Regulating for sustainability: business integrity, innovation, and impact

Check against delivery

Acknowledgements

Thank you, Danny, for your warm introduction.

I too would like to begin by acknowledging the Traditional Custodians of the land on which we meet, the Gadigal People of the Eora Nation, and pay my respects to their communities and Elders past and present. I also extend my respect to First Nations people joining us today. I wish to acknowledge the stewardship of First Nations communities in preserving and sustaining their lands throughout history to today, and for their enduring contributions caring for country.

We meet today during National Reconciliation Week, a week in which we reflect on our path forward together guided by past truths and lessons. This year’s theme, Bridging Now to Next, is especially resonant as we discuss how we ensure that the decisions we make today create the conditions for a more just, inclusive and sustainable future.

It is a privilege to be invited to deliver the Fiona Wain Oration, and to contribute to a forum that has consistently challenged the business community to think rigorously and lead with ambition and foresight to integrate sustainability into the core practice of their businesses.

As we gather in Fiona’s name, during this week of national reflection, it is only fitting that we consider the legacy of leadership and place that shapes our work today.

Introduction

We meet at a moment where the world is not short on challenges – but we are, at times, short on clarity.

In 2025, the need for urgent action on environmental sustainability is undeniable. Environmental harm, including climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss, represent a critical category of threat. As we know, action by government alone will not be enough. All of us need to act at scale and at pace, including (and importantly) the business community as fostered by the Business Council for Sustainable Development Australia. 

We are in the throes of a far-reaching transition toward a more sustainable and more technologically advanced economy. And this transition is impacting every sector – from energy to transport, agriculture to finance, and digital infrastructure to waste management.

New markets are emerging and developing in unexpected ways, while long-established industries are adapting, consolidating, or, in some cases, declining.

Sustainability drivers are reshaping the landscape for investment, industrial development, consumer expectation and regulatory responsibility in Australia, and worldwide.

In this context, regulation matters. And this is something Fiona Wain understood well before most.

Serving from 1999 to 2011, as CEO of Sustainable Business Australia, as the Business Council of Sustainable Development was then known, Fiona’s contribution to sustainable business in Australia was ahead of its time then – and remains enduring and significant now.

Fiona understood that economic and environmental imperatives are structurally intertwined.

She challenged the orthodoxy of her era – arguing that a greater focus on sustainability had the potential to usher in a new era of commercial activity and wealth generation.

And she recognised the critical role of regulation, not as an inhibitor of innovation, but as an enabler of market integrity and long-term value creation.

While the ACCC is not an environmental regulator, we do play a key regulatory role in this transition. And our view is clear: confident consumers and competitive markets are mutually reinforcing and supportive to the transition to a low-carbon, innovation-driven economy.

In this speech today, I will share the work of the ACCC in protecting consumer welfare and competition; and our insights on the role of regulation in guiding enhanced sustainability outcomes for our nation.

First, I will reflect on the current era of regulatory and commercial change in the environment and sustainability space.

Second, I will discuss the dual challenges of greenwashing and greenhushing and their impact on consumer trust and market integrity.

Third, I will share the balancing act of competition, sustainability and the public interest.

And finally, I will reflect on the future of regulation: truth, trust, and sustainable markets.

An era of regulatory and commercial change

First, to the current era of regulatory and commercial change.

More than a decade since Fiona’s tenure, her insight on the economic and commercial advantages of sustainability is increasingly manifest.

Today across Australia, and around the world, there are many examples of businesses that are supporting the transition to a more sustainable economy. These businesses are increasing efficiency and innovation, reducing risk, and unlocking resilience and long-term value.

As sustainability becomes a source of business differentiation – of investment, recognition of consumer preference, and reputational capital – it has also become an area of increased business accountability.

Many businesses have been increasing transparency in relation to sustainability, including through adopting voluntary reporting frameworks. And in Australia, new sustainability reporting and assurance standards and new rules around mandatory climate-related financial disclosures have been introduced.

While sustainability reporting – and the associated data needs – burden businesses in the near term, in the long run this investment can deliver greater credibility and fan merit-based competition.

The value of more reporting on sustainability, however, depends on truth and integrity – on whether the claims being made in the market are evidence-based and credible.

When businesses market to consumers – as opposed to reporting to regulators and investors – it is critical that they consider how everyday consumers will interpret their claims. It is not simply a case of copying and pasting from a mandatory report. Green marketing claims must cater to the information needs of the reasonable consumer.

It’s in this context that we turn to one of the key roles of the ACCC in sustainability – and my second point for today’s speech: the dual challenges of greenwashing and greenhushing.

Greenwashing, greenhushing and market integrity

As regulator, the ACCC’s focus is not on sustainability reporting or environmental outcomes per se. Our role is to make markets work for consumers, now and in the future. This includes protecting consumers, and other businesses, from untrue claims.

In doing so, we not only tackle consumer harm, but also safeguard the competitive process and ensure that market outcomes are not distorted by deceptive practices.

In the environment and sustainability space, this means addressing greenwashing – namely misleading or unsubstantiated claims about the environmental benefits of a product or service.

