Greenwashing in the Context of Unfair Competition and Advertising Law under Turkish and European Union Law

Öz

The increasing environmental awareness among consumers is influencing their choices and encouraging them to purchase environmentally friendly products and services. Additionally, the green transition laws force businesses to produce more environmentally friendly products and services. However, businesses sometimes make false or misleading green claims. This practice is referred to as ‘greenwashing’. Greenwashing can strengthen the market reputation and credibility of businesses and affect consumer preferences. Therefore, greenwashing has an impact on the competition in green market. Ensuring that environmental claims are accurate, fair, and understandable also contributes to the establishment of a fair competition environment. The European Union has adopted Directive 2024/825, which prohibits greenwashing practices and empowers consumers by ensuring they receive correct and reliable information about the environmental impacts of products and services. However, there is no provision in the Turkish Commercial Code that directly regulates greenwashing. Since greenwashing activities mislead consumers and affect the reputation and credibility of businesses, they have a negative impact on the competitive environment. For this reason, it is necessary to examine to what extent the provisions on unfair competition can limit greenwashing activities. As greenwashing actions are usually carried out through green marketing, it is also essential to assess the legality of these actions within the scope of advertising law.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• unfair competition law
• european union law
• greenwashing
• green marketing
• green claims

Yeşil Aklamanın (Greenwashing) Haksız Rekabet ve Reklam Hukuku Boyutuyla Türk ve Avrupa Birliği Hukukları Kapsamında Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Tüketicilerde artan çevre bilinci tüketicilerin tercihlerinde etkili olmaktadır. Ayrıca ülkelerin kabul ettikleri yeşil dönüşüm yasaları işletmeleri daha çevreci ürün ve hizmetleri üretmeye yönlendirmektedir. Ancak işletmeler bazen ürün ve hizmetlerinin veya kendilerinin çevre üzerindeki etkileri hakkında yanlış veya yanıltıcı beyanlarda bulunabilmektedir. Bu durum yeşil aklama (boyama) olarak ifade edilmektedir. Yeşil aklamayı kullanan işletmelerin ticari itibarı yeşil tüketiciler nezdinde güçlenmektedir. Dolayısıyla bu işletmeye ait ürün ve hizmetlerin tüketiciler tarafından tercih edilme olasılığı artmakta olup yeşil aklama rekabet ortamını etkilemektedir. Bu nedenden ötürü çevresel beyanların doğru, adil ve anlaşılabilir olmasının sağlanması dürüst bir rekabet ortamının oluşmasına da hizmet edecektir. Avrupa Birliği, yeşil aklama uygulamalarını yasaklamak, tüketicilerin ürün ile hizmetlerin çevresel etkileri hakkında doğru ve sağlıklı bilgi alabilmelerini sağlamak amacıyla 2024/825 sayılı Direktifi kabul etmiştir. Türk Ticaret Kanunu’nda ise yeşil aklamayı doğrudan düzenleyen bir hüküm bulunmamaktadır. Yeşil aklama faaliyetleri tüketicileri yanılttığından ve işletmelerin güvenilirliğini etkileyebildiğinden dolayı rekabet ortamı üzerinde olumsuz etkisi bulunmaktadır. Bu bakımdan haksız rekabet hükümlerinin yeşil aklama faaliyetlerini hangi ölçüde sınırlandırabildiğinin incelenmesi gerekmektedir. Yeşil aklama eylemleri genellikle yeşil pazarlama aracılığıyla gerçekleştiğinden bu eylemlerin hukuka uygunluğunun reklam hukuku boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi de zorunludur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• haksız rekabet hukuku
• avrupa birliği hukuku
• yeşil aklama
• yeşil pazarlama
• yeşil beyan

Kaynakça

1. Abbamonte G B, ‘The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive: An Example of the New European Consumer Protection Approach’ (2006) 12(3) Columbia Journal of European Law 695–712.
2. Aksoy M A, ‘2005/29/AT Haksız Ticari Uygulamalar Direktifinde Düzenlenen Haksız Rekabet Halleri ve Uygulama Örnekleri’ (2016) 73(1) İstanbul Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 279–318.
3. Arkan S, Ticari İşletme Hukuku (Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Araştırma Enstitüsü 2021).
4. Bahtiyar M, Ayli A, Şua M ve Karamanlıoğlu A, Ticari İşletme Hukuku (Beta 2022).
5. Bektaş İ, ‘Haksız Rekabet Hukukunda Dürüst ve Bozulmamış Rekabeti Sağlama Amacı (TTK m. 54) ve “İşleyen Rekabet” Ölçütü’ (2018) 34(3) Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Dergisi 277–310.
