From greenwashing to greenbleaching: green communication and mitigating moral outrage in the context of revisited situational crisis communication theory

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of the study is to examine the relevance and application of green communication in management of the risks associated with moral outrage inducing crises. The study aims to identify how green communication mitigates both crisis risks and moral outrage. Additionally, the research discusses ethical and unethical green communication practices in the context of their impact on relationships between organizations and stakeholders during the crisis. Design/methodology/approach The study is designed as exploratory research. Available English-language journal articles and conference proceedings have been examined to investigate the role of green communications in crisis response contexts. The application of the search criteria and initial filtering yielded a total of 139 publications for further analysis. Following a detailed review and subsequent filtering, the final sample of 66 unique cases has been selected and analyzed in the context of Situational Crisis Communication Theory. Findings The systematic review and document analysis indicated multitude of significances of green communications in the context of the updated Situational Crisis Communication Theory. Moreover, a novel phenomenon has been identified: greenbleaching is exaggerated or fabricated usage of green communication to mitigate risks in the organizational crises caused by ESG-unrelated factors or events. Originality/value This study offers greenbleaching as a novel concept. Moreover, this is the first research that examines unethical green communication in the context of moral outrage inducing crises. Insights for researchers and practitioners regarding sustainability communication, green communication, and crisis communication ethics are also incorporated.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 13 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.