Gen Z Holds Companies To Account For Greenwashing

Companies increasingly want to talk about sustainability, but not everyone believes equally in their commitments. The focus of corporate communication has shifted towards sustainability in response to increasingly serious environmental issues, international campaigns such as the UN's 2030 Agenda, regulatory pressures in certain markets, interest in more environmentally friendly investments and a growing number of environmentally aware consumers. As a result, environmental matters have become a key part of corporate reputation in recent years.

However, not all organizations that claim to be sustainable are and not everyone shares the same views of these corporate commitments. Members of Gen Z, those born between 1995 and 2009, are especially sensitive to greenwashing and seem prepared to shun companies that are not consistent with their message. This is the conclusion of a new study led by Elisenda Estanyol, a researcher in the Learning, Media and Entertainment Research Group (GAME) and a member of the Faculty of Information and Communication Sciences Studies at the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC). Researchers from Pompeu Fabra University and the MERCO Corporate Reputation Business Monitor also participated in the study.

"The most striking thing is that Gen Z isn't indifferent or complacent: they actively observe, assess and judge the companies' behaviour in terms of the environment. They don't just consume; they construct a brand's reputation, based on what it does or doesn't do for the environment," said Estanyol, who is also the academic director of the University Master's Degree in Corporate Communication, Protocol and Events at the UOC. "The study shows a generation that is especially sensitive to greenwashing and ready to hold companies accountable when they say one thing and do another." “Generation Z actively observes, evaluates and judges companies’ environmental behaviour”
Stigmatized sectors and more demanding consumers

One of the key findings of the study, based on the opinions of 8,980 people in three European countries (Spain, Italy and Portugal) and three Latin American countries (Chile, Colombia and Mexico), is that, when it comes to sustainability, not all companies start from the same point. The reputation and environmental commitment of organizations in socially stigmatized sectors, such as tobacco, gambling, fossil fuels or sugary drinks, are generally perceived more negatively. However, these negative perceptions, like the positive ones, vary between countries and population groups.

Europeans tend to be more critical than Latin Americans when assessing companies' environmental commitment. Spain stands out as the most demanding country. According to Estanyol, "this is due to several factors. First, there is greater social and media awareness of the climate crisis. Second, there is a tradition of distrust towards institutions and large corporations, which leads young people to adopt a more sceptical and demanding perspective. Gen Z in Spain does not take environmental commitment for granted: it demands evidence, transparency and tangible results."

Mexico and Colombia lead in positive ratings. This does not necessarily mean that companies in these countries are more sustainable, but that social expectations may be different. "In countries where environmental regulation is less strict or there is less institutional pressure, any visible effort is perceived as a significant advance," said Estanyol, who is also attached to the UOC-TRÀNSIC research centre. "In Europe there is an increasingly demanding regulatory framework, which raises people's expectations. Sustainability is no longer a bonus, it has become a minimum expected standard, which explains a more critical and less forgiving public attitude to corporate behaviour."

Besides location, another factor that makes a difference is gender. In all the countries and generations analysed in the study, women tend to value environmental commitment and corporate reputation more highly than men. This difference is especially clear in Generation X and Millennials, but it is also evident in Gen Z. This highlights the importance of incorporating a gender perspective in the analysis of corporate social responsibility.Gen Z is demanding, but also recognizes effort

The results of the study confirm that Gen Z is more critical, demanding and active than previous generations. The data, however, suggest certain nuances. Far from showing a systematic distrust of companies, Gen Z values environmental commitment and corporate reputation most positively, especially when they perceive this commitment as credible and consistent. In other words, members of this generation are demanding, but they are also able to recognize companies' hard work and real commitment.

This behaviour points to a key characteristic: Generation Z acts not so much from distrust as from discernment. Their expectations are high, but not indiscriminate. They expect transparency, consistency between discourse and practice, and measurable results. When these conditions are met, the response is positive. "The message for companies is clear: Gen Z is watching and will not forgive inconsistency. Companies that incorporate sustainability in a real and verifiable way can gain reputation and legitimacy; those that merely feign commitment risk losing credibility," Estanyol said.Towards credible sustainability: key points for companies

Communicating sustainability is more important than ever, but it is only effective if it is done honestly and connects with the realities of different audiences. The study not only diagnoses the demanding circumstances in which companies operate, but also proposes a series of changes to how they communicate to respond to the demands of an increasingly engaged public:

• Real and verifiable transparency. Environmental commitment must be communicated with clear data and measurable objectives that allow real progress to be verified, beyond marketing messages.
• Targeted messages. Expectations regarding sustainability vary between countries and socio-demographic groups, so environmental communication must adapt the content and form of messages accordingly.
• Channels open to participation. Generation Z expects to be able to interact with companies and question corporate discourse, so businesses should focus on digital channels that encourage dialogue and not just one-way communication.
• Consistency in words and action. Environmental commitment is only credible if it is aligned with real, sustained action. Any contradiction is quickly detected and called out, especially by younger audiences.

"The implication for companies is clear: neutrality is no longer an option," said Estanyol. "For Gen Z, doing things right has a reputational reward, but doing them badly has an immediate cost. Brands face a logic of reward or punishment in which coherence in terms of the environment directly influences trust, reputation and social legitimacy. It's not enough to talk about sustainability: it must be demonstrated constantly."