6. Bozer A ve Göle C, Ticari İşletme Hukuku (Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Araştırma Enstitüsü 2021).
7. Carson R, Silent Spring (Penguin 1962).
8. Carol C, ‘Starbucks to Stop Using Disposable Plastic Straws by 2020’ The New York Times, (New York, 07 September 2018) < https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/09/business/starbucks-plastic-straws.html > accessed 14 September 2024.

9. Ceylan E, ‘Tüketici Hukukunda Haksız Ticari Uygulamalar ve Uygulama Örnekleri’ (2020) 15 Uyuşmazlık Mahkemesi Dergisi 123–147.
10. Chernev A and Blair S, ‘Doing Well by Doing Good: The Benevolent Halo of Corporate Social Responsibility’ (2015) 41(6) Journal of Consumer Research 1412–1425.
11. Cherry M A, ‘The Law and Economics of Corporate Social Responsibility and Greenwashing’ (2014) 14(2) UC Davis Business Law Journal 281–304.
12. Cherry M A and Sneirson J, ‘Beyond Profit: Rethinking Corporate Social Responsibility and Greenwashing after the BP Oil Disaster Deep Trouble: Legal Ramifications of the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill’ (2011) 85(4) Tulane Law Review 983–1038.
13. De Jong M D T, Harkink K M and Barth S, ‘Making Green Stuff? Effects of Corporate Greenwashing on Consumers’ (2018) 32(1) Journal of Business and Technical Communication 77–112.
14. Delmas A and Burbano V C, ‘The Drivers of Greenwashing’ (2011) 51(1) California Management Review 64– 87.
15. European Commission, New Consumer Agenda Strengthening Consumer Resilience for Sustainable Recovery COM(2020) 696 final.
16. European Commission, ‘The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive: Questions and Answers’ (European Commission, 2007) https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/MEMO_07_572 accessed 30 August 2024.
17. European Commission, ‘Screening of Websites’ (European Commission, 2021) https://ec.europa.eu/commission/ presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_269 accessed 30 August 2024.
18. European Commission, ‘Guidance on the interpretation and application of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market’ [2021] OJ C 526/01.
19. European Council Directive 2005/29/EC concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market [2005] OJ L 149/22.
20. European Council Directive 2011/83/EU of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights [2011] OJ L 304/64.
21. European Council Directive (EU) 2024/825 of 28 February 2024 amending Directives 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/ EU as regards empowering consumers for the green transition through better protection against unfair practices and through better information [2024] OJ L 825/1.
22. Federal Trade Commission, ‘Truly Organic? The FTC Says No, Alleges Retailer Misled Consumers about Its Products’ (FTC, 19 September 2019) https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2019/09/ truly-organic-ftc-says-no-alleges-retailer-misled-consumers-about-its-products accessed 30 August 2024.
23. Feinstein N, ‘Learning from Past Mistakes: Future Regulation to Prevent Greenwashing’ (2013) 40(1) Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review 229–258.
24. Franko N, ‘Haksız Rekabette Elde Edilmesi Muhtemel Menfaate Hüküm’ (1986) 13 Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Dergisi 191-208.
25. Freitas Netto S V, Sobral M F F, Ribeiro A R B and Soares G R L, ‘Concepts and Forms of Greenwashing: A Systematic Review’ (2020) 32(1) Environmental Sciences Europe 1–19.
26. Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, ‘Amount of Finance Committed to Achieving 1.5°C Now at Scale Needed to Deliver the Transition’ (GFANZ, 3 November 2021) https://www.gfanzero.com/press/ amount-of-finance-committed-to-achieving-1-5c-now-at-scale-needed-to-deliver-the-transition/ accessed 30 August 2024.
27. Gomez F, ‘The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive: A Law and Economics Perspective’ (2006) 2(1) European Review of Contract Law 5–34.
28. Grodsky J, ‘Certified Green: The Law and Future of Environmental Labeling’ (1993) 10 Yale Journal on Regulation 147–226.
29. Gürbüz Güngör E, ‘Tüketicilerin Çevre Konusundaki Duyarlılığına Yönelik Reklamların Hukuki Açıdan İncelenmesi’ (2021) 12(1) Ege Stratejik Araştırmalar Dergisi 21-50.
30. Güven Ş, Haksız Rekabet Hukukunun Amacı ve Koruduğu Menfaatler (Adalet Yayınevi 2012). Henning-Bodewig F, Unfair Competition Law (Kluwer Law International 2006).
