Posted on June 5, 2025
From exploring whether sustainability is at risk of becoming just another buzzword, to addressing the growing threat of greenwashing, the creative industry’s moral compass, and the potential for a unified code of conduct—they share perspectives on what it truly means to communicate sustainability with integrity.
Sustainability has become a branding pillar across industries. But as the term appears more frequently in campaigns and corporate messaging, it risks becoming a buzzword—its meaning diluted by overuse or under-delivery. Paru Minocha, MD & Head – Qualitative & Sustainability Transformation Practice, India, Kantar, offers a long view of this shifting landscape. She says, “The period from the mid-eighties to the beginning of the financial crisis in 2008 is known to economists as the Great Moderation—a period of stability in which disruptions were less frequent and less severe.
She continues, “That is in the past. Discontinuities are now a feature of the marketplace, not the exception. And the World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report is a year-on-year reminder that the greatest disruptor of them all, Climate Change, is looming, with all its associated disruptions to human society and the economy. So, what we have thought of as ‘sustainability’ is rapidly becoming business as usual.”
Sharing how they’re working to protect sustainability from becoming hollow rhetoric and ensure it continues to hold value and drive real impact, Praveen Nijhara, CEO, Hansa Research Group emphasizes the widening gap between brand messaging and consumer trust. He says, “At Hansa Research, our view is that while sustainability has emerged as an area of focus for most sectors, there is a growing threat that the term is more used as a marketing buzzword than as a meaningful promise.
He continues, “What we have discovered in our consumer research is that while Indian consumers would like to purchase many brands—increasing numbers of Indian consumers prefer brands with claims to be sustainable. This observation arises from our ongoing consumer research monitoring perception against behavior, giving brands a reality check. Lack of transparency and measurable action on behalf of brands is a key cause of this divide.
He adds, “To ensure sustainability’s relevance and credibility, companies need to do more than just talk about it. They need to incorporate it into their routine operations, business plans, and communication—along with sufficient certifications, regular progress updates, and conclusive outcomes. That would be the greatest means of achieving customer trust and long-term brand value.”
On the question of the term being in danger of becoming a buzzword, Rakesh Hinduja, Co-founder & Managing Partner, Wondrlab Network remains optimistic about genuine efforts standing out, “No, I don’t think so. There are various brands and businesses that are truly practicing or working towards achieving it in various ways. There would always be cases of superficial usage but consumers and the world at large are way smarter not to fall for the trap. False claims by brands/businesses, however, are the rotten ones that we as marketing partners surely need to work towards eliminating.”
Shradha Agarwal, Co-founder and Global CEO of Grapes Worldwide cautions against overuse that could backfire explains, “Undeniably, sustainability has become a buzzword given the rising awareness among consumers. Gauging the behavior, brands are leaving no stone unturned and are riding the ‘green’ bandwagon to reach potential target audiences. However, overusing the term, especially when not necessary, can jeopardize the entire endeavor and even risk the term losing its meaning.
“As a result,” she adds, “brands need to be very careful when integrating sustainability into their communication strategy. Rather than just using the term at a superficial level, it is important to showcase accountability where the brand practices sustainability. Exercising transparency by undertaking initiatives such as recycling material or making use of eco-friendly products, etc., can play a significant role in building trust among the audience.
Along with this, Agarwal recommends that brands avoid exaggerating their commitments and rather focus on depicting honest storytelling with meaningful dialogue to establish the credibility of the brand. She adds, “Crafting a well-informed, purpose-driven campaign with meaningful messaging can reduce the risk of exploitation of the buzzword and showcase the brand in solidarity with the purpose.”
Keerthi Kumar, Business Head – Bengaluru, SW Network points to consumer influence and the importance of measurable actions, “Sustainability is for sure becoming a core branding pillar today. According to some reports, 82% of Indian consumers say they’re making more sustainable choices, directly shaping brand strategies. However, as more brands adopt the term, there’s a real risk it becomes diluted by overuse or under-delivery. To protect its meaning, we must focus on authenticity and tangible action.
Kumar recalls, “Fresh in my memory are a couple of brands and campaigns like Tata Tea’s #JaagoRe for climate-resilient supply chains and Himalaya’s tree plantation initiatives, which show that real impact happens when brands go beyond just using the term and actually deliver measurable results.”
