Save the Skate: How Biodiversity Risk is Becoming the New Corporate Flashpoint
Table of Contents
Climate risk once dominated the ESG agenda. Now biodiversity risk is fast becoming the next corporate flashpoint. At the center of this shift is an unlikely symbol: the “Save the Skate” campaign, launched by investors, NGOs, and community groups in Tasmania to protect a critically endangered species from supermarket supply chains.
The Maugean skate, a ray that has survived for 60 million years, lives only in macquarie Harbour on Tasmania’s rugged west coast. Scientists warn that the population is collapsing and could be gone within a decade. Its decline has been linked to salmon farming in the harbour,which reduces oxygen levels in an already fragile ecosystem.
For investors and campaigners, the connection is clear: Coles and Woolworths, Australia’s two dominant supermarkets, are the largest buyers of salmon from the harbour. Both retailers have marketed it under their own-brand labels as responsibly sourced.
A local question about how to address the problem has now leapt onto the global stage. Environment tasmania has filed a complaint against Woolworths under the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises,the most widely recognized international standards for responsible business conduct. This will be the first case worldwide to test the OECD’s newly revised biodiversity provisions, which call for heightened due diligence in relation to endangered species and protected areas.
While the process is not legally binding, it is indeed backed by government-run National Contact points that can investigate complaints, mediate disputes, and issue findings with meaningful reputational weight. If accepted, it would set an significant precedent for how international frameworks hold companies accountable for biodiversity risk.
For campaigners, it marks an escalation from shareholder advocacy into the realm of international grievance processes. For investors, it signals that biodiversity risk is no longer peripheral but tied to global frameworks in the same way climate and human rights issues already are.
The campaign has moved beyond NGO advocacy into the heart of shareholder activism.In 2024, resolutions calling on Coles and Woolworths to address the risks their salmon sourcing posed to the Maugean skate achieved votes of 39% and 30% respectively. These were the largest shareholder votes on biodiversity risk anywhere in the world that year.
“Shareholder resolution votes act as a barometer for investor sentiment,” said Kelly Roebuck, vice chair of Environment Tasmania and Sustainable Seafood campaign director at Living Oceans. “Last year, Woolworths faced one of the largest votes for a nature-risk resolution ever. Numerous institutional funds from Australia and abroad, representing millions of members, called for Woolworths to act for the skate. If Woolworths had listened to their shareholders it may not have been necessary to lodge a complaint with the OECD.”
Despite the results, neither company committed to exit Macquarie Harbour. Coles has quietly stopped using the responsibly sourced label on its Tasmanian salmon, though it still references third-party certifications in product details – a move critics say creates a green halo without addressing biodiversity risks. Woolworths has made little visible progress.
That refusal prompted a second wave of resolutions in 2025. Business leader and environmental advocate Geoff Cousins joined Tasmanian NGOs and ethical share trading platform SIX as a lead filer at Coles. “it’s a complete failure of their risk management if Coles needs to be dragged by their shareholders into stopping an extinction caused by their salmon supply,” said Phoebe Rountree, campaigns manager at SIX.
Woolworths now faces even higher stakes. The OECD complaint argues that the company failed to disclose foreseeable biodiversity risks, misled consumers with its responsibly sourced label, and neglected its obligation to conduct heightened due diligence in a World Heritage area – as the skate is listed as an outstanding value of the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area. If accepted, it would also be the first.“`html
Greenwashing: What It Is and How to Spot It
greenwashing is the deceptive practice of portraying a company’s products, policies, or practices as environmentally friendly when they are not. It’s a form of marketing spin intended to mislead consumers into believing a company is doing more to protect the environment than it actually is. As consumer demand for sustainable products grows, so too does the risk of companies exaggerating or fabricating their environmental credentials.
What Drives Greenwashing?
Several factors contribute to the rise of greenwashing:
- Increased Consumer Demand for Sustainability: Consumers are increasingly seeking eco-friendly products and are willing to pay a premium for them.
- Lack of Clear Regulations: The absence of standardized definitions and strict regulations surrounding “green” claims allows companies more leeway in their marketing.
- Competitive Pressure: Companies may feel pressured to appear environmentally responsible to keep up with competitors,even if their actual practices don’t warrant it.
- cost Savings: Genuine sustainability initiatives can be expensive. Greenwashing offers a cheaper choice to making substantial changes.
Common Greenwashing Tactics
Companies employ a variety of tactics to mislead consumers.Here are some of the most common:
Highlighting a single environmental attribute while ignoring other, more significant environmental impacts. For example, a paper product might be labeled as “made from recycled content” but the manufacturing process could still be highly polluting.
No Proof
Making environmental claims without providing supporting evidence or third-party certification. Terms like “eco-friendly” or “sustainable” are used without substantiation.
Vagueness
Using poorly defined or broad terms like “all-natural” or “green” that lack specific meaning. These terms can be easily misinterpreted by consumers.
Worshipping False Labels
Creating misleading labels or certifications that resemble genuine eco-labels but have no real standards or verification process.
Irrelevance
making claims that may be truthful but are unimportant or unhelpful. For example, advertising a product as “CFC-free” when CFCs have been banned for decades.
Lesser of Two Evils
Claiming a product is “greener” than other products in its category, even if the entire category is environmentally harmful.
Fibbing
Simply making false environmental claims. This is the most blatant form of greenwashing.
Recent Examples of Greenwashing
Greenwashing isn’t a new phenomenon, and scrutiny is increasing. A Senate inquiry has examined the use of responsibly sourced labels on salmon products, raising the prospect of enforcement action. Globally, initiatives such as Naturea highlight numerous examples across various industries.
How to Spot Greenwashing
Consumers can protect themselves from greenwashing by being critical and informed:
- Look for Third-Party Certifications: seek out products with credible eco-labels from organizations like Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), USDA Organic, or ENERGY STAR.
- Research the Company: Investigate the company’s overall environmental record and sustainability initiatives.
- Be Wary of Vague Claims: Question claims that lack specific details or supporting evidence.
- Read the Fine Print: Pay attention to the details of environmental claims and look for any hidden trade-offs.
- Check for Openness: Look for companies