Greenwashing in Pharmaceutical: An Overview of Sustainability Claims

I. Introduction

Over the years, trends have been changing toward a sensitive approach to nature. These trends have led both consumers and companies to act more ecologically friendly. In recent years, companies have been trying to reduce their impact on the environment. However, the efforts of these companies are not always transparent, with some choosing to use their efforts as a form of advertising while others choose to deceive the consumer by pretending to be environmentally friendly when they are not. In this context, this article is going to try to shed light on general greenwashing and its potential examples on the healthcare sector.

II. General View of Greenwashing

As previously mentioned, consumers are more likely to choose environmentally friendly products. Consequently, companies naturally build their advertising strategies around this theme. This is where the greenwashing comes in. Greenwashing is misleading consumers about companies' ecological intensives and environmental impacts by making false statements in green marketing and advertisements. Therefore, non-environmentally friendly companies promote themselves as green company or eco-friendly companies.

The main driver of greenwashing is rising consumer awareness about climate change. Companies try to influence consumers to make environmentally friendly choices. Consumers' adoption of such choices makes the strategy profitable and popular. Furthermore, promoting the company as an environmentally responsible entity enhances its reputation and brand image.

III. Legal Framework

The EU Directive[1] on Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition (Empowering consumers for the green transition through better protection against unfair practices and through better information, 2024/825) was adopted by the European Parliament on 17 January 2024. Claims need to be supported in a solid way with this new directive. This directive is designed to integrate properly with the EU Green Claims Directive [2]that is expected to be adopted by countries at the end of 2026. The proposal was adopted by the European Parliament in March 2024. This directive will set some detailed proofs and rules. Both directives will complement each other. In 2019, the European Commission published a document named “Strategic Approach to Pharmaceuticals in the Environment,” which was later optimized and complied with the European Green Deal. Even though it is considered a strategy that is not binding, it aims to detect and prevent the pollution of pharmaceuticals on the environment from production to consumption.

IV. General Greenwashing Tactics and Examples

In recent years, there has been an increase in the number of tactics and examples of greenwashing. It is important to note that these tactics do not necessarily happen due to a conscious strategy. These occurrences may be a consequence of non-compliance with regulatory frameworks. According to the European Commission, %53 of green claims include misleading or unfounded information. %40 of claims do not have any supporting evidence, and nearly half of the claims were not verified, or their verifications were suspicious and weak.

Unapproved Data: The data being promoted might not have been verified with trusted verification. It can also be irrelevant, inconsistent, or outdated.

Misdirection: First, companies can use compatible words like green to convince consumers that they are trustworthy even though these words lack a standard meaning. Companies can also mislead consumers, like a flare, to draw their attention and prevent them from seeing another activity that is harmful to nature. As another, companies can promote their activities in a distorting mirror in spite of their minimum impact on nature. Lastly, this misdirection can occur because of the company's policies. The company has the possibility to promote its environmental policy, even though there is no applied policy. Although there is no actual environmental claim, such an image may be tried to be visualized in the eyes of the consumer with some symbols.

Concealment: Companies might prefer to hide their non-eco-friendly intensives while promoting eco-friendly intensives. The focus is exclusively on the positive effects, while the potential negative impacts on nature are not addressed. Consequently, consumers are only aware of the good ones. Alternatively, they may promote their eco-friendly operations to hide their harmful operations as a smoke screen. Furthermore, companies might not mention the content of their promotions and operations that are claimed as green.

More seen examples might be:

- An advertisement about the products some percent is made of recycled materials,

- Mention that the product can be recycled,

- Uncertain statements about eco-friendly intensives,

- Mentions about energy and carbon savings.

V. Greenwashing and Sustainability in Healthcare & Pharmaceutical

According to an article published on the UK parliament's website[3], the pharmaceutical industry's emissions per million-dollar revenues were 48.55 tonnes, and the automotive industry's was 31.4 tonnes. Even these statistics expose the importance of the pharmaceutical and healthcare industry's location in terms of carbon footprint. In light of this information, the pharmaceutical and healthcare industry’s impact on nature cannot be ignored.

A. Unique Challenges

a) Pharmaceutical Pollution: This topic mainly focuses on the pollution of unused or expired pharmaceuticals & needles & single-used plastics & syringes, air pollution during manufacturing, and their bad effects on the environment and especially on the water. More than half of the waste disposal in the pharmaceutical sector is mainly waste from pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. The rest can be listed as major contributors other than hospitals and pharmacies. Drug waste disposal should also not be forgotten. These drugs or other pharma products are designed to protect themselves from external factors in order to be effective. As a result of this, these drugs that may be thrown at toilets mix with the water. Due to their small molecules, water filter systems cannot separate from the water. This leads to the detection of drugs in waters such as rivers and seas with long periods of life.  Moreover, at the end of the manufacturing period, hazardous wastewater should be managed carefully to protect the environment from these types of hazardous chemicals. Even if these might not now trigger a fast action, results may be terrific in the long term. Their effect on marine life should not go unnoticed as a result of the above. To look at single-use plastics, according to research[4], nearly more than half of the companies use incineration to manage the waste, and %30 of companies use traditional landfilling. These manufacturing stages can cause air pollution without sufficient filtration, leading to the relaxation of VOC(volatile organic compounds) that are hazardous to nature. In particular, pharmaceutical companies may claim their drug's effect on environmental pollution.

