by Caroline Chamberland, M.Sc., MBA
When a company proudly displays its ISO 14001 certification, can we really conclude that it is committed to the environment? Or is it just greenwashing, a well-crafted strategy to make itself look environmentally friendly?
At first glance, certification seems to be a guarantee of seriousness. Indeed, the ISO 14001 standard is based on external audits conducted by independent organizations that verify compliance with environmental requirements. In theory, this should limit greenwashing practices. But what about in practice?
What is greenwashing?
According to the Vitrine linguistique de l'Office québécois de la langue française,greenwashing is defined as:
A public relations operation carried out by an organization or company to conceal its polluting activities and attempt to present itself as environmentally responsible.
This definition highlights the importance of transparency and consistency between a company's actual actions and the image it projects. Can environmental certification sometimes be used to embellish this image without reflecting a genuine commitment?
Understanding the fundamentals of the standard
ISO 14001 certification has three main objectives:
- Environmental protection
- Compliance with legal requirements
- Continuous improvement
These objectives must be integrated into the company's environmental policy and applied to all of its activities... or at least those included in the scope of certification.
Scope: a source of ambiguity
A company may choose to certify only part of its operations. For example, a company that specializes 80% in excavation and 20% in snow removal may limit its certification to its snow removal activities. As a result, it can display the ISO 14001 logo while excluding its most polluting activities. Consumers or business partners who are not well informed may believe that the entire company is certified. Is this a form of greenwashing?
The same reasoning applies to an oil company. It can certify its production facilities for their greenhouse gas (GHG) management while continuing to produce oil, the end use of which generates massive emissions. Does the certification cover the overall impact or only a carefully selected portion?
Compliance: a relative concept
Complying with laws and regulations seems obvious. However, some companies are unaware of the environmental obligations specific to their sector. ISO 14001 certification requires them to identify and comply with these obligations. This can prevent situations where, due to a lack of knowledge, a company pollutes without malicious intent.
But compliance may not be the same for all Quebec companies. Take the case of the Horne Smelter, which does not comply with Quebec's atmospheric emission standards but is still ISO 14001 certified thanks to a special agreement with the government. Is this misleading?
And what about foreign companies operating in countries with less stringent environmental standards? They can be ISO 14001 certified while releasing quantities of pollutants that would be prohibited here. Can Quebec consumers really compare these certifications on an equal footing?
Continuous improvement: but at what pace?
The standard requires companies to continuously improve. But it does not set targets or areas for improvement. One company may aim for a 1% reduction in water consumption, while another may aim for 55%. Both are certified. Is one less committed than the other? Not necessarily. The overall objectives and the initial context must be considered.
The overall objectives must be considered. The company that reduces its water consumption by 1% could also be aiming for a 45% reduction in its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Conversely, it could also have a target of only 0.5% reduction in its GHG emissions. In both cases, it meets the requirements of the standard, which values the improvement process but does not judge the ambition of the targets.
This raises an important question: can a certification that does not take into account the level of ambition truly reflect a company's environmental commitment? And if the targets are modest, or even symbolic, is this considered a form of greenwashing?
Transparency: a crucial issue
The standard requires communications to be consistent and reliable. But if a company deliberately fails to specify the extent of its commitment, this can be misleading. According to the definition of greenwashing by the Vitrine linguistique du Québec, it is a public relations operation carried out by an organization to mask its polluting activities and attempt to present itself as environmentally responsible. The line between omission and manipulation then becomes blurred.
Conclusion
Although the requirements related to environmental protection, compliance with obligations, and continuous improvement are well defined in the ISO 14001 standard, not everything is BLACK or GREEN. There are many nuances in its application, particularly due to the diversity of companies that can be certified.
For buyers, purchasing managers, members of executive committees, or consumers, it is essential not to stop at the ISO 14001 logo. You have to go further: check the scope of the certification, ask questions about environmental objectives, and ensure that the products or services you are looking for are covered. This is all the more important when considering a long-term business relationship.
So, is an ISO 14001-certified company necessarily more committed than a non-certified company? Not always. Certification can be a good starting point, but it is not enough on its own to judge the depth of environmental commitment.
To further your thinking on this subject, we also suggest reading the following articles:
https://www.accademia.com/fr/comment-definir-son-domaine-dapplication/
https://www.accademia.com/fr/la-norme-iso-14001-pourquoi-obtenir-la-certification/