They lie in the “appropriate” containers without having the “right” to do so, they travel to a recycling plant that will not be able to process them, finally they are disposed of elsewhere or will likely end up contaminating the recyclable waste fraction. All of this, of course, happens without the knowledge of the user, who believes he or she made the right choice. This is the trajectory of “deceptive” waste, or those products that look “eco-friendly” without being ‘eco’ nor even “friendly” and that end up letting down consumers, especially those who are more sensitive to environmental issues. This phenomenon, which is probably underestimated and yet quite widespread, has been named wishcycling, otherwise known as the “recycling illusion.”
Zalando: goodbye to misleading green claims, two years before it becomes mandatory
The illusion of recycling
Anyway, what is it all about? Essentially the practice of disposing of materials in separate collection in the hope – rather than the certainty – that they are recyclable. Even though often they are not. This problem, say experts, is questioning the role of consumers. “Modern consumers”, in fact, “have been burdened with a responsibility that may be beyond their capacity: deciding what to do with product packaging after use,” Anastasia Vayona, a researcher at Bournemouth University’s Faculty of Science and Technology, wrote in a recent article published in the website The Conversation.
But the truth, she adds, is that many of them are actually “unprepared, undereducated or simply unaware of the full effect of their choices.”
The main responsibility, in any case, cannot be placed on users. Indeed, it would be up to companies to provide clear guidance on the treatment of their products once they become waste. Unfortunately, however, this is often not the case. Yet greenwashing strategies, by contrast, lead consumers to make “incorrect and potentially harmful decisions.”
You write “organic” on the label only if the product really is
Environmentally conscious people are also the most vulnerable
Vayona and her colleagues described this mechanism in a study published in the journal Sustainable Development. In particular, they analyzed the relationship between corporate marketing, perceived motivations and recycling behaviors of 573 consumers in the United Kingdom. The survey was released a year ago but its findings are of close relevance today. Authors, in fact, placed some emphasis on a phenomenon that is still very common: that of the so-called “environmental halo.”
According to the study, some elements such as a well-designed package or a couple of green labels or an eco-friendly claim, in particular, can be enough to make users think that the whole product is more environmentally friendly than it really is.
The most surprising aspect, however, is actually the psychological profile of the consumer. Paradoxically, those with greater environmental awareness (expecially young people), a higher level of education and a more secure personality (in terms of self-esteem and emotional stability, for example) are more vulnerable to greenwashing. According to the researchers, in fact, “consumers with higher levels of education tend to place greater trust in corporate claims of promoting sustainability and ethical practices.” Even when these claims are generic or non-verifiable.
No more “green,” “eco-friendly” or “sustainable” on labels and advertisement
A problem for the entire recycling chain
The consequences of these practices are significant. Although “innocent”, consumers are actually putting incorrect materials into recycling streams. With the risk of compromising the entire process. “Even small errors, such as disposing of a multi-layer package that cannot be separated, can contaminate an entire batch of recyclable waste,” the study explains,
Therefore, what to do? The solution, say the authors, is to ensure better recycling starting with the companies’ own choices. What is needed, in short, is more transparent and truly sustainable packaging, shared standards for labeling and greater responsibility on the part of manufacturers. But also the commitment and attention of “both environmentally conscious and critically aware consumers.”
