Foodprints for the Future
Greenwashing in the Grocery Store
November 5, 2025
Those “eco-friendly” snack bars you bought this week? Chances are, the label was more marketing than truth.
Feeding the world comes with a heavy environmental cost. In 2022, food production accounted for 29.7% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Beyond that, agriculture drives deforestation, water pollution, soil degradation, biodiversity loss, and raises serious concerns about farm animal welfare.
All of this damage is intrinsically woven into our food system, so it’s no surprise that customers have been seeking out more sustainable options. Food companies have picked up on this trend, dressing their products up in ‘green’ marketing to appear environmentally responsible. In reality that doesn’t always mean they are actually doing better for the planet.
Greenwashing is when companies mislead customers into believing they are doing more to protect the environment than they actually are. Greenwashing takes many different forms, like misleading claims about plastic recycling capabilities, or even products labeled as biodegradable when they don’t actually break down easily unless they go through another industrial process. On food packaging, this often means vague labels like ‘eco-friendly’ or ‘all natural,’ or just plain old ‘green’.
Greenwashing also involves the using visual symbols of nature, like a leaf or a tree, to convey the same message. Earlier in 2025, Snapple entered a lawsuit regarding the company’s marketing of their tea as “all natural,” despite the fact that they contain citric acid, which is considered synthetic by the Food and Drug Administration. In 2014, General Mills’s Nature Valley bars came under fire for their ‘natural’ claims, despite also containing synthetic ingredients.
Eco-friendly? Prove it!
While it feels good to come home with a grocery bag full of “sustainably sourced” pasta, “farm fresh” tomato sauce, and “pasture-raised” cheese, topped with “pesticide-free” basil. And vague eco-buzzwords may seem enticing, we as consumers need hard evidence to back these claims up. . In the United States, these labels lack a legal definition, which means there are no enforceable standards, and companies can use them freely without providing evidence.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) polices food labels on packaged goods, but only when the wording has a legal definition. Since words like “eco-friendly” or “all natural” are legally undefined, the FDA doesn’t have the authority to get involved in their use.
It might make sense for the FDA to handle these claims, but since greenwashing falls under advertising, this work shifts to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The FTC is in charge of advertising claims to ensure that companies aren’t misleading customers. Their Green Guides provide companies with standards for making truthful environmental marketing claims.
This might seem great for us consumers, but in reality these guidelines have not been updated since 2012, and they aren’t legally binding. The FTC has a more comprehensive legal framework for addressing greenwashing, but its enforcement ability is limited and stronger oversight is needed for this type of marketing. Vague labelling is misleading and gives a false sense of progress and worse, it distracts from the bigger problems we are facing in agriculture and food supply chains.
What Should You Look Out For?
If buzzwords like “natural” and “green” aren’t enough to guarantee sustainability, then what can we rely on? That’s where trusted certifications come in; backed by third-party oversight, rigorous standards, transparency, and actual accountability.
The USDA Certified Organic label allows farms or processing facilities to call their products organic but to earn the certification, farms must adopt organic practices. That means protecting soil and water quality, conserving habitats, and avoiding the use of synthetic fertilizers and genetic engineering altogether. If any rules are broken, there are financial penalties and even the risk of losing their organic certification.
The Non-GMO Project butterfly seal isn’t given out to just anybody. There is a rigorous multi-step process involving third-party administrators, verification fees, and annual renewals. To be given the butterfly seal, the product must avoid genetically modified organisms (GMO). Crops must fall below a strict GMO threshold, and farms and facilities need to keep GMO and non-GMO ingredients separate. The Non-GMO Project verification does not guarantee that products are GMO-free, as such a claim is not legally or scientifically defensible but it is a serious attempt to help consumers find non-GMO foods as best it can. Risks of GMO contamination still exist in seeds, crops, and ingredient supply as many of these non-GMO and GMO products share processing and supply chains. .
Certified Humane has its own multi-step process, which includes fees, inspections, and intensive reviews. The verification ensures that a farm’s animals are never kept in cages or crates; they are allowed to move freely and behave naturally. Animals must be fed quality food free of antibiotics or growth hormones. They have set animal care standards for individual species ranging from cattle to red deer but even here it’s hard to police every farm or brand who bears their symbol.
Our Wallets Have Power
Knowing the difference between greenwashed labels and trustworthy certifications trying to do the right thing – helps! Here’s a cheat sheet to refer to next time you’re at the grocery store:
- Showing, not telling: don’t fall for the labels with no explanations. Buzzwords like “natural” and “eco-friendly” don’t tell the whole story. Look for details!
- Look for the seal! Certifications like USDA Organic, Non-GMO Project, and Certified Humane require fees and inspections; not just any brand can claim these labels!
- Check the databases. Certifications provide a product database for you to check your favorite brands. Here for USDA Organic, here for Non-GMO Project, here for Certified Humane.
At the end of the day, these greenwashing labels are another attempt at curbing the blame of the climate crisis on the individual, rather than making true changes within the industry itself.
Found some useful information in this article? Consider donating to EARTHDAY.ORG to support further research and awareness. You can also have these articles emailed directly to you by signing up for our email list.
This article is available for republishing on your website, newsletter, magazine, newspaper, or blog. The accompanying imagery is cleared for use with attribution. Please ensure that the author’s name and their affiliation with EARTHDAY.ORG are credited. Kindly inform us if you republish so we can acknowledge, tag, or repost your content. You may notify us via email at [email protected] or [email protected]. Want more articles? Follow us on substack.
