Connect with us

Finance

Greenwashing, greenhushing and greenwishing: The new sustainable finance lingo | Investment Executive

Published

on

Greenwashing, greenhushing and greenwishing: The new sustainable finance lingo | Investment Executive

“The majority of Canadians want new rules to clear out greenwashing because they’re frustrated by claims not being met with action,” said Julie Segal, senior program manager of climate finance with Environmental Defence Canada. “And a number of financial institutions also want clear rules on sustainable finance, so they can move more clearly in that direction.”

Greenwashing was one of the first terms coined in the sustainable finance discourse, but terms such as greenhushing and greenwishing have since been adopted.

Here’s what the terms mean and how some suggest putting an end to these practices.

Greenwashing

Greenwashing is the practice of making inflated or misleading claims about how environmentally friendly a company, organization or product is, said Yrjo Koskinen, a sustainable and transition finance professor with the University of Calgary’s Haskayne School of Business.

Advertisement

“It’s not necessarily lying, but maybe making exaggerated claims about your environmental or social policies,” he said. “Companies have a tendency of spinning or putting their best foot forward. Everybody does that, right? So, it’s commonplace.”

As Koskinen explained, greenwashing was a niche issue until 2022, when cases began making more frequent headlines in Europe, the U.S. and Canada.

This includes the high-profile case of Keurig Canada reaching a $3-million settlement after the Competition Bureau found the company’s coffee pod recycling claims were false or misleading in certain cases.

In the U.S., DWS Investment Management Americas Inc., a subsidiary of Deutsche Bank AG, agreed to pay US$25 million to settle charges over alleged greenwashing and deficient anti–money laundering controls at its mutual funds. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission alleged the firm made “materially misleading statements” about the ESG investment processes used for certain actively managed mutual funds and separately managed accounts.

And earlier this year, the European Commission and national consumer protection authorities started action against 20 airlines for alleged misleading greenwashing practices, among other examples.

Advertisement

The Canadian government’s Bill C-59, which received royal assent on June 20, is one example of the recent crackdown on greenwashing.

The legislation requires companies to provide evidence to support their environmental claims. The government said doing so will “protect consumers, competitors and the proper functioning of the market against the harms of untested representations about a product’s benefits for protecting the environment or mitigating the effects of climate change.”

The legislation has received mixed reactions. It was cited by Pathways Alliance as the reason the group of oilsands companies decided to pull its online content. The group said the provision applies a standard “so vague as to lack meaning.”

Financial services regulators have also made progress in addressing greenwashing.

In March the Canadian Securities Administrators bolstered their guidance for investment funds and fund managers around ESG-related disclosure with the goal of increasing clarity and consistency in fund documentation and sales communications.

Advertisement

Also in March, the Canadian Sustainability Standards Board released its draft standards for climate-related risks and opportunities based on the International Sustainability Standards Board’s standards, but with proposed modifications. The consultation on the standards wrapped last month.

Over the past decade, firms such as Morningstar Sustainalytics have established frameworks for assessing companies’ exposure to industry-specific ESG risks and risk management.

Clark Barr, head of ESG methodology with Morningstar Sustainalytics, said the firm relies not on environmental promises from companies, but rather a thorough picture of their ESG policies, programs and performance.

“This is one of the ways we avoid greenwashing, because it’s not just having a policy in place or making a document. We want to see that [impact] all the way through to the performance level,” Barr said.

Greenhushing

Greenhushing is the practice of deliberately downplaying or hiding sustainability goals, Koskinen said, noting this concept is relatively new compared to greenwashing.

Advertisement

One reason companies may employ this practice is because they’re afraid of being accused of greenwashing, he said. They may think that “there’s always somebody who’s going to blame us — either we do too much or too little, but [we’re] never right.”

And companies can see how politicized the issue has become, Koskinen said.

In a January 2024 analysis from global climate consultancy South Pole, 81% of companies said that communicating their net-zero targets would be good for their bottom lines. However, 58% of the 1,400 companies surveyed — across 14 countries and 12 sectors — said communicating their climate action was now more difficult, and they were planning to decrease their level of external communications.

In the realm of finance, a March 2024 report from private and public equity markets data provider PitchBook Data Inc. suggests that some asset managers are pulling back from public ESG commitments out of fear of backlash, with fewer general partners making public commitments to ESG each quarter over the past few years via the UN-supported Principles for Responsible Investment. Meanwhile, others are leaning in to ESG as a value creation and protection tool in the challenging macroeconomic environment, the report said.

