Widespread criticism of “greenwashing” practices has prompted business organizations to report on their corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities under more stringent transparency standards. However, in order to steer economic activity towards the meaningful integration of social and environmental sustainability goals, it is not enough for companies to simply report on the degree of “responsibility” with which they conduct their business: what counts as “responsible” corporate behavior must also be conducive to such a state. We argue that the fulfillment of the latter condition is hampered by an under-conceptualized form of greenwashing. “Type II greenwashing,” as we call it, refers to discursive practices by which the means advocated in the name of CSR (i.e., the corporate practices qualified as “responsible”) are decoupled from their stated ends (i.e., the declared broader goal of a corporate “responsibility”, ensuring an economically prosperous society that is also socially and ecologically sustainable). We show how Type II greenwashing differs from the practices that are conventionally subsumed under the term “greenwashing” (i.e., “Type I greenwashing”), and describe three discursive mechanisms through which Type II greenwashing functions: conflation, blurring, and distension of the means-ends link. Finally, we outline an agenda for researching and countering Type II greenwashing and offer useful implications for managerial practice.
