Perspectives: Advertising and climate change – Part of the problem or part of the solution?

Figures & data

Table 1. Research areas covered in each section (section headings are in italic).

Advertising as part of the problem	The carbon footprint of the advertising industry Advertising production and media campaigns cause a significant amount of carbon emissions (e.g. energy consumption). Advertising’s role in driving the internet’s carbon emissions The advertising industry indirectly contributes to the carbon emissions caused by advertising-driven online businesses (e.g. social networks). Advertising and aggregate consumption Advertising’s impact on aggregate consumption remains disputed, but individual-level studies show that materialism and consumerism increase consumption and are negatively related to pro-environmental behavior. Greenwashing Deceptive and ambiguous claims about products’ environmental impact hinder consumers’ green choices and increase their skepticism.
Advertising as part of the solution	Greening the advertising industry This section underscores the pressure and the initiatives within the advertising industry to decarbonize its activities. Promoting climate-friendly consumption through green advertising Accessibility to accurate information, emotional appeals, and heuristics are key to motivating low-carbon consumption. Demarketing climate-harmful consumption Advertising can help reducing the consumption of climate-harmful products.
What’s next for the industry	Toward a climate-friendly paradigm shift Advertising professionals are proactively supporting a shift toward climate-friendly business practices. Fighting greenwashing Greenwashing needs to be addressed through self-regulation, certification systems, bans, and interventions to increase greenwashing literacy. Leveraging low-carbon media campaigns and advertising carbon footprint information Companies will demand climate-friendly advertising campaigns because they will need to report their overall carbon footprint. Cutting ties with climate-harmful companies Advertising agencies will increasingly refuse to work for climate-harmful clients.
What’s next for advertising research	Defining and operationalizing concepts and constructs Since definitions of many sustainable advertising concepts and constructs are still vague, they need to be unified to allow theory development and empirical study. Assessing the impact of advertising on climate change Further research is needed to quantify the industry’s direct, indirect, and consumer behavior-mediated contribution to carbon emissions. Focusing green advertising research on mitigating climate change Future research needs to address specific antecedents, processes, and outcomes of climate-relevant behavior because most studies to date have only analyzed general environmental behavior. Also, the excessive focus on individual behavior change has diverted attention from advertising’s ability to shape society-wide climate-aware consumer culture.

Table 2. Overview of research on greenwashing.

Topic	Contribution	Studies
A conceptual review of greenwashing	Studies identify misleading and deceptive claims in green ads and define the phenomenon.	Bowen and Aragon-Correa (2014), de Freitas Netto et al. (2020), Delmas and Burbano (2011), Kangun, Carlson, and Grove (1991).
Green cues and greenwashing	Nature images, green color, eco-labels, and some packaging cues can give the impression of a product being environmentally friendly even in the absence of supportive facts.	D’Souza (2004), Gershoff and Frels (2015), Grimes (2008), Hahnel et al. (2015), Hartmann and Apaolaza-Ibáñez (2009), Magnier and Schoormans (2015), Matthes, Wonneberger, and Schmuck (2014), Pancer, McShane, and Noseworthy (2017), Seo and Scammon (2017), Sörqvist et al. (2015).
Greenwashing practices of oil companies	Apart from using deceptive and ambiguous claims, oil companies’ PR and advertising campaigns have also downplayed the need and urgency of climate action. Responsibility for taking action, if any, is placed on individuals rather than businesses.	Beder (2002), Bonneuil, Choquet, and Franta (2021), Boussalis and Coan (2016), Brulle, Aronczyk, and Carmichael (2020), Dunlap and McCright (2011), Jaworska (2018), Kent (2009), Megura and Gunderson (2022), Plec and Pettenger (2012), Schlichting (2013), Supran and Oreskes (2017, 2020, 2021).
Consumers’ reaction to greenwashing	Untrained consumers hardly recognize greenwashing in advertising, but its widespread use has increased consumers’ skepticism and distrust, lowering consumers’ intentions to buy green products.	D’Souza, Taghian, and Lamb (2006), do Paço and Reis (2012), Fernandes, Segev, and Leopold (2020), Goh and Balaji (2016), Gorissen and Weijters (2016), Parguel, Benoit-Moreau, and Russell (2015), Schmuck, Matthes, and Naderer (2018), Smith (2014).

Table 3. Overview of green advertising research.

