the later years it became deliberate, and that’s where we now have a problem.”
Barnett spent eight years at the Green Building Council in the 2000s, where she helped launch the Green Star rating system – Australia’s first environmental rating system. After leaving the company in 2012, she spent 12 months researching the building supply chain. “I delved quite deeply into every supply chain group, whether it was carpet or lighting or plants, and I went in search of organisations that met certain criteria to show that they were authentic in their environmental claims,” she recalls. “And I got a rude awakening because I found that not many companies were actually doing what they said, or implied, they were doing.”
The most prevalent method of greenwashing that Barnett observed was the use of imagery implying a sustainable approach – companies using pictures of a pair of hands holding the Earth, or a green frog in the rainforest. Despite appearing green, the companies generally had nothing to back up any kind of sustainable claims. “They were just using the imagery so people were going, ‘Oh, look at that, they must be green’,” Barnett says.
Another disingenuous method Barnett noticed companies favour is to achieve an environmental label for a single product and then host the certification label on their homepage. To the uninformed, it would appear that the company’s whole practice is environmentally certified, when in reality, the certification only applies to one product, and unless you do a fact-check, you could easily be duped.
Environmental activist (and designer) Joost Bakker shares similar observations. Bakker has spent the better part of his 45 years deep diving into our built environment, striving for better practices. And there’s no guessing that he has witnessed his fair share of green spin.
“FSC certified classifications are the perfect example of greenwashing,” he says. “Students are told at university that using timber is great because when it’s growing it absorbs carbon, so it’s a cleaner alternative to steel or concrete. However, in my opinion, timber and the promotion of its use through FSC certification has been an absolute environmental disaster. We assume that it’s fine because the forests are going to get replanted, but what people don’t realise is that they’re being rebuilt as a single species. So a massive ecosystem is being wiped out and replaced with a monoculture. I’ve walked through plantation forests all over the world – Brazil, China, Europe, South America, Australia and New Zealand – and you don’t see any wildlife. You don’t even see any birds in most plantations.”
It’s not far-reaching to say that greenwashing has caused sustainable design to enter stagnation. How can we expect suppliers to be pushed to be better when buyers are lulled into misguided contentment via a stock image of a frog or a single tick of approval from a third party?
Perhaps not enough people care, or maybe we aren’t adequately educated about the tricks of sustainable advertising. I think it may be a touch of both, but mostly I think it’s all just a little too overwhelming. Talking to Bakker, I find myself feeling a sense of irritation at the way things are, and an acute desire to make my own better choices, but also an unfortunate sense of defeat. Bakker admits he often experiences the same. “Sometimes I just feel that the problems that need to be solved and the scale of issues is so massive that it seems impossible to tackle. It’s like you’re trying to shift the Titanic,” he says.
Last year, Bakker was involved in ABC’s programme War on Waste. In episode three, host Craig Reucassel filled a tram with 50,000 take away coffee cups – the amount that’s sent to landfill every 30 minutes in Australia. “The year before War on Waste, Australia threw away 1 billion coffee cups,” says Bakker. “The show was a huge success and everybody was talking about it; despite that, a friend of mine who works in recycling told me that last year, that number went up to 1.3 billion. We grew the number of cups we use by nearly 30%, even though everyone is talking about how successful this show is. Things like that make it hard to not feel defeated sometimes.”
For architects, designers and builders who specify hundreds upon thousands of tonnes of product a year, the path ahead towards truly sustainable work can be just as overwhelming – but it’s terrain that can be overcome with the right approach.
“Keep looking for solutions, because they are out there,” advises Bakker. “Architects are inspired by innovating and in the face of a challenge is where the best innovation can happen. Don’t follow; create your own solutions!” With many hurdles to face including the client’s brief, costs, time and practicality, researching a product’s ‘green’ claims can add an extra demand to an already tough list of boxes to tick, however as Bakker says, it’s extremely rewarding when you do find that truly sustainable result, especially if it’s a new approach.
