Annual reports can make corporate climate action appear simple: a few executives planting saplings, a polished solar panel photo, and a promise of "environmental stewardship."
But Rexford Adjei Darko — a public relations practitioner, governance and artificial intelligence advocate, and corporate social responsibility researcher — warns that in parts of Ghana, many corporate sustainability efforts may be doing more for a company's image than for real environmental protection.
What's happening?
In an essay published by Modern Ghana, Darko said there is a growing divide between the environmental record companies describe in annual reports and the conditions people encounter around their operations.
He identified extractive and manufacturing companies as particularly susceptible to this pattern. Some businesses, he said, heavily promote activities such as tree-planting events or beach cleanups even as they fall short on tailings management, packaging waste, and pollution controls.
Darko argued that real stewardship is not proved through branding. Instead, he said, it should be visible in day-to-day environmental management systems, transparent pollution and effluent tracking, and targets with deadlines and consequences when those targets are missed.
He also noted that employees often see this disconnect firsthand. Darko said staff members are not easily persuaded by sustainability messaging when it clashes with what they observe inside the organization.
TCD Picks » Good Store Spotlight
Get 10% off your next purchase with code TCD10
Why does it matter?
People living near industrial operations do not deal in sustainability slogans; they deal with the fallout from poor corporate environmental decisions. Those effects can include contaminated water, damaged land, and plastic waste that blocks drains and waterways.
When corporate effort goes more into refining an environmental image than reducing pollution dangers, surrounding communities are often the first to bear the cost.
Darko also warned that greenwashing creates a broader trust problem. If residents, workers, and consumers repeatedly see "green" promises followed by spills, waste, or other failures, public confidence in all corporate sustainability claims can begin to erode, including claims from businesses making legitimate progress.
The TCD Guide page about greenwashing explains how to identify misleading environmental marketing.
TCD Picks » Quince Spotlight
💡These best-sellers from Quince deliver affordable, sustainable luxury for all
What's being done?
Darko said cosmetic changes will not solve the problem. First, he said companies need ongoing environmental measurement paired with disclosure that shows the full record — setbacks included — rather than comforting one-line summaries in a report.
Second, he said sustainability claims should be checked externally. Independent audits grounded in Ghana's Environmental Protection Authority standards and broader international frameworks can supply credibility that company self-reported claims often do not.
Third, he said companies should bring communities into the conversation before damage is done, instead of waiting until public pressure forces a response. Consultation, in his view, should help prevent harm rather than merely manage a crisis.
Darko also said communicators have a role to play. Public relations teams, he argued, should not "launder" weak environmental performance into success stories. That includes independently verified data, clear deadlines, and evidence that a company's local environmental record matches its public messaging.
As Darko put it: "Greenwashing, by contrast, is stewardship performed for an audience — a communications strategy dressed as an environmental one … A community living with a polluted stream does not experience the corporate sustainability report; it experiences the stream."
Get TCD's free newsletters for easy tips, smart advice, and a chance to earn $5,000 toward home upgrades. To see more stories like this one, change your Google preferences here.