Manisha Desai, Head of Marketing, AdLift believes sustainability’s credibility hinges on proof, not positioning. “Today’s consumers are discerning,” says Desai. “So, brands need to back their claims with action—via data, audits, and real operational changes. If we want sustainability to be taken seriously, we need to treat it as a long-term business strategy, not a temporary brand play.”
Maghan Varkey, Strategy Director, ABND is blunt about the overuse and demands brands get specific. “It became a buzzword over a decade ago. It’s become so stagnant, I’m pretty sure even stand-up comedians have stopped joking about it. Actions have always spoken louder than words, and when it comes to sustainability, that’s non-negotiable.
“The only way to protect its meaning and rebuild trust is to talk about specific, quantifiable initiatives and their real-world impact. Not the vague, feel-good fluff brands often cram under the umbrella of ‘sustainability.’
Varkey adds, “Don’t tell me you save water. Tell me exactly how many litres you save every day, and what systems made that possible. Then go a step further: open-source that knowledge, and encourage others in the industry to do the same. That’s how we move forward, with facts, not fiction.”
Sushant Sadamate, COO & Co-founder, Buzzlab too calls out performative branding and insists on accountability. “Sustainability is now stamped on everything from face creams to fintech, but let’s be honest, half the time, it’s just fancy wallpaper. The word gets thrown around in boardrooms and ad copy like confetti, but without real commitment, it risks turning into just another hollow hashtag.
“The fix? Strip it back to impact. Brands need to stop chasing applause and start chasing accountability. Show the data. Prove the change. Whether it’s reducing plastic in packaging or switching to greener servers, the story has to go beyond intentions and into actions. If it’s not measurable, it’s just talk.
Sadamate asserts, “The brands that win the sustainability game won’t be the loudest; they’ll be the ones with receipts.”
As sustainability becomes a key marketing message, brands face a crucial challenge of avoiding the communication traps that lead to greenwashing—whether intentional or accidental. The stakes are high, with consumer skepticism growing and regulatory scrutiny tightening. Describing the common pitfalls that ensnare brands in misleading messaging, Praveen Nijhara of Hansa Research Group, says, “Greenwashing, either deliberate or accidental, remains one of the biggest hurdles for sustainability communication. As far as consumer comprehension goes, brands are habitual victims to the traps of unsubstantiated claims, relying on vague descriptors like ‘eco-friendly’ in the absence of full explanations, highlighting narrow, isolated initiatives disproportionately, and failing to report on the total environmental impact of their core activities.
He continues, “Our studies frequently uncover increased demand for transparency—especially in areas such as retail, fashion, FMCG —where claims of sustainability abound but proof is scarce. Today’s consumers are becoming increasingly skeptical and intolerant of generic or unsubstantiated sustainability statements.
Nijhara adds, “Brands need to take a more cautious, evidence-led communications approach to protect their credibility and trust, relying on solid judgments, open standards, and full openness over making exaggerated statements that might boomerang or catch the regulators’ eye.”
Paru Minocha of Kantar on the other hand offers a sobering diagnosis. “Brands are facing a crisis of trust.” To take concrete steps to counter perceptions of greenwashing, Minocha share the following framework of the thirteen principles for action.
Rakesh Hinduja of Wondrlab Network, highlights a mindset error, “The biggest mistake is treating sustainability like a checkbox or a tagline. Another common misstep is a mismatch between the brand’s core offering and its sustainability messaging, which makes audiences skeptical. Transparency about limitations as much as progress is the antidote. It builds trust and gives brands room to grow credibly.”
Shradha Agarwal of Grapes Worldwide, stresses clarity and consistency, “To avoid falling prey to greenwashing, brands should prioritize clarity, credibility, and consistency in their messaging. They should be cautious to not exaggerate claims and portray real achievements, even if they have minimal impact. This will exhibit the brand in a positive light, where they will stand the chance of appreciation for their consciousness and genuine initiatives.
“Moreover,” Agarwal says, “supporting the campaign or ad with authentic third-party certifications from organized bodies can reinforce the commitment of the brand before the audience. Simultaneously, fact-based storytelling with knowledge of the initiative highlights the involvement of the brand in sustainable practices rather than just projecting an act of claim to fame.”
