Greenwashing Risk in Green Supply Chain Management: Explaining Greenwashing Through the Discrepancy Between GSCM Practice and Marketing Claims— A Comparative Case Study of H&M and Patagonia
Main Article Content
Keywords
greenwashing, green supply chain management (GSCM), sustainability communication, signalling theory, stakeholder trust
Abstract
Growing sustainability expectations have increased concern about greenwashing, yet comparatively little attention has gone to how the mismatch between green supply chain management (GSCM) practice and sustainability communication itself generates that risk. Working from signalling theory and legitimacy theory, this study builds a discrepancy-based framework explaining how misalignment between operational performance and marketing claims shapes greenwashing risk. A comparative case study of H&M and Patagonia examines how different levels of alignment affect claim credibility and stakeholder trust. The findings show that wider discrepancies raise the likelihood of greenwashing accusations, while transparency and independent verification strengthen credibility and trust. The study identifies the supply chain–channel interface as a key source of greenwashing risk and offers a framework for understanding the relationship between discrepancy, greenwashing risk, and stakeholder trust.
References
- [1]Pizzetti, M., Gatti, L., & Seele, P. (2024). Unraveling green marketing and greenwashing: A systematic review in the context of the fashion and textiles industry. Sustainability, 16(7), 2738. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16072738
- [2]Cepêda, C., Monteiro, A. P., & Aibar-Guzmán, B. (2025). Bridging the ESG credibility gap: The role of institutional investors in mitigating ESG decoupling. Business Strategy and the Environment, 34(6), 7139–7160. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.4336
- [3]Delmas, M. A., & Burbano, V. C. (2011). The drivers of greenwashing. California Management Review, 54(1), 64–87. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2011.54.1.64
- [4]Velte, P. (2023). Determinants and consequences of corporate social responsibility decoupling. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 30(6), 3205–3217. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2538
- [5]Zioło, M., Bąk, I., & Spoz, A. (2024). Literature review of greenwashing research: State of the art. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(6), 5343–5356. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2842
- [6]Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., & Lai, K.-h. (2008). Confirmation of a measurement model for green supply chain management practices implementation. International Journal of Production Economics, 111(2), 261–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2006.11.029
- [7]Connelly, B. L., Certo, S. T., Ireland, R. D., & Reutzel, C. R. (2011). Signaling theory: A review and assessment. Journal of Management, 37(1), 39–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310388419
- [8]Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.2307/258788
- [9]Shourkaei, H. M., Rauer, J., & Hoejmose, S. U. (2024). Examining sustainable supply chain management via a social-symbolic work lens: Lessons from Patagonia. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(4), 2876–2896. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3552
- [10]Netherlands Authority for Consumers & Markets (ACM). (2022). Going forward, Decathlon and H&M will provide better information about sustainability to consumers. https://www.acm.nl/en/publications/going-forward-decathlon-and-handm-will-provide-better-information-about-sustainability-consumers
Article Sidebar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.