Abstract
Public discourse on environmental responsibility and sustainability continues to pressure corporations, especially those that have been portrayed as key contributors of environmental harm. Greenwashing is a strategy that companies adopt to engage in symbolic communications with environmental issues without substantially addressing them in actions. This paper aims to raise awareness of corporate greenwashing, drawing attention to issues that progress the trend of individualized responsibility and consumption, while concealing the social and (eco)systemic issues in the process. By drawing on the case study of winter apparel company Canada Goose, this paper questions whether businesses can ‘go green’ in good faith, if corporate responsibility and environmental responsibility can ever be reconciled, and if there is considerable need to clarify the intended effects and unintended consequences of corporate greenwashing.
Highlights
Public discourse on environmental responsibility and sustainability continues to put pressure on corporations, especially as many “have been portrayed as one of the key causes of ... environmental problems” (Walker and Wan 2012: 227)
In the case of the latter, greenwashing1 is a strategy that companies adopt to engage in symbolic communications with environmental issues, without substantially addressing them in action (Walker and Wan 2012)
As an ‘umbrella concept’, green criminology has broadly conceived its place within the criminological main, spanning a wide field of ‘green’ crimes, and maintains its concern with mainstream criminology’s neglect of ecological issues (Brisman 2017; see Gacek 2018, 2019)
Summary
Public discourse on environmental responsibility and sustainability continues to put pressure on corporations, especially as many “have been portrayed as one of the key causes of ... environmental problems” (Walker and Wan 2012: 227). While generally this research has been focused on environmental performance, marketing and consumer consumption, green criminological inquiry has made inroads into understanding how state (in)action regulates or incentivizes corporations and firms to commit illegal or harmful actions towards particular environments and ecosystems (e.g., see Hasler, Walters and White 2019; Nurse 2015; Walters and Westerhuis 2013; White 2009, 2018a, 2018b). As an ‘umbrella concept’, green criminology has broadly conceived its place within the criminological main, spanning a wide field of ‘green’ crimes, and maintains its concern with mainstream criminology’s neglect of ecological issues (Brisman 2017; see Gacek 2018, 2019). The planting of green perspectives into the criminological field has produced a bounty of fruitful outcomes and deliverables, spanning several decades of extensive and thought-provoking inquiry at its best (for early considerations, see Halsey 2004; Halsey and White 1998; Lynch and Stretesky 2003; South 1998; White 2003)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
