Been doing climate/ESG research on small brands lately and noticed a pattern: a huge share of "carbon neutral" or "sustainably sourced" claims trace back to either (a) an offset purchase with zero methodology disclosed, or (b) nothing at all — just marketing copy.

Meanwhile the brands that ARE doing real work rarely say so clearly, because they think the data is too technical for customers to care about.

Quick framework if you're evaluating a brand's (or your own) sustainability positioning:

• Does the claim cite a scope (1, 2, or 3 emissions)? If not, it's almost always marketing, not measurement.

• Is there a named verification body (e.g. a real certifier), or just a logo?

• Do they compare against an industry baseline, or just say "we're green" in isolation?

If you're a small brand and even ONE of those boxes is checkable, you already have a competitive edge over 80% of your category — most competitors have none of it and are relying purely on vibes.

Curious if others here have looked into this for their own brand or clients — what's the biggest gap you've found between a company's sustainability marketing and what's actually verifiable?