SW Network’s Keerthi Kumar lists common traps brands fall into, “Greenwashing, whether intentional or accidental, is still a major hurdle. Brands often fall into traps like making vague or unproven claims, emphasizing small green features while ignoring larger consequences, using deceptive imagery, or relying too much on future promises. It’s essential for brands to be honest, specific, and transparent. This is particularly important now that the ASCI mandates advertisers to support their environmental claims and consider the full lifecycle of their products.”
Manisha Desai of AdLift, meanwhile calls out vague language and the importance of full disclosure. “The biggest trap? Vague language with no proof. Terms like ‘green,’ ‘eco-friendly,’ or ‘clean’ don’t mean much without context. Even well-meaning brands stumble when they highlight minor wins while ignoring bigger issues. To avoid this, align sustainability and marketing teams, stick to facts, and share the full picture, flaws and all.”
Maghan Varkey of ABND, urges brands to align sustainability communication with business scale, she explains, “Consumers can spot the difference between genuine intent and hogwash. So either don’t talk about it, or talk about it only when it genuinely moves the needle.
Citing an example, Varkey says “If your revenue is ₹3,000 crores, don’t show off the 300 trees you planted at your manufacturing unit. That’s not impact, that’s optics. Do what’s appropriate to the scale of your business. If you’re serious about sustainability, adopt a forest.
She adds, “One of the biggest traps brands fall into is dressing up token gestures as transformation. Overselling small wins. The moment sustainability becomes a storyline before it’s a reality, it’s already greenwashing.”
Sushant Sadamate of Buzzlab, warns against superficial claims and the need for transparency, “Greenwashing often starts with good intentions and ends with bad optics. One of the biggest traps that brands fall into is overpromising with vague claims. Words like ‘eco-friendly,’ ‘natural,’ or ‘sustainable’ are plastered on packaging without any proof or standards to back them up.
Sadamate adds, “It sounds nice, but it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Another common misstep? Spotlighting one green initiative while ignoring the rest of the supply chain. For example, celebrating recyclable packaging while running carbon-heavy logistics is like cleaning your front porch while your house is on fire.
He continues, “Today’s consumers are savvier, they don’t just read the headline; they read the fine print. Transparency isn’t a buzzword, it’s the baseline. Brands that treat sustainability like a PR stunt are the first to be called out. The ones that treat it like a business function? They will earn real trust.”
As sustainability climbs higher on the business agenda, a provocative question challenges the creative sector: does the industry have the courage to say ‘no’ to unsustainable clients or projects—and should it? Kantar’s Paru Minocha believes the role of the industry lies in guidance, not sole guardianship. “The creative or market research industry is here to help brands connect with consumers in an authentic way. Part of that is integrity and responsibility and make sure the brand has the consumer’s pulse.
Minocha adds, “In that role, they should guide brands to deliver what matters most to consumers today and what is likely to become imperative tomorrow. They alone are not the custodians of sustainability but rather it is a shared responsibility between the brand and its eco system.”
Praveen Nijhara of Hansa Research Group, sees a rising consumer demand for ethics that calls for creative courage.“Since it shapes consumer attitudes and influences cultural values, the creative industry has a stake in the sustainability story. At Hansa Research, our insight is that consumers today, especially Gen Z and the younger millennials, are extremely sensitive to the moral stance of both brands and their creative agencies.
He adds, “In our consumer behavior studies, we’ve seen a distinct tilt toward brands and creators who take a stand—even if that means walking away from non-sustainable partnerships. To this end, communications professionals and agencies have the power as well as the obligation to reject tales that are not aligned with environmental responsibility.
Nijhara asserts, “A ‘no’ to non-sustainable briefs is no longer an ethical imperative—it is a sound business imperative that saves reputation, drives value over the long term, and speaks to the shifting expectations of a values-driven marketplace.””
Rakesh Hinduja of Wondrlab Network, offers a nuanced take on the business realities agencies face. “It’s complicated. The business reality is that saying ‘no’ isn’t always black and white. But I do believe the industry can push back in constructive ways. We have the creative tools to challenge clients, guide them toward better practices, and elevate conversations from compliance to commitment. Should we say no? If a brand is actively misleading consumers or ignoring serious harm, then yes—our conscience and credibility demand it.”