31. Hoch D and Franz R, ‘Eco-Porn Versus the Constitution: Commercial Speech and the Regulation of Environmental Advertising’ (1994) 58 Albany Law Review 441–466.
32. Howells G, Micklitz H-W and Wilhelmsson T, European Fair Trading Law: The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (Ashgate 2006).
33. Hussain W, ‘Is Ethical Consumerism an Impermissible Form of Vigilantism?’ (2012) 40(2) Philosophy & Public Affairs 111–143.
34. Karamanlıoğlu A, ‘Haksız Rekabet Boyutuyla Yeşil Aklama’ (KHAS Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Bülteni, January 2023) https://hukukbulteni.khas.edu.tr/bulten/108#_ftn12 accessed 30 August 2024.
35. Karliner J, The Corporate Planet: Ecology and Politics in the Age of Globalization (University of California Press 1997).
36. Kaya A ve Demir K, Rekabet ve Haksız Rekabet Hukukunun Esasları (Vedat 2024).
37. Kim E-H and Lyon T P, ‘Greenwash vs. Brownwash: Exaggeration and Undue Modesty in Corporate Sustainability Disclosure’ (2015) 26(3) Organization Science 705–723.
38. Kiraz Ş E, ‘Ticarette Yeşil Dönüşüm: Çevre Etiketi ve Hukuki Niteliği Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme’ (2024) 4(2) Kırıkkale Hukuk Mecmuası 651–676.
39. Kocabıyık S ve Başer E, ‘Haksız Rekabet Hukuku Hükümlerinin Yeşil Yıkama Davranışı Kapsamında Değerlendirilmesi’ (2024) 216 Terazi Hukuk Dergisi 134-148.
40. Koyuncu A Ç, Tüketici Hukuku Çerçevesinde Haksız Ticari Uygulamalar (Seçkin 2022).
41. Lane E L, ‘Green Marketing Goes Negative: The Advent of Reverse Greenwashing’ (2012) 3(4) European Journal of Risk Regulation 582–588.
42. Laroche M, Bergeron J and Barbaro-Forleo G, ‘Targeting Consumers Who Are Willing to Pay More for Environmentally Friendly Products’ (2001) 18(6) Journal of Consumer Marketing 503–520.
43. Laufer W S, ‘Social Accountability and Corporate Greenwashing’ (2003) 43(3) Journal of Business Ethics 253– 261.
44. Lyon T P and Montgomery A W, ‘The Means and End of Greenwash’ (2015) 28(2) Organization & Environment 223–249.
45. Memiş T, ‘Türk Ticaret Kanunu’nun 55/1-f Hükmünün Yorumunda Gözden Kaçanlar,’ iç. Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Araştırma Enstitüsü 60. Yıl Armağanı (Ankara: Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Araştırma Enstitüsü, 2015), 227.
46. Möllers T ve Temel E, ‘Avrupa Yeşil Mutabakatı: Yeşil Yıkama, Bilgi Taşkınlığı ve İyi Kurumsal Vatandaş Özelliği Unutulan Yatırımcı’ (2024) 73(3) Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 2119–2180.
47. Nestlé, ‘Nestlé Accelerates Action to Tackle Plastic Waste’ (Nestlé, 15 January 2019) https://www.nestle.com/ media/pressreleases/allpressreleases/nestle-action-tackle-plastic-waste accessed 30 August 2024.
48. Net Zero Tracker, ‘Net Zero Stocktake 2023’ (Net Zero Tracker, 2023) https://zerotracker.net/$prımary_sıte_url/ analysis/net-zero-stocktake-2023 accessed 8 August 2024.
49. Nomer Ertan F N, Haksız Rekabet Hukuku (On İki Levha Yayıncılık 2016).
50. Nyilasy G, Gangadharbatla H and Paladino A, ‘Perceived Greenwashing: The Interactive Effects of Green Advertising and Corporate Environmental Performance on Consumer Reactions’ (2014) 125(4) Journal of Business Ethics 693–707.
51. Olsen M C, Slotegraaf R J and Chandukala S R, ‘Green Claims and Message Frames: How Green New Products Change Brand Attitude’ (2014) 78(5) Journal of Marketing 119–137.
52. Özdemir S S, Haksız Rekabet Kavramı Açısından Dürüstlük Kuralına Aykırı Reklamlar (On İki Levha Yayıncılık 2013).
53. Özel A, ‘Çevresel Aktivizm, Halkla İlişkiler ve Yeşil Aklama Üzerine Kuramsal Bir Bakış’ (2015) 8(4) Selçuk İletişim 73–89.