Topic	Contribution	Studies
Theoretical development	This body of research covers early attempts to define green advertising and provides a framework to assess the greenness of advertising, identify consumers who are likely to pay more for green products, and discuss marketing strategies to target them.	Banerjee, Gulas, and Iyer (1995), Kilbourne (1995), Kilbourne (2004), Laroche, Bergeron, and Barbaro-Forleo (2001), Zinkhan and Carlson (1995)
Accurate information provision	To inform consumers’ choices and avoid suspicions of greenwashing, green advertising should prioritize clarity, specificity, and salience of environmental facts using substantive claims instead of vague image-enhancing cues.	Carlson, Grove, and Kangun (1993), Chan (2000), Davis (1993), Kangun and Polonsky (1995), Hartmann and Apaolaza-Ibáñez (2009), Scammon and Mayer (1995).
Promotion-focused appeals	Studies testing gain-oriented green advertising have mainly focused on three strategies: First, anticipating a positive affect from helping the environment (i.e. warm glow) can motivate pro-environmental action. Second, consumers’ willingness to signal a socially desirable identity can be exploited by linking green consumption to social approval. Third, advertisements using the green color or showing nature scenes activate an environmental schema for the consumer leading to positive emotional experiences that can encourage green consumption.	Bhatnagar and McKay-Nesbitt (2016), Hartmann and Apaolaza-Ibáñez (2008, 2009, 2010, 2012), Hartmann et al. (2017), Matthes, Wonneberger, and Schmuck (2014), Mazar and Zhong (2010), Nyborg, Howarth, and Brekke (2006), Pancer, McShane, and Noseworthy (2017), Policarpo and Aguiar (2020), Sachdeva, Jordan, and Mazar (2015).
Prevention-focused emotional appeals	Green advertising strategies based on negative emotions can effectively influence consumers. They may act pro-environmentally to avoid feelings of guilt and shame. Fear activation can also increase pro-environmental intentions. Climate change-related images activate fear by highlighting the severity of nature degradation and increasing the level of perceived threat.	Amatulli et al. (2019), Chang (2012), Hartmann et al. (2014), Homar and Knežević Cvelbar (2021), O’Neill et al. (2013), Pittman, Read, and Chen (2021).
Heuristics	Green advertising can exploit consumer heuristics, that is, mental shortcuts which simplify decisions. For instance, the ‘green halo effect’ caused by green labels can improve perceptions of product performance even in aspects unrelated to sustainability. Another heuristic, familiarity bias, leads to consumers more consistently making green purchases when repeatedly exposed to green advertising.	Apaolaza et al. (2018), Juhl, Fenger, and Thøgersen (2017), Park and Lessig (1981), Sörqvist et al. (2015).

Table 4. Further research agenda.

Topic	What we know	Research gap	Further research avenues
Construct definitions	The current literature provides diverse definitions and construct operationalizations concerning green advertising.	Vague definitions of concepts and constructs concerning sustainable advertising (e.g. green/sustainable advertising, greenwashing, etc.).	Unified definitions and operationalizations based on recent theoretical developments in the definition and operationalization of concepts and constructs.
Advertising’s carbon footprint	Activist and industry-based studies have intended to quantify advertising’s carbon emissions.	Existing data are scarce, industry-sourced, and not backed by systematic research.	The carbon footprint of advertising campaigns (advertising management, production, media choice).
Advertising’s indirect role in the internet’s carbon footprint	Advertising enables online business models. Internet activity causes carbon emissions.	Scarce data and conceptual development.	Advertising’s role in enabling advertising-driven online business models that have a significant carbon footprint (e.g. social networks).
Advertisings’ effect on aggregate consumption	Some studies support that advertising stimulates consumption.	Ongoing discussion on whether advertising drives aggregate consumption, for instance through materialism and consumerism.	The extent to which advertising increases aggregate consumption and boosts economic activity. The magnitude of the additional carbon emissions attributable to advertising.
Green advertising research’s climate change focus	Green advertising research has addressed the effects of advertising claims on pro-environmental consumer behavior.	The focus of extant green advertising research is on environmentally friendly consumption in general. Lack of specific theoretical underpinnings on how to mitigate climate change.	Development and empirical test of specific theoretical models of the relationship between green advertising claims and climate-friendly behavior.
Research focus on carbon-intensive systemic behaviors	Isolated studies have assessed advertising effects on carbon-intensive behavior such as energy choice.	Existing research focuses on more easily influenceable behaviors while avoiding hard-to-manipulate, carbon-intensive systemic behaviors (e.g. mobility and energy).	Extend green advertising research scope to the promotion of low-carbon alternatives to systemic carbon-intensive products, services, and behaviors (e.g. adoption of green electricity at home, public transport, etc.).
Demarketing climate harmful behavior	Research recognizes the need to decrease the consumption of some goods under certain circumstances and has revealed related mechanisms.	Scarce research on green demarketing and on how to restore the symbolic benefits that are lost when foregoing consumption. Lack of a climate change focus.	Development and empirical test of specific theoretical models focused on discouraging climate harmful behavior (e.g. flying, individual transport, meat consumption, etc.).
Psychological and sociological processes involved in climate-related persuasion	Several mediating and moderating processes have been revealed for green advertising effects.	Lack of knowledge on mediating processes explaining specific climate-related advertising effects.	Theoretical proposition and empirical test of specific psychological and sociological processes involved in climate protective behavior (e.g. mediating variables social emotions pride, shame, and guilt, climate anxiety, norm activation, social- and self-identity, personality traits and situational moderators).
Greenfluencers	Extant research has addressed the effects of influencer traits. Greenfluencer communication has been assessed by content analysis.	Lack of research on the effects of greenfluencers on climate-relevant behavior.	Impact of greenfluencers on consumer’s carbon footprint. Effects of greenfluencer traits and appeals. Identification of mediating variables to explain greenfluencer persuasion processes.
Systemic change to promote climate protection	Most theories of social change focus on individual responsibility to mitigate climate change.	Scarce interdisciplinary research on the systemic impacts of advertising on how consumer options are structured by governments, infrastructures, and economic institutions.	A more holistic approach to the role of advertising in sustaining a society-wide culture and narrative that promotes climate protection.