Segal said the concept of greenhushing exists because in Canada sustainability reporting and disclosure standards are voluntary.

Advertisement

“The second something becomes mandatory, it’s no longer a decision that a business or financial institution has to make about whether they are talking about something,” she said.

Greenwishing

Less recognized than greenwashing and greenhushing is greenwishing, which has been described as a company making abstract wishes about “going green” or setting climate targets without taking action.

“Greenwishing sounds pretty much like greenwashing to me. It’s kind of inadvertent greenwashing,” Koskinen said.

Greenwishing is driven by the pressure to set ambitious sustainability goals, KPMG says on its website.

In an article for the Center for Corporate Reporting, which provides guidance on corporate reporting for companies in Switzerland, Germany and Austria, one of the founders of South Pole wrote that greenwishing “ensures that [a] company is seen as a climate leader in the eyes of the public, without running the risk of being accused of greenwashing.”

Advertisement

“After all, you did not make any binding commitments in the first place; you were only expressing your support for climate action and your wishes for a low-carbon future,” the article said.

The way forward

Industry watchers say Canada needs to move toward policies that support the transition to a net-zero economy.

Segal said the country needs to act with greater urgency, given how climate change could affect everything from people’s homes to their livelihoods and the economy.

“We’re seeing increasing climate-related disasters that affect both communities and investment,” Segal said. “Climate-aligned finance policy is the missing piece of Canada’s climate plan,” if it is to align with the country’s commitments under the Paris Agreement.

Segal pointed to Bill S-243, which would hold corporate directors to account for climate action and mandate climate action plans from financial institutions, among other things.

Advertisement

“Requiring the plans that support the commitment is really key in terms of transparency and accountability, and just helping ensure we move in the right direction,” she said.

Koskinen was pleased about Canada following the lead of other jurisdictions, such as Europe.

“Right now, with the new European law, if you advertise a certain ESG investment strategy, at least 80% of your assets have to follow that strategy. That’s a massive, tangible, measurable thing,” he said. “Until the passing of Bill C-59, there was no explicit law against greenwashing in Canada. It was activist groups trying to name and shame, or [the Office of Consumer Affairs] bringing cases against these companies.”

However, Koskinen said the new greenwashing regulations in Canada are “quite vague at the moment.” He said he hopes they will be clarified soon “so that companies have more certainty what is allowed and what is not.”

Barr, of Morningstar Sustainalytics, agrees Canada should look to the European Union as an example as it develops its sustainable finance policies, saying there’s a competitive reason for this as well.

Advertisement

“If you have this whole base of EU customers that are buying products from other businesses and they look at Canadian companies and say, ‘Oh, they’re not taking carbon seriously [so] I’d rather buy from this other company in France,’ that’s a lost opportunity for Canadian business,” he said.

But Barr and Koskinen acknowledged that moving toward a sustainable economy requires time.

Koskinen noted that Europe is less reliant on fossil fuels, whereas oil and gas are Canada’s top exports.

“It’s very difficult to decarbonize our energy system,” he said. “The economy doesn’t change overnight. The new firms are much quicker and agile to change, and some firms can change very fast, but [for] the large legacy companies, it’s going to take time.”

Barr shared a similar remark.

Advertisement

“Sometimes there’s criticism that the regulations aren’t strong enough, or they’re not going quick enough, but at least we’re seeing progress on them. And so it might not be ideal, it might not be perfect, but it is a journey,” he said. “It’s a bit of a marathon, not a sprint.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Finance

Why Chime Financial Stock Was Music to Investor Ears in December | The Motley Fool

Published

on

Why Chime Financial Stock Was Music to Investor Ears in December | The Motley Fool

The company appears to be effectively serving its often-overlooked customer base.

The holiday month brought fintech Chime Financial (CHYM 3.13%) one of the best gifts a stock can receive — a substantial bump higher in price. Across December, Chime’s shares rose by more than 19%, lifted by a set of factors that included a recommendation upgrade from a prominent bank and a positive research note by an analyst who’s now tracking the company.

Good as gold

The bullish tone was set by that upgrade, which was made before market open on Dec. 1 by Goldman Sachs pundit Will Nance. According to his new evaluation, Chime stock is now a buy, up from Nance’s previous tag of neutral. The new price target is $27 per share.

Image source: Getty Images.

According to reports, the analyst’s move is based on the company’s new Chime Card, an innovative credit product that represents an evolution of the secured credit card (i.e., plastic that must be backed by a user’s actual funds).