Wading through the mud of greenwash is the first step. And being informed is obviously key. But even before that, we must remember that at this point in time, finding a product or company that does everything right is virtually impossible, and trying to do so will only leave us with our heads in our hands.
Barnett recommends the way forward is to decide on what is the most important thing to you – is it to reduce impact from an environmental perspective? Or is it health and wellbeing? Understand exactly what you’re looking for and then research how to identify claims surrounding that area. Be informed about what sort of validation is going to ensure you aren’t falling for greenwashing, whether it be a transparency label, or third-party scientific research and evidence that confirms claims. She says to break it down, and you will eventually find a handful of partners who meet those core goals that you’re looking for.
The responsibility of pushing sustainability in the built environment lies in the hands of everyone. And if we do keep pushing, there is a brighter, healthier and greener future ahead.
“Biophilic buildings and buildings as complete ecosystems is the only sustainable way forward,” Bakker explains. “The benefits of having plants around us has been proven time and time again. It’s an incredibly exciting prospect because there are so many benefits – think of the reduction in energy and materials if we started growing food where we live. Nobody actually trusts anyone who is growing food anymore, so what better way than taking it into your own hands?”
“True biophilia is the whole building becoming an ecosystem, which is what every building could be,” he says.
Bakker has long worked on designs for buildings that embrace greenery and are completely self-sufficient in terms of food. In 2008, his pop-up restaurant, Greenhouse by Joost, took over Melbourne’s Federation Square with its waste-free operation, straw walls and edible garden, and since then, he has completed a variety of buildings with the same ethos. “Biophilia isn’t a trend, it’s a necessity,” he says.
Imagining the millions of houses in Australia growing enough food to sustain the people who live within them is an incredible future to strive towards. “I’m also proposing growing food inside,” Bakker adds. “Having a part of homes being a glazed atrium, so that you can grow things like tomatoes and cucumbers year round.”
Anyone who has spent a day in an old growth forest won’t argue against the effects of biophilia; the relaxation that you feel being surrounded by nature is unmatched. So imagine living within it.
Improved and more transparent labelling is also something that is creeping over the horizon. Last year, The International Living Future Institute launched its Declare label programme in Australia. The labels allow for full transparency and have already experienced success overseas. Just like a nutritional label, the Declare label tells you basically everything you need to know in order to make an informed purchasing decision – but it’s for the materials marketplace. With end-of-life options, ingredients that are colour coded for restrictedness and toxicity, VOC information and an indication of whether the product complies with the Living Building Challenge Red List, the Declare label is the assailant to greenwash.
This level of transparency will leave us with suppliers who do better and buildings that are more restorative in the future, paving way for truly sustainable specification in the built environment.
“I liken this situation to how we have evolved with our purchasing of food,” says Barnett. “Think about a decade ago, when you went to the supermarket, you didn’t know what was in anything and you chose things based off how good the packaging was or what you felt like eating. Then things like the Heart Foundation Tick rose up, and food had that label that said, ‘We think this is good for you.’ But now what we have is basically complete transparency. We can now pick up food and see what the ingredients are, what percentage of fat or sugar is in it, and where it came from.
“In the built environment, we’re still making decisions based off a tick or a label. Which is a step forward from where we were when we knew nothing, but where I think we are heading is towards complete transparency so we can make informed decisions.”
Looking back to the past, we have come a long way in terms of sustainability in architecture and design. But there’s certainly room to do a lot better… And seeing beyond the greenwash is the first step.
Suzie Barnett has worked across sustainability in the architecture and design industry for over a decade. She is currently the General Manager of Junglefy and Board Director of the Living Future Institute of Australia.
Joost Bakker is a fifth-generation tulip farmer and environmental visionary. He is known for his celebrated plant-based installations and waste-free restaurants, Greenhouse by Joost and Silo. He also designed 98色花堂’s Vertical Garden.