Bowen, F, and J. A. Aragon-Correa. 2014. Greenwashing in corporate environmentalism research and practice: the importance of what we say and do. Organization & Environment 27, no. 2: 107–12.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

de Freitas Netto, S. V., M. F. F. Sobral, A. R. B. Ribeiro, and G. R. D L. Soares. 2020. Concepts and forms of greenwashing: a systematic review. Environmental Sciences Europe 32, no. 1: 19.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Delmas, M. A, and V. C. Burbano. 2011. The drivers of greenwashing. California Management Review 54, no. 1: 64–87.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kangun, N., L. Carlson, and S. J. Grove. 1991. Environmental advertising claims: a preliminary investigation. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 10, no. 2: 47–58.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

D’Souza, C. 2004. Ecolabel programmes: a stakeholder (consumer) perspective. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 9, no. 3: 179–88.

 Google Scholar

Gershoff, A. D., and J. K. Frels. 2015. What makes it green? The role of centrality of green attributes in evaluations of the greenness of products. Journal of Marketing 79, no. 1: 97–110.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Grimes, A. 2008. Towards an integrated model of low attention advertising effects: a perceptual-conceptual framework. European Journal of Marketing 42, no. 1/2: 69–86.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hahnel, U. J. J., O. Arnold, M. Waschto, L. Korcaj, K. Hillmann, D. Roser, and H. Spada. 2015. Damaris roser, and hans spada. 2015. “the power of putting a label on it: Green labels weigh heavier than contradicting product information for consumers’ purchase decisions and post-purchase behaviour. Frontiers in Psychology 6, : 1392.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hartmann, P, and V. Apaolaza-Ibáñez. 2009. Green advertising revisited: Conditioning virtual nature experiences. International Journal of Advertising 28, no. 4: 715–39.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Magnier, L, and J. Schoormans. 2015. Consumer reactions to sustainable packaging: the interplay of visual appearance, verbal claim and environmental concern. Journal of Environmental Psychology 44, no. December: 53–62.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Matthes, J., A. Wonneberger, and D. Schmuck. 2014. Consumers’ green involvement and the persuasive effects of emotional versus functional ads. Journal of Business Research 67, no. 9: 1885–93.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Pancer, E., L. McShane, and T. J. Noseworthy. 2017. Isolated environmental cues and product efficacy penalties: the color green and eco-labels. Journal of Business Ethics 143, no. 1: 159–77.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Seo, J. Y., and D. L. Scammon. 2017. Do green packages lead to misperceptions? The influence of package colors on consumers’ perceptions of brands with environmental claims. Marketing Letters 28, no. 3: 357–69.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sörqvist, P., A. Haga, L. Langeborg, M. Holmgren, M. Wallinder, A. Nöstl, P. B. Seager, and J. E. Marsh. 2015. The green halo: Mechanisms and limits of the eco-label effect. Food Quality and Preference 43, no. July: 1–9.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Beder, S. 2002. Global spin: the corporate assault on environmentalism. Vol. 2. Devon: Green Books.

