GREENWASHING AND BOYCOTT: CRITICAL APPRECIATION OF ACADEMIC PRODUCTION GREENWASHING E BOICOTE: APRECIAÇÃO CRÍTICA DA PRODUÇÃO ACADÊMICA GREENWASHING Y BOICOT: APRECIACIÓN CRÍTICA DE LA PRODUCCIÓN ACADÉMICA

The lack of effective regulation has contributed to the proliferation of the practice of greenwashing, relegating the responsibility for identification, differentiation and protection to consumers. The article aimed to evaluate academic production regarding greenwashing and the consumer boycott movement. As a methodological procedure, a systematic review of the literature was carried out, through a bibliometric survey associated with a critical analysis of academic production with the themes of greenwashing and boycott (boycott/buycott), mapping the main scientific platforms (Capes, Proquest, Scielo , Scopus, Spell). With this, it was possible to evaluate the current state of the art on the subjects, consolidating what had been studied so far, in addition to making it possible to suggest future studies to advance the topic in academia and in practice. As a main result, it was found that there are few approaches that encompass both themes in question, jointly, emerging as an important research gap, with new studies encouraged.


INTRODUCTION
Environmental movements that began in the 19th century already expressed, in a pioneering way, concerns about the impact that unrestrained consumption causes on the environment (Andreoli, Crespo & Minciotti, 2017).In this context, new purchasing and consumption habits guided by greater awareness and socio-environmental responsibility have stood out as an important market trend (Topal, Nart, Akar & Erkollar, 2020).
As a consequence, there is a movement within the organizational environment to meet these new and growing demands, requiring a review of its strategies towards the implementation of more sustainable practices, as is the case with environmental or green marketing (Riccolo, 2021).However, this new scenario also enabled many organizations to practice greenwashing, a term that denotes the misappropriation or even false appropriation of ecological appeals, without due practical support (Andreoli, Crespo & Minciotti, 2017;Andreoli, Costa & Prearo, 2022).In other words, according to the aforementioned authors, the practice of greenwashing is characterized when the published image is washed or made up -whether of a product, a brand or an organization -so that it appears environmentally responsible, without necessarily being.
As an aggravating factor, it is noteworthy that there are still practically no effective regulatory actions regarding this practice in the country and in the world (Andreoli & Batista, 2020), a scenario that corroborates the argument of wide and growing proliferation of greenwashing (Andreoli, Minciotti & Batista, 2024).In this context, the role of the consumer is highlighted, as both a target audience and an end point in the chain (Jong et al, 2020;Andreoli, Costa & Prearo, 2022).In this way, the responsibility of not only identification and differentiation ends up being imposed on the consumer, but, more importantly, of protecting the practice, emerging as a possible regulatory agent (Andreoli & Batista, 2020;Andreoli, Costa & Prearo, 2022).
One of the main forms of consumer demonstration is through boycott movements, a term used to characterize behavior of repudiation towards a product, brand or organization.(Cruz, 2012).In this sense, Klein, Smith and John (2004) define a boycott as an individual or collective action by the consumer market to stop purchasing and consuming a product or brand.It is precisely this anticonsumption movement that differentiates the boycott from other protest practices in the consumer market, such as social movements, demonstrations or activist marches (Friedman, 1999;Soule, 2009;Cruz & Pirez Jr, 2013).
In light of the above, the article aimed to evaluate academic production regarding greenwashing and the consumer boycott movement.The theoretical framework discussed the practice of greenwashing, contextualizing it in particular within the consumer market, in order to discuss the manifestation of boycotts.As a methodological procedure, a systematic review of the literature was carried out, through a bibliometric survey associated with a critical analysis of academic production with the themes of greenwashing and boycott/buycott.