Protecting and empowering consumers in the green transition

The ‘Protecting and empowering consumers in the green transition’ report released by the OECD this month, highlights the increasing importance of the green transition for consumers and suppliers in recent years. [1]  

Research in Australia also shows that a growing number of consumers want to make environmentally conscious purchasing decisions and, in some cases, are willing to pay a premium for products that reflect genuine sustainability commitments. [2]

This demand has the potential to drive green innovation and accelerate the broader transition to a lower-emissions economy. But this can only succeed if the claims consumers rely on are credible, accurate and easy-to-understand.

Greenwashing simulates a false equivalence between credible and misleading claims – distorting consumer purchasing decisions, disadvantaging businesses who make genuine claims and dampening the commercial incentive to invest in sustainability.

Greenwashing also hinders the innovation required to meet long-term decarbonisation goals – slowing the nation’s progress towards more sustainable environmental outcomes.

The ACCC’s 2023 ‘Greenwashing by businesses in Australia report’, examined an internet sweep of 247 businesses and revealed that 57 percent of companies had made environmental claims that could mislead consumers.[3]

These findings were particularly notable in sectors where environmental credentials are a key competitive factor, such as cosmetics, clothing, footwear, and food and drink.

Our investigations uncovered conduct including vague and unqualified claims, the use of aspirational claims with little information about how goals would be achieved, and the doubtful use of certifications and trust marks.

The ACCC has prioritised consumer concerns relating to environment and sustainability since 2022. And in recognition of the substantial impact of greenwashing conduct on consumer trust and market integrity we have identified this as a specific area of focus in the year ahead.

Our work includes enforcement investigations into potentially false or misleading environmental claims – of which we have a number that are currently ongoing.

An example of this work includes the case against Clorox Australia, which concluded earlier this year with the Federal Court ordering Clorox to pay $8.25 million in penalties for misleading claims that its GLAD garbage and kitchen tidy bags were made from ocean plastic.[4]

In the Clorox case, the court noted that: “There is a particular societal harm that arises when conduct undermines consumers’ confidence in environmental claims” – and that such claims are “useful… only if they are accurate.”[5]

Growing community expectations of the integrity of green claims can also be seen in the actions taken against Santos and Energy Australia by the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility[6] and Parents for Climate[7] respectively.

Protecting consumers in a just transition

I understand that the Fiona Wain Oration is held in the Art Gallery of NSW each year in recognition of Fiona Wain’s deep appreciation for Indigenous Australian art and culture.

In honour of Fiona’s connection to this place, and also on this first day of National Reconciliation Week, I wish to draw attention to the Birubi case, which illustrates the societal harm of misleading claims in relation to Australian indigenous designs and culture.

In 2019, following enforcement action by the ACCC, the Federal Court ordered Birubi Art Pty Ltd to pay $2.3 million in penalties for misleading conduct under the Australian Consumer Law.[8]

Over a two-year period, Birubi had supplied almost 50,000 boomerangs, bullroarers, didgeridoos and message stones – purporting to be adorned with Aboriginal designs and sold as “Authentic Aboriginal Art”, “Hand Painted”, and “Made in Australia”.

They were, in fact, mass-produced in Indonesia.

As the Court recognised, these misrepresentations undermined the integrity of the Indigenous Australian art industry and were tantamount to “the dismantling of Indigenous cultural heritage”.[9]

Supporting a high ambition green transition

While I want to be clear that the ACCC is committed to investigating and taking enforcement action in response to misleading claims including greenwashing and, indeed, claims that undermine Indigenous cultural heritage – we also support the good faith efforts of businesses to communicate genuine claims.

We consider genuine sustainability claims to be beneficial to consumers, to the effective functioning of markets, and to a green and just transition. And we contend that a well-functioning market requires transparency – both in accurate communication, and proactive disclosure of environmental performance.

Through our monitoring activities and consultation with the business community, we are aware of emerging concerns around greenhushing. Including, in some cases, businesses minimising or withholding their environmental and sustainability initiatives, due to fear of regulatory scrutiny. [10]

This reticence decreases the visibility of sustainability initiatives and diminishes the information stakeholders require to make confident, informed decisions.

To address this, in 2023, we published the ACCC’s final ‘Making environmental claims: a guide for business’.[11]

Following consultation with consumer, business and environmental organisations, this guide seeks to assist businesses to make clear, evidence-based environmental claims that consumers can understand and trust.

While there is a breadth of detail in this guide, the takeaway is simple: if you make environmental claims, you must consider what an ordinary and reasonable consumer would understand from those claims, and you must be able to back them up.

Through our stakeholder engagement, businesses have called for further specific guidance, particularly in relation to emissions-related claims. This is a complex undertaking in a rapidly evolving landscape, but in the year ahead we are looking to provide more guidance in these areas.

Competition, sustainability, and the public interest

In addition to this consumer protection work, we maintain a focus on competition and I will now move to my third point of discussion today: the balancing act of competition, sustainability and the public interest.

Competition has an important role to play in delivering the transition to a sustainable economy. Competition provides the incentive for innovation and drives greater investment in renewables and new green consumer energy services and products.