 Google Scholar

Bonneuil, C., P.-L. Choquet, and B. Franta. 2021. Early warnings and emerging accountability: Total’s responses to global warming, 1971–2021. Global Environmental Change 71, 102386.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Boussalis, C, and T. G. Coan. 2016. Text-mining the signals of climate change doubt. Global Environmental Change 36, no. January: 89–100.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Brulle, R. J., M. Aronczyk, and J. Carmichael. 2020. Corporate promotion and climate change: an analysis of key variables affecting advertising spending by major oil corporations, 1986–2015. Climatic Change 159, no. 1: 87–101.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Dunlap, R.E, and A.M. McCright. 2011. “Organized climate change denial.” In The oxford handbook of climate change and society. 1. New York: 144–160. New York: Oxford University Press.

 Google Scholar

Jaworska, S. 2018. Change but no climate change: Discourses of climate change in corporate social responsibility reporting in the oil industry. International Journal of Business Communication 55, no. 2: 194–219.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kent, J. 2009. Individualized responsibility and climate change: ‘If climate protection becomes everyone’s responsibility, does it end up being no-one’s? Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal 1, no. 3: 132–49.

 Google Scholar

Megura, M, and R. Gunderson. 2022. Better poison is the cure? Critically examining fossil fuel companies, climate change framing, and corporate sustainability reports. Energy Research & Social Science 85, no. March: 102388.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Plec, E, and M. Pettenger. 2012. Greenwashing consumption: the didactic framing of exxonmobil’s energy solutions. Environmental Communication 6, no. 4: 459–76.

 Google Scholar

Schlichting, I. 2013. Strategic framing of climate change by industry actors: a meta-analysis. Environmental Communication 7, no. 4: 493–511.

 Google Scholar

Supran, G, and N. Oreskes. 2017. Assessing ExxonMobil’s climate change communications (1977–2014). Environmental Research Letters 12, no. 8: 084019.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Supran, G., and N. Oreskes. 2020. Addendum to ‘assessing ExxonMobil’s climate change communications (1977–2014)’ supran and oreskes (2017 environ. Res. Lett. 12 084019). Environmental Research Letters 15, no. 11: 119401.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Supran, G., and N. Oreskes. 2021. Rhetoric and frame analysis of ExxonMobil’s climate change communications. One Earth 4, no. 5: 696–719.

 Google Scholar

D’Souza, C., M. Taghian, and P. Lamb. 2006. An empirical study on the influence of environmental labels on consumers. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 11, no. 2: 162–73.

 Google Scholar

do Paço, A. M. F, and R. Reis. 2012. Factors affecting scepticism toward green advertising. Journal of Advertising 41, no. 4: 147–55.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Fernandes, J., S. Segev, and J. K. Leopold. 2020. When consumers learn to spot deception in advertising: Testing a literacy intervention to combat greenwashing. International Journal of Advertising 39, no. 7: 1115–49.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Goh, S. K, and M. S. Balaji. 2016. Linking green scepticism to green purchase behaviour. Journal of Cleaner Production 131, no. September: 629–38.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Gorissen, K, and B. Weijters. 2016. The negative footprint illusion: Perceptual bias in sustainable food consumption. Journal of Environmental Psychology 45, no. March: 50–65.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Parguel, B., F. Benoit-Moreau, and C. A. Russell. 2015. Can evoking nature in advertising mislead consumers? The power of ‘executional greenwashing. International Journal of Advertising 34, no. 1: 107–34.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Schmuck, D., J. Matthes, and B. Naderer. 2018. Misleading consumers with green advertising? An affect–reason–involvement account of greenwashing effects in environmental advertising. Journal of Advertising 47, no. 2: 127–45.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Smith, K. T. 2014. Millennial’s interpretations of green terminology. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal 18, no. 1: 55–68.

 Google Scholar

Banerjee, S., C. S. Gulas, and E. Iyer. 1995. Shades of green: a multidimensional analysis of environmental advertising. Journal of Advertising 24, no. 2: 21–31.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kilbourne, W. E. 1995. Green advertising: Salvation or oxymoron? Journal of Advertising 24, no. 2: 7–20.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kilbourne, W. E. 2004. Sustainable communication and the dominant social paradigm: Can they be integrated? Marketing Theory 4, no. 3: 187–208.

