Corporate Sustainability Gap: How Greenwashing and Greenfraud Mislead Investors and Harm Environmental Progress

Ilustrasi by AI

Researchers from Perbanas Institute Jakarta published a study in 2026 analyzing the growing disparity between corporate sustainability claims and actual environmental performance. Authors Dessy Adelin, Jonnardi, Primadonna Ratna Mutumanikam, and Laela Lanjarsih investigated how companies manipulate environmental disclosures to build eco-friendly public images. The findings highlight how market pressures drive greenwashing and greenfraud, undermining genuine global sustainability initiatives and creating substantial long-term risks for investors, consumers, and corporate reputation.

The Challenge of Corporate Sustainability Communications

Corporate sustainability initiatives have shifted from voluntary public relations efforts to core metrics used by investors and regulators to assess corporate risk and organizational success. Modern market trends favor companies that demonstrate strong Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) performance. Consumers increasingly favor eco-friendly products, and financial institutions channel capital toward organizations with high ESG rankings.

However, this financial and social incentive structure creates an environment where corporate communications frequently outpace actual environmental achievements. While companies actively publish sustainability reports and run green marketing campaigns, many fail to make the required capital investments needed to reduce emissions, manage waste, or transition to clean energy.

Study Methodology

The researchers conducted a comprehensive qualitative literature study analyzing corporate sustainability practices, ESG disclosures, and environmental reporting mechanisms. Secondary data was collected from peer-reviewed scientific journals, academic books, corporate disclosures, and regulatory frameworks published across major databases, including Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and SpringerLink.

The team applied content analysis techniques to categorize corporate misconduct, identify structural reporting gaps, and evaluate the underlying systemic factors that drive superficial sustainability claims.

Key Findings: Greenwashing vs. Greenfraud

The study delineates two distinct categories of corporate environmental misrepresentation, each differing in intent and severity:

  • Greenwashing Dynamics: Greenwashing represents a communication strategy where companies use selective or ambiguous environmental statements to cultivate an eco-friendly image without making substantive operational changes. Common tactics include using vague terms like "eco-friendly" or "sustainable" without verifiable metrics, as well as selective disclosure—highlighting minor eco-friendly initiatives while concealing broader environmental impacts.
  • Greenfraud Mechanics: Greenfraud involves deliberate manipulation, falsification, or concealment of environmental data. Examples include altering carbon emission records, falsifying environmental audit documents, or deliberately misreporting renewable energy consumption.
  • Primary Drivers: The widespread presence of greenwashing and greenfraud is driven by market competition, the demand for social legitimacy, inconsistent international reporting standards, and a lack of mandatory independent third-party verification.
  • Consequences of Misrepresentation: Short-term reputational gains from exaggerated environmental claims often lead to long-term valuation drops, severe legal litigation, regulatory penalties, and a decline in consumer brand loyalty when discrepancies are exposed.

Real-World Impact and Industry Implications

The research emphasizes that corporate misrepresentation distorts capital allocation in financial markets. When investors rely on unverified ESG data, funds intended for sustainable development are diverted to high-polluting companies operating under a green facade.

To mitigate these risks, the authors recommend implementing mandatory independent audits for all corporate sustainability reports, establishing standardized global ESG reporting frameworks, and strengthening corporate governance structures through independent boards and internal ethics oversight.

"There needs to be more transparency, stricter reporting standards, and effective oversight to make sure that companies' sustainability claims reflect the actual environmental conditions." — Dessy Adelin, Jonnardi, Primadonna Ratna Mutumanikam, and Laela Lanjarsih, Perbanas Institute Jakarta

Author Profiles

  • Dessy Adelin, M.A. is a researcher and academic faculty member at Perbanas Institute Jakarta, specializing in accounting, corporate governance, and corporate sustainability reporting.
  • Jonnardi, Ph.D. is a researcher affiliated with Perbanas Institute Jakarta, focusing his research on accounting frameworks, financial auditing, and business ethics.
  • Primadonna Ratna Mutumanikam, M.Sc. is a lecturer and researcher at Perbanas Institute Jakarta with expertise in management practices, corporate reporting, and sustainability.
  • Laela Lanjarsih, M.Ak. is a researcher at Perbanas Institute Jakarta specializing in corporate financial systems, ESG metrics, and environmental performance evaluation.

Source

 


Posting Komentar

0 Komentar