GREENWASHING AND THE CONSUMER BOYCOTT MOVEMENT
Greenwashing is understood as the practice of washing or making up a product, a brand or an organization, so that it appears environmentally correct, without necessarily being so (Andreoli, Crespo & Minciotti, 2017;Andreoli, Costa & Prearo, 2022).Thus, greenwashing can be defined as the intersection of two behaviors on the part of organizations, being, on the one hand, low environmental performance, but, on the other, positive communication about this environmental performance (Delmas & Burbano, 2011).
For this reason, it is noteworthy that the term is directly associated with marketing communication actions carried out by the most diverse organizations with the aim of emphasizing their activities as good environmental practices, minimizing the negative environmental impacts arising from their actions and/or unduly valuing their offer (Souza, 2017).Therefore, the practice of greenwashing creates and promotes a false model, which intentionally misrepresents reality, misleading the consumer (Souza, 2017;Andreoli, Costa & Prearo, 2022).
The topic of greenwashing has been gaining significant academic interest.A seminal survey of production carried out in 2017 identified only 42 articles classified in the Qualis criteria of the period, with an even smaller number when considering a greater level of depth of discussions (Andreoli, Crespo & Minciotti, 2017).More recently, a systematic literature review carried out in 2020 updated and expanded the sum of academic production, identifying 67 articles of interest (Freitas Netto, Sobral, Ribeiro & Soares, 2020).
In general, the literature is consensual when contextualizing the current alarming situation of the practice of greenwashing, defending the growing and even proliferation of organizational cases (Andreoli, Crespo & Minciotti, 2017;Freitas Netto, Sobral, Ribeiro & Soares, 2020;Andreoli, Costa & Prearo, 2022).The aggravating factor is the lack of effective regulation of the practice in the country and in the world (Andreoli & Batista, 2020), justified, in large part, by the voluntary nature linked to the organizational incorporation of socio-environmental values (Márquez, González & Ramírez, 2022).
In this context, we end up praising the role of the consumer, target audience and main interested party (Jong et al, 2020;Andreoli, Costa & Prearo, 2022).More than that, it is argued that, as the final end of the production chain, the consumer has an important role in questioning and demanding from the organizational environment (Jong et al, 2020;Andreoli, Costa & Prearo, 2022).In this way, the outcome ended up being to impose on the consumer the responsibility for regulating the practice of greenwashing, in the sense of identification and differentiation, in addition to self-protection and dissemination to others (Andreoli & Batista, 2020;Andreoli, Costa & Prearo, 2022).
There are several studies that address consumer reactions to the practice of greenwashing, in particular pointing out various harmful effects on the organization reported and/or caught as acting in this regard.Nyilasy, Gangadharbatla and Paladino (2014) argued the possibility of consumer fluctuations in relation to the brand, or even their detachment from it.Parguel, Benoît-Moreau and Larceneux (2011) defended the decrease in purchase intention, just as Hamann and Kapelus (2004) mentioned the loss of consumer loyalty.Furthermore, there is mention of loss of reliability, both in a targeted way, for the specific organization, and in a generalized way, for the green market as a whole (Parguel, Benoît-Moreau & Larceneux, 2011;Chen & Chang, 2013;Guyader, Ottosson & Witell, 2017).
If the mere reaction of the consumer, in an individual and unstructured way, is already argued to be important and impactful, it is to be expected that a more active movement will be even stronger.This includes boycott, understood as one of the main forms of consumer expression, characterized by behavior of repudiation in relation to a product, a brand or an organization (Cruz, 2012).Boycott is defined as an anti-consumption action, in which the consumer intentionally reduces or even interrupts purchasing and consumption with a certain brand or organization (Klein, Smith & John, 2004;Soule, 2009;Cruz & Pirez Jr, 2013).

METHODOLOGICAL PROCEDURE
A systematic literature review was conducted, carried out through a bibliometric survey and a critical analysis of academic publications that address the themes of greenwashing and boycott/buycott.This allowed a general mapping of what has already been produced on the topic, both qualitatively and quantitatively, not only to consolidate what has been studied so far, but also to enable a critical analysis to advance the topic in academia and practice.
More specifically, the systematic review was guided by three research questions, namely: 1.How is the current academic production on the topics of boycott and greenwashing characterized? 2. How does the relevant literature study consumer boycott related to the practice of greenwashing?
A methodological procedure similar to that adopted in related literature was applicated here, with the same objective of evaluating the state of the art, one focused on the theme of greenwashing, in general (Andreoli, Crespo & Minciotti, 2017), and the other related to bluewashing theme (Andreoli, 2023).Therefore, the structure proposed by Kitchenham ( 2004) was adopted as a model, which summarized PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyzes) into three main phases: (1) Review Planning, with a description of the need review and development of the protocol; (2).Conducting the Review, stage in which the search, selection, evaluation, extraction and synthesis of the collected data is carried out; and 3. Review Report, with the presentation and analysis of the results.

Review Planning
Six different forms or variations of the terms of interest were considered for the search, always combined (AND command), namely: greenwashing and boicote, greenwash and boicote, greenwashing and boycott, greenwash and boycott, greenwashing and buycott e greenwash and buycott.The databases used for the search were Portal Capes, Proquest, Scielo, Scopus and the Spell platform, as they represent the most complete academic databases.Access to them was done through an institutional login, so that unrestricted return of results was possible.In all cases, the advanced search engine was used in order to work with the aforementioned combinations.Furthermore, on some platforms, the academic journals filter was used.
Therefore, the inclusion criteria were publications in academic journals, available as full text on the internet and written in English, Portuguese or Spanish.The search process was carried out at the beginning of January 2023, being repeated by a third-party researcher the following week, in order to check and validate the results found.Thus, all results up to the beginning of 2023 were included, returning an analysis period from 1998 to 2022.The exclusion criteria, in turn, were all other forms of publication, such as reports, conference articles, book chapters, dissertations and theses.
The extracted data was consolidated into an Excel spreadsheet for subsequent analysis.All duplicate articles were discarded, and an initial analysis was carried out to define the set of publications that would be used for the investigation.Various points of interest were used to conduct and consolidate the results, such as title, year of publication, periodical, authorship, quote, keywords, objective, conceptual bases, methodological procedure, mentions of the term, among others.