b) CO ₂ Emissions & Energy: In addition to the above, pollution of pharmaceuticals stands for the entire life cycle of drugs, which includes manufacturing. According to research[5] done by ARUP in 2019, the healthcare sector's carbon footprint is %4.4 of global net emissions, which is more than aviation and shipping. The sector's greenhouse gas emissions are not something to be underestimated. As you can guess easily, the power consumption of factories is important because of air conditioning systems, heating, ventilation, separators, and pumps. According to research done by McMaster University, the Pharma sector should have reduced its emission % by 59 from 2015 to 2025. Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI) claims [6]that switching to renewable energy sources can cut down the %45 carbon footprint of the pharma sector. It has been observed that pharmaceutical companies tend to use more renewable energy sources. Pharmaceutical companies may claim fewer emissions, energy-efficient systems, and usage of renewable energy sources during manufacturing.

c) Water Consumption: The Pharma sector mainly depends on water consumption due to manufacturing, cooling, maintaining temperatures, and intensive water usage during detailed cleaning processes. According to an article[7], pharmaceutical sectors have a %23 share of global water consumption. Also, according to another research done by WWF, %80 of the top 30 pharma companies consider water consumption as one of the main sustainability focus area. It is essential in this perspective that water consumption is a key issue for sustainable pharmaceuticals. In this context, a range of approaches can be explored. These include the reuse of water and the implementation of efficient water consumption techniques. Zero liquid discharge might be one of the examples of wastewater management systems that maximize the recovery of freshwater.  Claims about these techniques (including the ones not listed here) might be false or misleading. These claims should be examined in a detailed way.

d) Packaging: It is widely known that pharmaceutical packaging relies heavily on plastics. This leads to an overdose usage of plastics (containers, closures, accessories) due to their durable fabric. Furthermore, it is important to note that these plastics are typically intended for single use, with the primary purpose of preventing patient hygiene problems. General borders of packaging are driven by Good Manufacturing Practices & Packaging and packaging waste regulation. However, there is no obligation to use plastic. If paper-based materials meet strict requirements (protection, child-resistant, etc.), they can also be used for this purpose. In addition to paper-based materials, companies should consider recyclable packages, bio-based plastics, innovative plastics, or recycled packages as primary and secondary packaging. From this perspective, companies can change their packaging policies towards more environmentally friendly and recycled packaging. Recently, Johnson & Johnson has decreased [8]%20 waste through recycling initiatives. Claims about these types of claims, including eco-friendly packaging, need to be considered skeptical.

e) Supply Chain: In this topic, it is necessary to re-express the impact of supply chain emissions, though companies also need to be aware of Scope 3 emissions. According to research[9], Scope three emissions are responsible for %80-90 of total emissions in the pharmaceutical sector. Scope three emissions are expected to play a critical role in achieving sustainable net-zero emissions. However, it is important to note that these emissions are not solely associated with transport. The cold chain, for instance, has a significant impact on these emissions. It is important to examine the raw materials to look at the beginning of the supply chain. Some pharma products rely on natural ingredients like plant-based or mining elements. It's worth remembering that the use of these ingredients must be sustainable. The process of obtaining raw materials must not harm nature, deforestation, life, and sustainability of the inhabitants. Companies need to consider sustainable practices during the supply chain from raw material to final product.

B. Eco-friendly Action Examples

These examples will be explained due to their eco-friendly promises. None of them are related to a suspicion of greenwashing. They will be explained because, in the future, this type of information by pharmaceutical companies might mean greenwashing.

a) AstraZeneca: In 2020, AstraZeneca announced an “Ambition Zero Carbon[10]” strategy. According to the announcement, AstraZeneca is planning to zero carbon their scope one and two emissions by 2025 and their scope three emissions (supply chain) by 2030. This program will cost 1 Billion Dollars. Moreover, the transition to a %100 electric vehicle fleet and 50 million tree reforestation is highlighted in the strategy.

b) Pfizer: Pfizer is planning to use %82 energy from renewable energy (%6 in 2021) by 2025 and all %100 energy from renewable energy sources by 2030, with a strategy that aims to be net zero by 2040.

c) GSK: GSK is aiming[11] to zero operational waste, %25 impact reduction of packaging, %10 supply chain waste reduction by 2030.

VI. Conclusion

In conclusion, the practice of greenwashing appears to be a popular trend, as we can see from the WWF data. Consumers' awareness and support for nature are being abused by some companies. Although companies' sustainability and nature-supporting approaches are to be appreciated, they should be approached with skepticism by consumers. Companies that have such allegations should have them verified and published publicly. Sustainability trends show us that eco-friendly approaches will increase in the short term. As we can see from the examples above, pharmaceutical companies are taking planned steps towards sustainability. These processes need to be transparent with all participants of all parties. However, future plans and aims by companies need to be controlled and followed.

References

- Karkare, V. (2024, April 12). Green Pharma: How the pharmaceutical industry is embracing sustainability. Cornerstone International Group. https://www.cornerstone-group.com/2024/04/12/green-pharma-how-the-pharmaceutical-industry-is-embracing-sustainability/

- MSc, A. K. (2024, April 9). Understanding the environmental impact of the pharmaceutical industry. Pharma Life Sciences. https://www.techtarget.com/pharmalifesciences/feature/Understanding-the-environmental-impact-of-the-pharmaceutical-industry

- United Nations. (n.d.). Greenwashing – the deceptive tactics behind environmental claims | United Nations. https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/climate-issues/greenwashing

- Said, A. (2022, December 20). ESG challenges and opportunities within the pharmaceutical industry. Clarasys. https://clarasys.com/insights/thinking/esg-challenges-and-opportunities-within-the-pharmaceutical-industry