Shradha Agarwal of Grapes Worldwide, believes the industry holds the power to influence and must wield it responsibly. “It is important to understand that the creative industry comes with a lot of potential to influence the audience. It can shape the culture, perceptions, and behaviour of the consumers; as a result, it becomes imperative that industry be mindful of its actions.
“Given the impact the industry can create on the society, the stakeholders should be more conscious and responsible in their decisions. Collaborating with purpose-driven brands can give industry players an edge over the others that projects the ethos and vision-oriented direction of the industry,” adds Agarwal.
Keerthi Kumar of SW Network, points to an encouraging shift already underway, “The creative industry is becoming more conscious of its responsibilities. In India, while not every agency is ready to cut ties with unsustainable clients, there’s a noticeable shift towards being more selective about who they work with.
He continues, “Some Indian agencies are taking bold steps like for example a leading network’s FlexForward initiative, which transforms old flex materials into useful items, and another major player’s task force that advocates for recyclable materials in outdoor advertising. Yet, there are still significant hurdles to overcome, such as high costs and limited access to eco-friendly materials.
“Nevertheless,” Kumar adds, “the industry is heading in a positive direction, with more agencies understanding that saying ‘no’ isn’t just the right thing to do; it’s also crucial for building long-term credibility and trust with clients.”
Manisha Desai of AdLift, keeps it simple and direct “It’s tough, but necessary. We have influence and a voice, and using it means saying no when things don’t align with long-term values.”
While Maghan Varkey of ABND, suggests a collaborative over a confrontational approach. “No, we don’t need to say no. We need to say, ‘not like this.’ There’s more value in helping clients evolve than in walking away. The creative industry should act as a partner not a preacher, building better solutions with clients.”
Sushant Sadamate of Buzzlab, acknowledges the complexities but argues for a systemic shift. “It should and slowly, it is. The creative industry has always been a mirror to culture, and right now, culture is demanding accountability. Saying ‘no’ to unsustainable clients isn’t just a moral stance, it’s a brand-building move for agencies themselves. Because every campaign is a value signal, and creatives are the storytellers of those values.
“But,” Sadamate adds, “let’s be real: it’s not always easy. Pitches mean pressure. Revenue targets are real. The courage to walk away often comes at a cost. That’s why the shift has to be systemic, not just personal. Industry bodies, award juries, and procurement processes all need to evolve and reward sustainability not as a side note but as a core requirement. When that happens, ‘no’ won’t be a rebellious act, it’ll be standard practice.”
With sustainability now a cornerstone of modern branding, the need for clear, consistent, and credible communication has never been greater. But as terms like “eco-friendly” and “green” get thrown around loosely, the industry finds itself at a crossroads. Do we need a formal code of conduct for how sustainability is communicated across campaigns, channels, and categories? Paru Minocha highlights the importance of embedding sustainability into the creative core—and points to global collaborative frameworks already in motion.
Minocha says, “With no credible pathway to net zero without significant cultural and behavioural change, the deepening of the Action 5 workstream has never been more important. The sustainability sector agrees too, with leading organizations like the UN, IPCC, and various NGOs such as Climate Change Committee, Project Drawdown, Count Us In, Potential Energy Coalition aligned around this fact.
“Encouragingly,” she adds, “the Foundational Pathway shows that 76% of companies are already creating work for sustainable products, services and behaviours, including all six holding companies. However, with a recent survey from WARC revealing that only 4% of clients are adding climate considerations into their briefs, there is a clear need to plant this work at the heart of the creative process. As a result, Ad Net Zero now has a global, voluntary and science-backed pilot underway that aims to help creative, strategy and brand professionals support more sustainable behaviours through advertising campaigns.
“Named Every Brief Counts, this is a test programme, which aims to educate teams on the key sustainable behaviours outlined by climate science and the ways to tell these stories effectively through advertising. To support this initiative, the Advertising Association, Ad Net Zero and Kantar have launched The Sustainable Behaviours Advertising Tracker,” Minocha adds.
