Alex Macheras
The ad campaign in question featured images of an Etihad Airways loyalty card with a plant sprouting from it, alongside claims that the airline was the "sustainable aviation" choice with a green and efficient fleet. The campaign aimed to emphasise the airline's commitment to sustainability, showcasing initiatives such as reducing single-use plastic cutlery as part of a louder, bolder approach towards environmental responsibility.
However, the ASA initiated an investigation into the campaign, expressing concerns that the claims made by Etihad have exaggerated the environmental benefits of flying, as depicted in the imagery used, which included plants, the Earth, and the title "Environmental airline of the Year 2022". The advertising authority took issue with the airline's use of the term "sustainable air travel", which has been a central focus of Etihad's recent branding and campaigns, led by its former CEO Tony Douglas (who has since resigned and is now the CEO of Saudi Arabia's new airline startup, Riyadh Air).
According to UK marketing regulations, absolute environmental claims, such as "sustainable aviation", must be substantiated by a high level of evidence. The ASA, in its explanation, stated: "We noted steps were being taken by Etihad to reduce the environmental impact of its service. However, we understood that there were currently no initiatives or commercially viable technologies in operation within the aviation industry which would adequately substantiate an absolute green claim such as 'sustainable aviation' as we considered consumers would interpret it in this context." The ASA concluded that the claim made by Etihad exaggerated the impact that flying with the airline would have on the environment, breaching the advertising code.
Etihad's case is not an isolated incident, as the ASA has been actively cracking down on unsubstantiated or misleading green claims by companies. In September 2021, the watchdog made a promise to act against such claims, holding companies accountable for the accuracy and validity of their environmental assertions. Etihad joins the list of big brands that have been called out by the ASA for potentially misleading environmental claims in their marketing efforts.
Earlier this year an ad campaign by Lufthansa claiming that its green initiatives were protecting the world was banned by the same UK advertising watchdog, which ruled it was misleading consumers over the environmental impact of flying.
The ASA launched an investigation into the campaign – which featured a plane with an image of the Earth on its underside and the strapline: “Connecting the world. Protecting its future” – over concerns the German airline was giving consumers a “misleading impression of its environmental impact”.
Lufthansa said the tagline was “open to interpretation” and consumers would not see it as an “absolute promise” relating to the environment or that its planes did not cause harm.
While Etihad Airways has indeed taken some steps to reduce its environmental impact, the ASA's ruling indicates that the airline's claims of "sustainable aviation" is overstated. Much of its sustainability campaign is centred around the mere fact the UAE flag carrier operates 787 Dreamliners (which Etihad call “Greenliners”) but while the 787 is more environmentally efficient than older-generation aircraft, it’s categorically not a “sustainable” aircraft. The 787 is also not the only aircraft type in Etihad’s fleet, despite the very little mention of other aircraft types on Etihad’s sustainability commitments online. The airline operates a mix of aircraft – including superjumbos Airbus A380s which will resume flying for Etihad in July, an aircraft cited as emitting far more CO2 than newer, lighter generation long-haul jets.
Publishing an internal study in 2021, Qatar Airways used internal benchmarks to compare the A380 to the A350 on routes from Doha to Guangzhou, Frankfurt, London, Melbourne, New York, Paris and Sydney. In the cases of Melbourne and New York, the A380 emitted 95% more CO2 per block hour with the A350 saving around 20 tonnes of CO2 per block hour. For the other routes, the analysis found that the A380 emitted over 80% more CO2 per block hour than the A350 to these destinations.
Aside from just two flights operated using a blend of up to 40% sustainable fuel (a fuel which continues to remain expensive) – many areas of Etihad’s sustainability efforts are merely part of a wider green-themed rebrand, such as the “Green Ambassador Cabin Crew” scheme who are onboard and “ready to answer questions or suggestions about sustainability.”
If anything, the ASA's decision once again underscores the need for companies to back up their environmental claims with robust evidence to avoid misleading consumers.
The case of Etihad also once again raises broader questions about greenwashing - a practice where companies make exaggerated or false claims about their environmental efforts to attract customers. Greenwashing can be detrimental to consumers, as it can create a false sense of environmental responsibility and divert attention from the need for genuine sustainability measures.
In response to the ASA's ruling, Etihad Airways stated that it would "continue to be a responsible environmental steward" and would consider the findings for future advertising campaigns. The airline acknowledged the importance of accurate and transparent communication regarding its sustainability initiatives, recognising the need to avoid any misleading claims that could undermine consumer trust.
The author is an aviation analyst. Twitter handle: @AlexInAir