Conducting Review
Applying the search procedure in the selected databases, the total number of publications was 413 articles, practically all found on the ProQuest platform, in addition to two returned on the Capes Portal.There was no occurrence in the Scielo, Scopus and Spell databases.Table 1 shows the detailed distribution according to the expressions studied and the platforms used.
Despite the 413 articles found, several cases of duplicity were identified within the platforms themselves and between variations of expressions.In this way, repeated articles were eliminated, resulting in 331 different studies.Also at this stage, 7 articles were removed because they did not present a version in standard languages, stipulated as inclusion criteria, such as Portuguese, English and/or Spanish, as well as 13 works that did not qualify as scientific articles, defined as exclusion criteria.such as interviews, news articles, book chapters, among others, which resulted in an initial selection of 311 articles.
After that, a second check was carried out, in which the search terms were searched again, but this time directly in the body of the study text, analyzing article by article.The verification process was repeated here by a third-party researcher, ensuring the reliability of the procedure.With this, it was possible to identify several (108) articles whose mentions of one or both terms appear only in the list of bibliographic references or in explanatory notes, works that were also discarded.In this way, a final selection of 203 articles was delimited for analysis, as shown in Table 2.

Review Report
Regarding the date of publication, it was noted that academic interest in the themes of greenwashing and boycott is relatively recent, with the first publication occurring in 1998, maintaining a timid level in the first decade.From 2011 onwards, there was an increase in production, which became more significant after 2019, intensifying even further in 2021 and 2022.This illustrates the growing timeline of production (Figure 1), including both the recency and relevance of the subjects.

Source: Authors
A wide diversity in the origin of production was observed, involving 115 different journals.The journals that stood out with the highest recurrence of publication were the Journal of Business Ethics and Sustainability, with 27 articles each.It is interesting to mention that the first journal also presented greater representation in academic production related to greenwashing, in general (Andreoli, Crespo & Minciotti, 2017;Freitas Netto, Sobral, Ribeiro & Soares, 2020) and also to bluewashing (Andreoli, 2023).Also with repeated publication, but less frequently, Anticipating the analysis of the relevance of production, using the Qualis criteria for the 2017-2020 quadrennium, it is worth highlighting that all the journals with the highest recurrence of publication were classified in the highest strata, with the majority being A1, followed by A2.Furthermore, it is worth reflecting on the scope of the most prominent journals in the production of the topic, which aim to discuss organizational theories and practices in a more systemic way, considering possible impacts on society and the environment.This result is also aligned with the states of the arts mapped by the aforementioned authors.Furthermore, the entire production was published in the English language, demonstrating the lack of national repertoire.
In addition, 113 different journals were counted for the 203 publications, in which the relevance of production was analyzed, using the Qualis criteria for the four-year period 2017-2020.Of these, 38 journals were classified in the area of interest of this study, which is Public and Business Administration, Accounting Sciences and Tourism, in addition to another 18 classified in related areas.Thus, it is noted that 57 journals did not return classification in the last quadrennium, despite three of these being well classified (A1) in the previous quadrennium.More importantly, the high relevance of the classified journals stands out, practically all of them arranged in stratum A, with the majority being A1.These results are shown in Table 3.
There was a greater recurrence of publications with single (69) and double (65) authors, followed by triple ( 49) and other (20), with few repetitions of authors, the most prominent being Sarah Light, with 3 articles, followed by eleven authors with two articles each, namely: Jennifer Sumner, Darryl Reed, Cindy Isenhour, Jason F Shogren, Rajiv Maher, Brayden King, Michael Barnett, Injazz Chen and Aleksandr Kitsis (including co-authors ) and Matthias Damert and Edeltraud Guenther (also co-authors).Applying Lotka's Law (Figure 2), presented in the following analysis, the low productivity of authorship in the area is evident, showing that the study is not very concentrated, with a wide variety and diversity of authorship.
Analyzing the titles of the articles, a variety of terms were recorded, with emphasis on corporate (65), social (57), response (44), sustainable (40) and environmental (36), in addition to green and CSR (23 each), and consumer (20), as illustrated in Figure 3.In this way, there is a clear link between the studies and the broader discussion about the social, environmental or sustainable responsibility of organizations.Furthermore, the scarce participation of terms of interest in the titles stands 942 keywords were identified in the 203 selected articles, which were subsequently analyzed according to the frequency of each component word, that is, when a keyword contained more than one element, each of them was counted alone.For example, the term corporate social responsibility was computed as three independent words: corporate, social and responsibility.Therefore, the 942 keywords identified totaled 1,890 isolated words (Figure 4), of which the following stood out: social (99), corporate (87), response (77), sustainable (62) and environmental (53).The scarce participation of terms of interest is repeated here, both greenwashing (6) and boycott (1), again suggesting a certain generality of studies.Finally, a similarity between this analysis and the previous one can also be observed, illustrating the congruence between the titles and keywords of the articles investigated.
Furthermore, the number of citations of the articles analyzed was investigated, using the Google Scholar platform.As a result, there was a significant propagation capacity, with practically all articles having some citation, which together totaled more than 22 thousand citations, returning an average of 110 citations per article.The highlight was the study 'The Impact of Corporate Sustainability on Organizational Processes and Performance', with almost three thousand citations.
The Table 4 provides a summary of the most significant results, showing the articles that exceeded 500 citations.
With regard to the method used by the articles (Table 5), there was a predominance of the theoretical approach (97), which includes theoretical essays, literature reviews, bibliometric surveys, among others.In theoretical and empirical work, the quantitative approach (64) was highlighted, followed by the qualitative (35), and, finally, the mixed approach (7).The quantitative approach was divided between collecting primary data (40), carrying out quantitative surveys -surveys (26) and experiments ( 14), and secondary data, carrying out statistical analyzes (24), such as regression and modeling.A similar division was observed in the qualitative approach, with primary Source: Authors data collection (13), conducting interviews, and secondary data (23), conducting case studies (11) or even discourse or content analyzes (11).In this way, it was possible to verify the superiority of theoretical studies focused on the analysis of secondary data, with studies that worked empirically using unpublished data being relatively scarce, which may suggest a certain lack of maturity in the themes.
Regarding the investigation of the mentions of terms, initially, we tried to carry out cluster analysis, in order to identify possible groupings; such an analysis was not possible, as the articles did not show good adherence to different groups.As a substitute, a crossover analysis was carried out between the mentions of both terms, as shown in Table 6.With this, it was possible to identify four general groups: (1) the largest of them, composed of articles that only mention (once or twice) both terms, without, however, delving deeper into their discussions, making interpretation possible.that they do not actually work with any of the themes; (2) on the one hand, a minority made up of articles that work with the theme of greenwashing, and only mention (once or twice) the term boycott; (3) on the other hand, another minority of works that work with the boycott theme, and only mention (once or twice) the term greenwashing; (4) and the last group, also a minority, composed of seven articles that have significant mentions (at least three) in both terms, jointly.
In line with the objective of this work, the last group was selected, as per the analysis above, identified as the one with the greatest depth in the topics of interest.Below is a detailed analysis of this section (seven articles).