Praveen Nijhara believes the demand for standards is both urgent and inevitable, “The need for an official, industry-standard code of conduct for communication around sustainability is both urgent and opportune. We believe it should include standardized definitions of terms employed in association with sustainability, third-party mandated certifications, lifecycle clarity, and fact-based reporting adherence. Through our syndicated and bespoke consumer research, we repeatedly find that people are calling for accountability and consistency from brands through channels.
Nijhara adds, “An industry code would not just aid brands in speaking plainly, but it would also increase consumer confidence. It would also include regulatory safeguards to discourage greenwashing and standardize how stories of sustainability get made and told. A code of conduct not only lifts ethical levels as a whole but also allows for trust and responsibility in an era where informed consumers are demanding proof, not promise.”
Rakesh Hinduja too supports the idea—not as moral policing, but as a practical tool. “Yes, we do—and not as a moral high ground, but as a practical framework. A code could cover basic principles like: back claims with data, avoid vague terms like ‘eco-friendly’ without context, disclose trade-offs honestly, and encourage lifecycle thinking. It can be like a filter for—what we say should stand up to scrutiny.
He adds, “I understand that it won’t solve everything, but it’ll at least protect credibility, and help rebuild public trust in brand-led sustainability narratives.”
Shradha Agarwal too agrees that standardized review mechanisms are overdue, “With sustainability being a woke topic across the industries, the urgency to carve an industry-wide code of conduct has been felt before. With every brand declaring to be sustainable, proper guidelines should be framed to verify the campaign and ensure it is in alignment with specific communication. Encouraging a third-party certification and review system can substantiate the authenticity of the campaign that conforms to the sustainable practices undertaken by the brand and does not make false claims.”
Keerthi Kumar highlights the importance of lifecycle transparency and the precedent set by Indian regulatory bodies, “To foster credibility and consistency in sustainability communication, an industry-wide code of conduct is absolutely necessary.
“This code,” Kumar says, “should mandate that all sustainability claims are substantiated with solid evidence and, when feasible, verified by independent parties. Brands must be upfront about the complete lifecycle impact of their products, from design to disposal, and should avoid using misleading visuals or vague terminology.
He adds, “Recent initiatives in India, like ASCI’s guidelines and the National Guidelines on Responsible Business Conduct, already provide a solid starting point, and a broader industry code would ensure that sustainability messages remain accurate, transparent, and effective.”
Sushant Sadamate offers a vivid and actionable blueprint for what the code should demand, “Yes, we absolutely need one, and not as a vague set of good intentions buried in fine print. An industry-wide code of conduct for sustainability communication should function like a North Star for marketers and creatives alike. Think of it less like a rulebook and more like a filter that every campaign idea must pass through.
“At its core,” Sadamate says, “the code should demand three things: truth, traceability, and tangibility. Truth, as in claims backed by data and certified impact, not lofty language or vague commitments. Traceability, where every sustainability claim can be followed back to a real action, product change, or supply chain decision. And tangibility, meaning the benefit to people or planet is measurable, not metaphorical.
“Add to that transparency in messaging, consistency across touchpoints, and accountability when outcomes fall short and you’ve got a baseline that the whole industry can build on. Because let’s face it: credibility is the new currency. And no one wants to spend theirs on green smoke and mirrors,” adds Sadamate.
Meanwhile Manisha Desai points to existing enforcement—and the need to build on it, “The CCPA’s (The Central Consumer Protection Authority) Greenwashing Guidelines (Oct 2024) already ban vague terms like ‘eco-friendly’ or ‘green’ unless backed by third-party proof. That’s a great start, but we need to go further. A strong code should focus on clarity (no jargon), credibility (data-backed claims), and accountability (honest about progress and gaps).”
Maghan Varkey, Strategy Director, ABND, prefers a more minimalist—but firm—approach, “This is a tough one, maybe not a code of conduct, but just drawing a line between honest communication and empty marketing.
She wraps up the conversation by saying, “It’s simple: no claims without proof, no hiding behind vague language, and no cherry-picking feel-good stats. If you’re not ready to be transparent about the trade-offs, don’t talk about sustainability at all. It’s not limiting creativity, it’s clearly being tangible. That’s all.”
Originally Published:
MediaBrief : https://mediabrief.com/exclusive-eight-marketers-on-world-environment-day-2025/