There’s something quaint about Latin. Conveying a level of authority and correctness, it’s used in medicine, law and business. Take the phrase ‘dictum meum pactum’ or, in English, my word is my bond. The motto of the London Stock Exchange it underscores the trust that traders place in each in other that deals made will be honoured.

But elsewhere in the world of commerce, where relationships are less formal and business is less well established, the temptation to push the boundaries is ever present. 

Consider the claims that some organisations make in relation to their green credentials. There are countless examples of firms being hauled over the coals for ‘greenwashing’ claims – where they purport to be environmentally conscious for marketing purposes but actually aren’t making any notable sustainability efforts.

Back in July (2022), Earth.org published a list of corporations caught out. It included VW, which since 2015 has been heavily punished for cheating emissions tests; Nestlé, which in 2018, said it had “ambitions” for packaging to be 100% recyclable or reusable by 2025. However, it didn’t release clear targets; and Starbucks, which in 2018, released a ‘straw-less lid’ as part of its sustainability drive, however the lid contained more plastic than the old lid and straw combination.

More recently, a November 2022 survey from Clear PR into sustainability claims, found that almost half of UK businesses say they are failing to deliver on their sustainable commitments, with one in five admitting to publicly exaggerating their green credentials .

Environmental claims are taken seriously by many in print. In November, marketing performance specialist Go Inspire was awarded gold accreditation from EcoVadis and invested around £1m in kit to enhance its sustainability.

And then there’s the Delta Group, which triumphed in the large enterprise Environmental Company of the Year category at the 2022 Printweek Awards. It’s taken great strides in this area.

Checking on standards

Dominic Harris, co-founder and director of CarbonQuota, an emissions consultancy, is well aware of the need to improve reporting standards in print. His website states that the company was launched “to help the packaging and print sector do a lot more in sustainable production because it’s a sector that has a tendency towards greenwash to protect its interests”.

As Harris explains, carbon measurement has become the gold standard “because it is, when correctly used, a scientific measure that removes all subjectivity around climate change which is the biggest single environmental threat”. When businesses say that they ‘are greener’ he asks “what does that actually mean? Greener than what?” For him, that’s a statement without any comparator. However, the statement would carry more weight in his view if, as he says, it “used a science-based statement such as ‘the carbon footprint has reduced from 1,200kg CO2e to 864kg CO2e’ as that demonstrates improvement”.

It’s of note that, as Harris has witnessed, businesses can choose to disclose their corporate carbon footprint or not, “but most print and packaging companies do not”.

But such firms should choose to publicly detail their carbon footprint in his view. And he explains why: “Our experience has shown that measuring and disclosing corporate carbon footprint is a pre-requisite of doing business with large corporations such as P&G, Sainsbury’s or CitiBank.” Increasingly, he says that the large buyers of print and packaging are demanding product ‘carbon footprinting’ as part of their buying process so they can make science-based eco decisions before a project is produced.

Understanding the detail

So, with genuine inconsistency in the market, how can an onlooker unpick a supplier’s eco claims?

The starting point for Harris is the lack of substantiation in a claim. He says that in this situation “red lights should flash...” In responding to unsubstantiated claims, he says: “So what? When a claim is scientifically validated, such as ‘23% less carbon’, that’s real.” He says that it’s even better if the claim is validated by a third party.

The natural question to pose here is, if the market is founded on unsubstantiated claims, where can the average printer on the Clapham Omnibus find accurate and relevant information on what those claims actually represent?

Again, Harris takes a very direct line. In his view there is only one solution here, and that is that “they need to know that any company making a claim is working to international standards or has an independent third party helping them – it’s not okay to just make a claim”.

And he cites that value of centring values and goals on the likes of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals which he describes as “wider than just environmental issues”. In overview, this covers water, pollution, production and climate action; he says that “any business that publishes a ESG and CSR policy on their website should be aligned to these, either directly or indirectly”.

The gold standard that firms should seek to attain requires – mandates, in Harris’ view – “explaining why the eco statement is good through scientific reasoning, and this is best done through a CO2e number”. 

He adds: “It is also best practice to not do it yourself and have any claim certified by a third party.”

For the record, CO2e, or carbon dioxide equivalent, is a standard unit for measuring carbon footprints. The idea is to express the impact of each different greenhouse gas in terms of the amount of CO2 that would create the same amount of warming. That way, a carbon footprint consisting of lots of different greenhouse gases can be expressed as a single number.

Put another way, Harris says that a CO2e number on a product is a complex calculation that includes a carbon allocation for raw materials, production processes, transport, and end-of-life. And “the ‘e’ stands for ‘equivalent’ and this means it counts all the greenhouse gas emissions emitted during production, not just carbon”.

It bothers him that “the use of misleading claims is prevalent in our industry, particularly in the paper industry.” Terms such as ‘green’, ‘sustainable’, ‘eco’, ‘lower carbon’, ‘offset’, ‘balanced’ and ‘sustainable’ are all over-used in his view. That said, he says that his firm has just completed a project where it can now “measure all papers and board from all mills across the globe – using one methodology to ensure it compare ‘apples with apples’, and it is certified by a third party – us.”

Saving the planet and business

Beyond ‘saving the planet’, generally being ‘green’ is good for business. As Harris knows from his day-to-day work, in today’s world, a sustainable business will always be chosen over one that is not.

He points out that “companies that fill the supermarket shelves or dominate our high streets all have net zero strategies proudly displayed on their websites and, whilst some are better than others, carbon reduction is front-and-centre of all of them.” He continues: “These businesses are driving better behaviour in their supply chains; therefore, it will hit our industry like a tonne of bricks.” 

