Environmentally-aware consumers know that where they spend their money can have significant environmental repercussions, so given the choice, environmentalists are much more likely to lean towards products or brands that make commitments to lowering their environmental impact. However, consumers have learned to become wary of vague statements and empty promises, an act labeled greenwashing, which companies have learned to make. By acting like they care about the environment without making significant changes to their contributions to climate change, they can get more sales without spending any time, money, or effort on actually altering their impact. Such deception has been tolerated since its origin, but legal action is finally being taken against greenwashing. 

Earlier this year, the state of New York filed a lawsuit against JBS, the largest meat company in the world, which has made public claims that they will reach net-zero emissions by 2040, but have made no efforts to bring them towards that goal. Their interest in reducing their environmental impact is well-represented by the fact that their own CEO “admitted in a public forum that the company didn’t even know how to calculate all of its emissions” in September of 2023. JBS made this promise to entice environmentalists that are concerned about the impact of the meat industry, but the company has no intention of keeping it. If JBS loses the suit, they will have to eradicate all of their promises regarding climate change, preventing them from profiting from false claims.

JBS is a prime target for this lawsuit as their disregard for their environmental impact extends beyond their blatant inaction to support their claims of sustainability. In France, there has been speculation of JBS’s role in the illegal deforestation of the Amazon, as the same banks invested in JBS have also provided “financial support for Brazil’s biggest beef companies[,] contributing to illegal deforestation in the Amazon” rainforest, a massive carbon sink and habitat to countless species. In addition, US senators have previously “alleged that the company engages in investor fraud.”

Usually these suits are filed by organizations or individuals concerned with global warming, but this one came from the office of a state attorney general, signaling how JBS’ lies are a huge problem that extends to entities beyond environmental advocates. If the state wins the case, it will set a precedent both to JBS and all other companies that have used empty environmental promises to maximize profits. The amount of time this case will last depends on if its legal time decides to drag it on, losing it momentum, or try to complete it swiftly to minimize damage to company reputation. Due to the implications of this case with future climate legislation, its outcome is extremely significant, and can finally put an end to unrealistic agreements that deceive consumers.

I’m really glad that legal efforts are being made, especially by people with political power, to hold people accountable for their impact on the environment. I’ll keep an eye out for any updates on the case, and I plan to make a post when we get more information, because it can really change how companies feel about using climate change as a marketing tool. Many businesses will exploit any opportunity to rake in money, so showing them that they cannot lie to customers about climate change without any repercussions is extremely valuable.

Been doing a lot of research on climate news and I hope you’re enjoying it as much as I am! That thing about the slashing of the Amazon was really shocking to me, and I’ll definitely be looking into that in the future. All the more reason to stay tuned to learn with me!

Also congrats everyone on post 100! Kind of strange that I’ve been doing this for almost two years, but there’s still so much that I’m learning and excited to research. Thank you for sticking around for this long.

https://explore.proquest.com/sirsissuesresearcher/document/3041585608?accountid=163174