Risky sustainability claims are usually claims where the communication goes further than the company’s evidence. The most common problem for an SME is usually not intentional misleading, but a message that is too general, too broad, or poorly defined.
Government proposal HE 47/2026, which concerns the implementation of the EU Directive on empowering consumers for the green transition, clearly shows what kinds of claims the regulation focuses on. General environmental claims, sustainability labels, overly broad claims concerning the entire company, and climate claims based on offsetting are particularly sensitive.
Risky claims include, for example, claims such as “ecological”, “green”, or “responsible” if their content is not specified. The risk also increases if a company communicates about one responsible solution in a way that gives the impression that the whole operation is responsible. A company’s own sustainability labels or unclear symbols, future-oriented claims without a credible plan, and climate claims based on offsetting can also be problematic.
A claim becomes risky when it creates a greater impression than the company can justify. This is why, when assessing a sustainability claim, it is not enough that the company considers the claim to be true in principle. What also matters is the overall impression it creates.
A good practical rule is simple: the bigger the word, the stronger the justification required.
Also read: What Is a Sustainability Claim In an SME?
Sustainability claims and sustainability communication under tightening regulation: What Can an SME Say About Its Sustainability?
Explore the online course: Sustainability claims and credible sustainability communication for SMEs (in Finnish).
EN 
FI