Advertisement

In Nance’s estimation, as a next-generation credit product, the Chime Card should earn more “take” (i.e., fees derived from use) and thus higher revenue and profitability for the company than many anticipate. The prognosticator wrote that “attach” rates — i.e., Chime customer uptake — could also be notably above current expectations.

On Dec. 11, a new Chime bull emerged. This is B. Riley analyst Hal Goetsch, who initiated coverage of the company’s stock with a buy recommendation. This was accompanied by a price target of $35 per share, which is well higher than even Nance’s very optimistic assessment.

Goetsch waxed bullish about Chime’s high growth potential, according to reports. He opined that the company is doing well servicing its target segment of customers traditionally shunned by established banks due to poor credit histories, among other perceived flaws. It has also cleverly partnered with lenders and other financial services providers to offer attractive products such as the Chime Card.

Chime Financial Stock Quote

Today’s Change

(-3.13%) $-0.87

Current Price

Advertisement

$26.95

Executive shifts

Finally, Chime promoted no less than three of its executives to new positions. It announced in the middle of the month that former chief operating officer Mark Troughton had been named president, and Janelle Sallenave replaced him as chief operating officer (from chief experience officer). Vineet Mehra, meanwhile, became chief growth officer; previously, he was chief marketing officer.

All three appointments, announced in the middle of the month, were effective immediately.

Advertisement

As the year came to a close, it was apparent that the company had executives who were eager to keep contributing to its success. That, combined with those bullish analyst notes and the somewhat under-the-radar success story that the Chime Card appears to be, makes this fintech’s stock well worth watching. This is one of the more innovative young businesses in the financial sector at present.

Continue Reading

Finance

Mis-Sold Car Finance Explained: What UK Drivers Should Know

Published

on

Mis-Sold Car Finance Explained: What UK Drivers Should Know
Car finance is now one of the most popular ways in which drivers purchase their vehicles in the UK. RICHMOND PARK, BOURNEMOUTH / ACCESS Newswire / January 5, 2026 / In particular, Personal Contract Purchase (PCP) and Hire Purchase (HP) agreements …
Continue Reading

Finance

Solaris Names Steffen Jentsch to Lead Embedded Finance Platform | PYMNTS.com

Published

on

Solaris Names Steffen Jentsch to Lead Embedded Finance Platform | PYMNTS.com

Carsten Höltkemeyer, the firm’s CEO, stepped down at the end of 2025, the company said in its announcement last week. Steffen Jentsch, chief information officer and chief process officer for FinTech flatexDEGIRO AG, will take his place.

“Jentsch brings a proven track record in scaling digital financial platforms, along with deep expertise in regulatory transformation and digital banking solutions,” the announcement said.

Höltkemeyer is set to stay on in an advisory role. The announcement adds that Ansgar Finken, chief risk officer and head of its finance and technology area, is also stepping down, but will remain on in an advisory capacity.

Finken will be succeeded by Matthias Heinrich, former chief risk officer and member of flatexDEGIRO Bank AG’s executive board.

“I’m truly excited to join Solaris and lead the next chapter — one defined by durable growth built on regulatory strength and commercial execution,” Jentsch said.

Advertisement

Advertisement: Scroll to Continue

“Digital B2B2C platforms thrive when cutting-edge technology, cloud-native infrastructure, and strong compliance frameworks work seamlessly together. Solaris has been a first mover in embedded finance and has helped shape the market across Europe.”

The release notes that the leadership change follows SBI’s acquisition of a majority stake in Solaris as part of the 140 million euro ($164 million) Series G funding round last February.

The news follows a year in which embedded finance “moved from consumer convenience to business as usual,” as PYMNTS wrote last week.

During 2025, embedded payments, lending and B2B finance all demonstrated clear signs of maturity — especially when tied to specific verticals and workflows instead of being deployed as generic platforms. The most successful implementations were almost invisible, woven directly into the systems where users already worked, the report added.

Advertisement

“The embedded finance revolution that transformed consumer payments is now reshaping B2 commerce — with far greater stakes,” Sandy Weil, chief revenue officer at Galileo, said in an interview with PYMNTS.

“In 2025, businesses are embedding working capital, virtual cards and automated workflows directly into their platforms, turning financial operations into growth engines.”

It was a year in which “buy, don’t build” became the overriding philosophy, the report added. Research by PYMNTS Intelligence in conjunction with Galileo and WEX spotlighted the way institutions prioritized speed and specialization over ownership, “outsourcing embedded capabilities rather than developing them internally.”

Continue Reading

Trending