Greenwashing Coca-Cola at COP27: A Critical Analysis

Greenwashing. Case study: Coca Cola, sponsor of COP27

We are analyzing the 2022 scandal at COP27, the largest conference on climate change, where Coca-Cola was the main sponsor.

25 May 2023 Teodora Ghenciu

Every year since 1994, the United Nations has organized the world's most important conference on climate change, called COP (Conference of the Parties), where leaders from all countries meet to establish measures against the effects of climate change.

This is how, for example, in 2015, the famous Paris Agreement emerged, which initially set the goal of keeping the average global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius and which was later adjusted to a target of 1.5 degrees, to avoid the most severe effects.

Therefore, these meetings are crucial for efforts to stop or at least slow down global warming. This is because negotiations are always ongoing, limits are re-established, plans to follow are made, and promises are made, depending on how things evolve.

At the last COP, number 27, held in November 2022 in Egypt, there was a major scandal, which began even before the event itself, when Coca-Cola was announced as the main sponsor.

Thousands of people signed a petition calling for the cancellation of this partnership, contested by environmental activists for two reasons:

1 - It's greenwashing. Coca-Cola unfairly benefits from a good market position as a sustainable brand, while the company is also the world's largest plastic polluter. Plastic is produced from oil, which is a fossil fuel, a direct cause of the climate change we are experiencing. And this was the problem discussed at the summit.

2 - The actual outcome of the negotiations could be affected due to potential lobbying by the company. And possible measures, which could lead to tougher laws for plastic polluters, for example, were in danger of not being taken.

What do specialists say about such partnerships? Should they be made or not?

Vasile Lazăr, sustainability consultant: "I believe that it would have been prudent for the conference organizers not to accept such a partnership. But this does not mean, by definition, that someone else who would have been a beverage supplier at that conference would not have an environmental impact. That is, I don't want to see Coca-Cola now as if it were a demon that we must avoid in every form it appears, anywhere. No, I don't think we should demonize a company. Coca-Cola will exist, and it also has product lines that are more eco-friendly than the conventional ones we know.

It doesn't mean that everything they do should be condemned, but such associations are inappropriate. They do not contribute to the trust of consumers, clients, and civil society in these types of organizations. (editor's note: COP)

That is, next time they organize a conference, they (editor's note: the United Nations organizers) will probably be more careful about whom they select as a partner.

But, indeed, we cannot ignore, in this whole discussion, the strong lobbying that consumer goods manufacturers' organizations exert on lawmakers and civil society."

At the end of COP 27, a document was signed, which you can see here. This is the fifth case study, out of a total of six, that we have done with sustainability consultant Vasile Lazar on the topic of greenwashing.

The first case study was about the Kaufland Zero Waste campaign.

The second case study was about the KLM Fly Responsibly campaign.

The third case study was about the TotalEnergies Net Zero campaign.

The fourth case study was about another partnership made by Coca-Cola with the WWF NGO, called Together for the Danube.

In the coming days, the last example will also be published here on eEco. And finally, the full interview.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is greenwashing and how does it affect public perception of companies?

Greenwashing is the practice by which a company promotes an image of sustainability and ecological responsibility, while in reality its actions contradict these values. This affects public trust, as consumers may become more skeptical of companies' marketing messages, fearing they are being manipulated.

Why has Coca-Cola's partnership with COP27 been criticized?

Coca-Cola's partnership with COP27 has been criticized because the company is the world's largest plastic polluter, which contradicts the conference's goals of combating climate change. Environmental activists have considered this partnership an example of greenwashing, in which Coca-Cola enhances its image despite its negative impact on the environment.

What are the implications of corporate lobbying on decisions made at international environmental conferences?

Corporate lobbying can influence decisions made at international environmental conferences, such as COP, by promoting the financial interests of companies at the expense of strict ecological protection measures. This can lead to the dilution of proposed legislation and delays in implementing necessary solutions to combat climate change.

What should organizers of international conferences consider when choosing partners?

Organizers of international conferences should consider the environmental impact of potential partners and their reputation within the ecological community. It is essential to avoid associations with companies that are perceived as having harmful environmental behavior, in order to maintain credibility and trust among participants.

Are there companies that can be considered sustainable despite facing criticism?

Yes, there are companies that, although they may be criticized for certain practices, also have initiatives and products that contribute to sustainability. Coca-Cola, for example, has product lines considered more eco-friendly, but its controversial partnerships can diminish the positive perception of these initiatives.