Harris warns the sector that while activity has slowed recently because of Covid and the energy crisis, “print should not think it’s gone away – it’s just been delayed”.

So, by changing course, through verifiable carbon assessment, Harris says that “a printer can shout their efforts from the rooftops to their customers and promote a better workplace for their staff. And companies looking for investment will be prioritised if they have strong eco-credentials”.

And this view is becoming more widespread says Harris: “Many of our customers come to us because they are being asked about carbon by their customers. In fact, we are working with three businesses that all support Tesco in different print areas, and it has become part of the service to measure carbon on every print job.” It’s important to another of his clients, a firm in the large-format market, who secured a high value customer because it had strong carbon credentials via his company.

Change is coming fast

There are risks to the corporate health of firms that make unsubstantiated green claims. The Competition & Markets Authority, and for the world of finance, the Financial Conduct Authority, have both launched investigations into firms making unsubstantiated claims. And as Harris also points out, “the Advertising Standards Authority has recently enhanced its activity and is banning adverts that make misleading environmental claims. It’s looking for greenwashing and brands such as HSBC, Pepsi and Innocent Drinks have recently had adverts banned as being misleading”.

While Harris thinks it unlikely the ASA will monitor the print industry, he says says it’s not a risk worth taking. He sees such high-profile stories as having the potential to be very damaging because social media drives awareness on greenwashing – “our industry must clean up its act”.

Ultimately, Harris thinks that firms should build a green supply chain as Delta has been doing for some time: “Paper, inks, pallets, transport, energy and even the accountancy sector have adopted carbon reduction strategies, and this should be part of any selection criteria when building a supply chain.” He adds “we support many print management businesses and printers when they receive a tender request from a prospective customer – and they all now include questions about carbon.”

And if that isn’t enough of an incentive, Harris sees more governmental action in this area and predicts the implementation of “deep legalisation over the coming years”. He notes that Streamlined Energy and Carbon Reporting (SECR) is in place but only affects large businesses; the majority of the print sector will not meet that criteria. But to him that is an example of what is coming.

Summary

It’s patently clear that print firms need to change – if not to save the planet then to save themselves. The direction of travel is set and large corporations putting work out to tender will only consider those who genuinely look at their sustainability credentials properly.

BEST PRACTICE CASE STUDY: Delta Group

Starzéus Hassan-Mcghee, head of sustainability at the Delta Group, says that while the company formalised its sustainability commitments in 2019, its journey started much earlier. He says that the initiative came from employees and other stakeholders wanting products that had “the least negative impact on the environment”.

He also says that the company wanted to “offer sustainable solutions to customers that align with their own ESG commitments.” This, Hassan-Mcghee says, is reflected in Delta’s Collaborate Pillar which consists of Delta Collaborate (innovation and partnerships), Delta Supply (managing the supply chain), and Delta People (enabling people and supporting communities).

From the beginning Hassan-Mcghee says that Delta sought to include stakeholders that include board members, employees, suppliers, and customers. This “generated lots of ideas which resulted in a comprehensive net zero roadmap being established and most importantly, a view on how we could add value to our customers”.

Doing this meant mapping out what Delta Collaborate, Delta Supply and Delta People stood for and, says Hassan-Mcghee, “how we intertwined each to drive forward our commitments to climate change reduction”. In essence, each of the pillars is tracked at board level every month and, as Hassan-Mcghee says, “the comprehensive detail that sits behind these keep us focused as a team”.

Cynics might look at a firm that’s on the path towards sustainability and suggest that it’s all about commercial gain. However, Hassan-Mcghee asserts that this is not the case for Delta when he says that it’s “definitely not a marketing tool - our customers are equally passionate and committed to reducing their greenhouse gas emissions”. He comments that offering sustainable alternatives and solutions “coincides with their own sustainability targets and meets the need of their consumers”.

The same appears to be true of Delta’s suppliers. Here Hassan-Mcghee remarks that the company’s suppliers “have been on our sustainability journey from the start, and many have been inspired to implement climate reduction projects within their own operations.”

And for clients, Delta, says Hassan-Mcghee, aims to look holistically at their needs with a view to introducing sustainable solutions wherever possible. Specifically, he says that the company conducts regular environmental reviews looking to see where alternatives and improvements can be made.

Now, when it comes to making green claims, Hassan-Mcghee is quite clear. He says that Delta uses a “rigorous verification process for any eco claims and data that we share to our stakeholders”. He explains that any claims made are backed by “science-based evidence” and that a reputable third-party environmental analyst verifies all claims and data. He continues: “We use a collaborative approach and ensure that we have the necessary information from our suppliers, as well as the essential information needed from our operational workstream - Optimus - to give us a clear breakdown of our customer’s print jobs.” He says that Delta’s process is “robust and transparent” and makes plain “the environmental impact of our print campaigns.” Beyond that, Hassan-Mcghee says that “before any green claims enter the public domain, we ensure it has gone through a rigorous process of due diligence” and they “meet the regulations of the Green Claims Code”.

He adds that while sustainability is a matter for individuals; organisations and governments have a responsibility to lead by example. He points out that legislation can change “mindsets in organisations to make operational changes that strengthen environmental pursuits”.

As for sustainability in print generally, Hassan-Mcghee thinks that it’s evolving: “Collectively the industry is making great strides to drive forward improved sustainable operations.” He knows that there is always more that could be done and there’s a need for greater transparency and accountability. But to do that he thinks the sector needs to work closer with material suppliers.