 Google Scholar

Laroche, M., J. Bergeron, and G. Barbaro-Forleo. 2001. Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. Journal of Consumer Marketing 18, no. 6: 503–20. MCB UP Ltd

 Google Scholar

Zinkhan, G. M, and L. Carlson. 1995. Green advertising and the reluctant consumer. Journal of Advertising 24, no. 2: 1–6.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Carlson, L., S. J. Grove, and N. Kangun. 1993. A content analysis of environmental advertising claims: a matrix method approach. Journal of Advertising 22, no. 3: 27–39.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Chan, R. Y. 2000. The effectiveness of environmental advertising: the role of claim type and the source country green image. International Journal of Advertising 19, no. 3: 349–75.

 Google Scholar

Davis, J. J. 1993. Strategies for environmental advertising. Journal of Consumer Marketing 10, no. 2: 19–36. MCB UP Ltd

 Google Scholar

Kangun, N, and M. J. Polonsky. 1995. Regulation of environmental marketing claims: a comparative perspective. International Journal of Advertising 14, no. 1: 1–24.

 Google Scholar

Scammon, D. L, and R. N. Mayer. 1995. Agency review of environmental marketing claims: Case-by-case decomposition of the issues. Journal of Advertising 24, no. 2: 33–43.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bhatnagar, N, and J. McKay-Nesbitt. 2016. Pro-environment advertising messages: the role of regulatory focus. International Journal of Advertising 35, no. 1: 4–22.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hartmann, P, and V. Apaolaza-Ibáñez. 2008. Virtual nature experiences as emotional benefits in green product consumption: the moderating role of environmental attitudes. Environment and Behavior 40, no. 6: 818–42.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hartmann, P, and V. Apaolaza-Ibáñez. 2010. Beyond savanna: an evolutionary and environmental psychology approach to behavioural effects of nature scenery in green advertising. Journal of Environmental Psychology 30, no. 1: 119–28.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hartmann, P, and V. Apaolaza-Ibáñez. 2012. Consumer attitude and purchase intention toward green energy brands: the roles of psychological benefits and environmental concern. Journal of Business Research 65, no. 9: 1254–63.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hartmann, P., M. Eisend, V. Apaolaza, and C. D’Souza. 2017. Warm glow vs. altruistic values: how important is intrinsic emotional reward in proenvironmental behaviour? Journal of Environmental Psychology 52, no. October: 43–55.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mazar, N, and C.-B. Zhong. 2010. Do green products make us better people? Psychological Science 21, no. 4: 494–8.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Nyborg, K., R. B. Howarth, and K. A. Brekke. 2006. Green consumers and public policy: on socially contingent moral motivation. Resource and Energy Economics 28, no. 4: 351–66.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Policarpo, M. C, and E. C. Aguiar. 2020. How self-expressive benefits relate to buying a hybrid car as a green product. Journal of Cleaner Production 252, no. April: 119859.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sachdeva, S., J. Jordan, and N. Mazar. 2015. Green consumerism: Moral motivations to a sustainable future. Current Opinion in Psychology, Morality and Ethics 6, no. December: 60–5.

 Google Scholar

Amatulli, C., M. De Angelis, A. M. Peluso, I. Soscia, and G. Guido. 2019. The effect of negative message framing on green consumption: an investigation of the role of shame. Journal of Business Ethics 157, no. 4: 1111–32.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Chang, C.-T. 2012. Are guilt appeals a panacea in green advertising? International Journal of Advertising 31, no. 4: 741–71.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hartmann, P., V. Apaolaza, C. D’Souza, J. M. Barrutia, and C. Echebarria. 2014. Environmental threat appeals in green advertising: the role of fear arousal and coping efficacy. International Journal of Advertising 33, no. 4: 741–65.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Homar, A, and L. Knežević Cvelbar. 2021. The effects of framing on environmental decisions: a systematic literature review. Ecological Economics 183, no. May: 106950.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

O’Neill, S. J., M. Boykoff, S. Niemeyer, and S. A. Day. 2013. On the use of imagery for climate change engagement. Global Environmental Change 23, no. 2: 413–21.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Pittman, M., G. L. Read, and J. Chen. 2021. Changing attitudes on social media: Effects of fear and information in green advertising on non-green consumers. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising 42, no. 2: 175–96.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Apaolaza, V., P. Hartmann, C. D’Souza, and C. M. López. 2018. Eat organic – feel good? The relationship between organic food consumption, health concern and subjective wellbeing. Food Quality and Preference 63, no. January: 51–62.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Juhl, H. J., M. H. J. Fenger, and J. Thøgersen. 2017. Will the consistent organic food consumer step forward? An empirical analysis. Journal of Consumer Research 44, no. 3: 519–35.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Park, C. W, and V. P. Lessig. 1981. Familiarity and its impact on consumer decision biases and heuristics. Journal of Consumer Research 8, no. 2: 223–30.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar