reenhushing, also known as brownwashing or greenblushing is the intentional practice of withholding communication or under-reporting an organization’s corporate sustainability or environmental initiatives. It’s often viewed as a knee-jerk response to greenwashing, in which companies fabricate or exaggerate environmental claims. Greenhushing occurs when organizations have policies and procedures in place to support sustainability yet choose not to disclose them publicly. It can happen for a number of reasons. In the U.S., for example, public companies can be sued for violating their obligation to increase shareholder profits, so firms may stay silent about their environmental efforts to avoid costly litigation.

Some organizations do it to manage political risks, limit scrutiny of their operations, or to avoid accusations of greenwashing, especially amid the evolving ESG landscape in the United States, where there have been a number of new policies that address how companies utilize ESG criteria in recent years. (Source: Rives, Tom. The politics of ESG backlash. Oxford Analytica, 2024.)

To understand the reasons for greenhushing, you need to understand the impact of greenwashing and the backlash it created. One assessment of greenwashing in the European Union last year found that nearly half of the “green online claims” made by companies were exaggerated, deceptive or false. This has led to crackdowns by watchdog organizations, making greenwashing an infraction if a company makes an environmental performance claim that can’t be substantiated.

The UN Secretary General called for zero tolerance of the practice. The heightened sensitivity to scrutiny may explain why some organizations choose not to report at all.

There are other reasons for greenhushing, including the perception that environmentally friendly products involve trade-offs. Consumers may assume that sustainability comes at the expense of performance or quality, which is not always the case.

Greenhushing has also become a way for companies to avoid being singled out and to reduce friction in doing business, even though 80% of consumers say sustainability is an important factor in their purchasing decisions (Consumers Drive Sustainability: 80% Prioritize Eco-Friendly Products).

A good way to combat the avoidance of reporting and sharing sustainable practices within an organization is by empowering employees. This can be achieved by providing them with resources and systems to understand and engage in sustainability efforts. Offering tools that demonstrate the impact of their work on the planet can boost employees’ confidence and motivation, helping them see that they are truly making a difference. This includes not only offering performance measures but also fostering a culture of care and implementing policies that strengthen connections to nature and community. For example, as Curbell creates their first-ever ESG report, we are exploring how employees and actions directly impact the communities in which we live.

Building trust is essential, and organizations should provide clear, accessible and comprehensive information about their specific sustainability actions. Inviting employees to publicly share the company’s commitments and initiatives can make its stance on sustainability more credible and tangible. At Curbell, sustainability is part of our culture and values, and we strive to demonstrate this to our employees in multiple ways. Removing the minefield of outside opinions and focusing on facts and science helps strengthen the case for clear and truthful reporting. Tracking and communicating the tangible, measurable scope of their actions, and their positive impact on society and the planet, goes a long way in supporting a culture of sustainability. Open communication allows businesses to share best practices, acknowledge challenges, and learn from one another. It also enables consumers to hold companies accountable while encouraging and rewarding responsible behavior. If you want to transform your business, communication is key. Clearly conveying a company’s sustainability vision and goals clarifies its identity for employees, focuses attention on aligning actions with sustainability objectives, and increases accountability to external stakeholders.

Several factors are driving this retreat from visibility. One of the most obvious is the fear of legal liability or public backlash which has pushed some companies to avoid the topic of ESG entirely. According to EcoVadis’ 2025 Business Sustainability Landscape Outlook, 87% of companies are maintaining or increasing their ESG investments, yet nearly one-third are intentionally communicating less. The Financial Times reports that 71% of the 50 largest U.S. companies remain committed to climate goals, despite a growing number of them removing public references to ESG, including Google’s parent company, Alphabet. (source: Greenhushing: Why Staying Quiet About ESG Is a Risk)

Concurrently, regulations are evolving quickly. New frameworks like the EU’s CSRD, California’s SB-253, and the Australian Sustainability Reporting Standards, are raising the stakes for disclosure, causing many companies to avoid speaking up rather than risk having to retract or revise their statements. In short, many businesses see greenhushing as a form of risk management; however, this tactic introduces a different set of risks. An ESG workforce strategy should not be a secret. Employee engagement, innovation and retention improve when companies are transparent about their ESG policies. In a recent study by Qualtrics, 54% of U.S. employees would take a pay cut to work at a company that shares their values, and 56% would not even consider a job at a company with values they disagree with, making it essential to communicate this information (source: https://www.qualtrics.com/news/for-employees-shared-values-matter-more-than-policy-positions/). These findings emphasize the potential of ESG performance to enhance employee satisfaction and attract prospective employees. While employers can rely on word of mouth to some extent, greenhushing does them no favors in terms of talent recruitment.

When an organization decides to go quiet about its sustainability work, the following can be potential consequences:

• Trust is undermined. If progress is not shown to stakeholders, it’s assumed to not exist. Credibility needs to have transparency.
• Momentum stalls. As teams work toward climate goals, it’s essential to acknowledge and share the progress, it motivates and inspires others.
• Opportunities can be missed. Strong ESG credentials are attractive to investors, partners, buyers and prospective employees. If you don’t share your intentions and commitments, you are missing potential growth.
• Innovation slows down. Industry-wide progress depends on sharing information and collective learning. If you stop sharing, you can’t benefit from others or learn from them.

This information does not need to be a billboard, an advertisement in a magazine, or even a post on social media, but credible, consistent and clear communication does make a difference. It matters perhaps now more than ever. Effectively communicating climate progress is a challenge. Some ways to avoid overpromising and under-communicating are as follows:

• Have real data to back up your claims. If you are sharing information, even less-than-perfect results shows intent and progress.
• Use clear messaging. Avoid industry buzzwords and abbreviations; use relatable messaging to convey your intent clearly.
• Focus on progress and strategy. Acknowledge that it is not a simple process, and share what is working as well as what needs more attention going forward. Not all strategies are home runs; some need more finesse or a different approach to succeed.
• Cross-functional consistency. Align across teams to ensure your communication reflects reality. It is better to be honest and share what is happening and how it is being addressed.

The rise of greenhushing does not mean that companies are backing away from climate action and sustainability; rather, it shows a shift in how these efforts are approached and communicated. The challenge, and the opportunity, now is to shape a more credible kind of sustainability narrative: one that is rooted in data, guided by strategy and communicated clearly.

We are in a critical time where expectations are rising, and regulators demand structures and auditable data. Customers are asking more questions, and the public wants more evidence in addition to ambition. Some may think that by staying quiet, they are staying safe; however, credibility is not supported by silence. No data is perfect, nothing in life has complete certainty. What matters most is aligning stakeholders with what your company is doing and what it is willing to communicate.