54. Pekdinçer T, Dürüstlük Kuralına Aykırı Reklamlar ve Satış Yöntemleri (Adalet Yayınevi 2020).
55. Pekdinçer T, ‘Kötüleme Suretiyle Haksız Rekabet Eylemi ve Bazı Özel Durumlar’ (2017) 16(2) İstanbul Kültür Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 513–538.
56. Pekdinçer T ve Yılmaz A, Reklam Kurulu ve Yargı Kararları Çerçevesinde Reklam Sektöründe Hukuk ve Regülasyon (Adalet Yayınevi 2024).
57. Perkins T, ‘Hold the Beef: McDonald’s Avoids the Bold Step It Must Take to Cut Emissions’ The Guardian (London, 10 December 2021) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/10/mcdonalds- emissions-beef-burgers accessed 30 August 2024.
58. Peterson J V, ‘Gray Areas in Green Claims: Why Greenwashing Regulation Needs an Overhaul’ (2024) 35 Villanova Environmental Law Journal 177.
59. PricewaterhouseCoopers, ‘Consumers Willing to Pay 9.7% Sustainability Premium, Even as Cost-of-Living and Inflationary Concerns Weigh: PwC 2024 Voice of the Consumer Survey’ (PwC, 2024) https://www. pwc.com/gx/en/news-room/press-releases/2024/pwc-2024-voice-of-consumer-survey.html accessed 30 August 2024.
60. Poroy R ve Yasaman H, Ticari İşletme Hukuku (Vedat, 2019).
61. Rawsthorn A, ‘The Toxic Side of Being, Literally, Green’ The New York Times (New York, 4 April 2010) https:// www.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/arts/05iht-design5.html accessed 30 August 2024.
62. Reed A, Forehand M R, Puntoni S and Warlop L, ‘Identity-Based Consumer Behavior’ (2012) 29(4) International Journal of Research in Marketing 310–321.
63. Rotman R M, Gossett C J and Goldman H D, ‘Greenwashing No More: The Case for Stronger Regulation of Environmental Marketing’ (2020) 72(3) Administrative Law Review 417–443.
64. Seele P and Gatti L, ‘Greenwashing Revisited: In Search of a Typology and Accusation-Based Definition Incorporating Legitimacy Strategies’ (2017) 26(2) Business Strategy and the Environment 239–252.
65. Shanor A and Light S, ‘Greenwashing and the First Amendment’ (2022) 122(7) Columbia Law Review 2033– 2118.
66. Starbucks, ‘Starbucks to Stop Using Disposable Plastic Straws by 2020’ The New York Times (New York, 9 July 2018) https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/09/business/starbucks-plastic-straws.html accessed 30 August 2024.
67. Şehirali Çelik F H, Tasarımların Haksız Rekabet Hükümlerine Göre Korunması (Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Araştırma Enstitüsü, Ankara, 2014).
68. Tekin U, Tüketicilerin Haksız Rekabet Hükümlerine Göre Korunması (On İki Levha Yayınları 2022).
69. Terrachoice, ‘The Sins of Greenwashing’ (Terrachoice, 2010) https://www.twosides.info/wp-content/ uploads/2018/05/Terrachoice_The_Sins_of_Greenwashing_-_Home_and_Family_Edition_2010.pdf accessed 30 August 2024.
70. The Economist, ‘Sustainable Finance Is Rife with Greenwash: Time for More Disclosure’ (The Economist, 22 May 2021) https://www.economist.com/leaders/2021/05/22/sustainable-finance-is-rife-with-greenwash- time-for-more-disclosure accessed 30 August 2024.
71. Ülgen H, Helvacı M, Kaya A ve Nomer Ertan F N, Ticari İşletme Hukuku (Vedat 2019).
72. Vandenbergh M P, ‘Private Environmental Governance’ (2014) 99(1) Cornell Law Review 129–200.
73. Vytopil L A, ‘Liability for “Greenwashing”?: On Unfair Commercial Practices, the Legal Duty to Be Transparent and the Case for a “Safe Harbor”’ in Vibe Ulfbeck, Alexandra Andhov and Katerina Mitkidis (eds), Law and Responsible Supply Chain Management (Routledge 2019).
74. Wynne R, ‘Defining “Green”: Toward Regulation of Environmental Marketing Claims’ (1991) 24(3) University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform 785–820.
75. Yıldız O A, Haksız Rekabet Hukuku (On İki Levha 2023).
76. Yılmaz A, ‘6102 Sayılı Türk Ticaret Kanunu’na Göre Karşılaştırmalı Reklâmlarda Gereksiz Yere Kötüleme Yasağı’ (2017) 75(2) İstanbul Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Mecmuası 813–826.