In this context, the ACCC is monitoring key markets as they emerge and evolve – such as those for electric vehicle charging infrastructure, batteries and virtual power plants, nature repair, sustainable fuels, and circular economy initiatives.

This includes working closely with international counterparts in horizon scanning activities.

Recent cases from the EU and UK illustrate competition law enforcement as a deterrent of anticompetitive conduct harming the green transition.

Last month the European Commission, and the United Kingdom Competition and Markets Authority, both issued fines on businesses that colluded in a way that stymied markets for end-of-life-vehicle recycling.

Given the serious nature of the collusion, which took place over a number of years, the European Commission and UKCMA achieved penalties in the order of 458 million euros,[12] and 77 million pounds[13], respectively.

Cartel participants not only agreed to not pay dismantlers, they also agreed not to market to consumers on the basis of the extent to which auto parts could be reused at the end of a vehicle’s life.

While proportionate competition enforcement is important to markets in transition, the ACCC also understands there will be instances where businesses need to work together to overcome urgent and systemic environmental problems.

Examples of this include where there is no incentive to unilaterally pursue a sustainability initiative, or where a single entity acting alone lacks the technological capability or scale needed.

There are many types of sustainability collaborations that will not raise competition concerns. And businesses across Australia are increasingly collaborating – to reduce pollution and emissions, manage food waste, improve recycling, or decarbonise technology and transport.

It is critical that these legitimate collaborations are not hampered by a fear of breaching competition law – or confusion about how competition law operates.

To better inform proponents of sustainability collaboration, in December 2024 the ACCC published the ‘Sustainability Collaboration: A Guide for Business’.[14]

The guide sets out how businesses can identify when collaboration is less or more likely to raise competition concerns, what exemptions may be available to protect parties from private as well as public competition law enforcement, and how public benefits will be weighed.

Sustainability as a public benefit

Under competition law public benefits are broadly defined and can include environmental benefits.

We assess environmental benefits in the same way we assess any other public benefit – rigorously, taking an evidence-based approach, and giving due consideration to both market function and broader social and economic outcomes.

In recent years, as action on environmental sustainability has become more urgent, the ACCC has more frequently received authorisation applications for collaborations that seek to bring about sustainability outcomes.

In 2023, one in four authorisation applications for collaborations between businesses considered environmental benefits. In 2024 that figure rose to one in three.

Examples of sustainability collaborations that have been authorised by the ACCC include industry stewardship schemes, joint buying of renewable energy, a voluntary code to address working conditions in supply chains, and collaboration to manage disruptions to recycling systems.

In April, the ACCC released a draft determination proposing to grant authorisation with conditions to allow the Australian Sustainable Finance Institute and industry participants to collaborate on sustainable finance initiatives for five years.[15]

In addition to publishing guidance and considering applications for exemption, the ACCC has an open-door policy and welcomes contact from businesses considering sustainability collaborations.

The future of regulation: truth, trust, and the sustainable market

I now move to my final point of reflection today: the future of regulation in supporting truth, trust, and sustainable markets. 

The long-term vision that underpins the ACCC’s approach to sustainability is a market governed by truth and transparency. One that will promote competition on the merits for businesses investing in genuine sustainability. And where companies demonstrating commitment through robust environmental practices earn consumer trust, market credibility, and reputational strength.

Since 2015, the United Nations has championed sustainability as the key to addressing a broad range of social, economic and environmental issues. It defines sustainable development as the way we must live today if we want to protect tomorrow.

That sentiment echoes Fiona Wain’s words: “If the world fails to act… we will have lost the opportunity to build the future we want—and avoid the future we certainly do not want.”

To help drive our work on sustainability, and better inform this work in the context of its intergenerational significance, in December 2022, the ACCC established an internal Sustainability Taskforce.

This team was created to proactively strengthen the ACCC’s capability and coordination in respect of sustainability-related conduct and market developments. It has a forward-looking mandate, specialised expertise, and a central role in ensuring the ACCC remains responsive to a fast-evolving policy, legal and commercial environment.

The Taskforce engages closely with regulatory counterparts such as ASIC and the Clean Energy Regulator, to support regulatory cohesion, share intelligence and coordinate responses to problematic conduct such as greenwashing.

Reflecting the global nature of sustainability challenges, we also regularly engage cross borders, including through the OECD and International Competition Network.

Through such transnational networks, and our technical cooperation programs with the ASEAN member states, we regularly exchange experiences and insights, and where possible take co-ordinated action – such as by signing a recent open joint letter to fashion retailers concerning green claims.[16]

Conclusion

To conclude today, I want to reflect on Fiona’s advocacy for bold thinking, long-term planning, and regulatory frameworks that balance accountability with innovation. She gave us lasting insights that businesses play an indispensable role in achieving sustainability and that regulation is not the enemy of innovation, but its necessary partner.

As future sustainability targets become present-day imperatives, we understand that the question for Australian business is no longer whether to act – but how to act with integrity, pace, and purpose.

I look forward to the work ahead of us at the ACCC, applying regulation that frames and supports the economic and overall consumer benefits of the green transition.

Thank you.