DETAILED ANALYSIS
In this topic, an in-depth analysis was carried out of the seven selected articles, which most mentioned both terms, together.It is worth highlighting the high relevance of the journals in which they were published, practically all of them being between A1 and A2, with just one exception.It is a period that also appears to be recent, between 2012 and 2022.Furthermore, a wide variety was observed in relation to the method used, with two theoretical essays, one qualitative article, three quantitative and one mixed.
The term greenwashing has been defined as selective, cosmetic, unfounded, misleading or erroneous disclosure Source: Authors that does not add environmental or economic value (Lyon;Maxwel, 2011).The mention of an intentional act of deceiving consumers was recurrent, whether in relation to the environmental practices of an organization, at an institutional level, or in relation to the environmental benefits of a product, more specifically (Delmas;Burbano, 2011).
Regarding the boycott, definitions were scarcer, relating it to the movement of consumer activism or social commitment, as a form of disapproval and punishment of an organization whose behavior was unethical (Kneip, 2012; Brennan; Merkl-Davies, 2014; Gilbert; James; Shogren, 2018).In two cases, in fact, the boycott was investigated as a metric of interest.More importantly, there seems to be no consensus regarding its effectiveness: one article mentions its importance in terms of price devaluation practiced by the organization targeted by the boycott (Kitzmueller; Shimshack, 2012), but there is also mention that there are still no conclusive results in empirical studies (Poret, 2019).
Although all articles explicitly mention environmental issues, the discussions were developed around different stakeholders, from consumers and society, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), to the financial market.Different areas were also investigated, both more general, such as corporate social responsibility, and more specific, such as advertising, marketing, product labeling and the supply chain program.In the keywords, the emphasis is repeated on the terms of corporate social responsibility, in addition to marketing and advertising, as can be seen in Figure 5.
It is interesting to mention that five articles aimed to investigate the logic of reward and punishment by the market, based on stakeholders, as a result of the implementation of a more sustainable organizational strategy (corporate social responsibility).The other two articles aimed to understand the effects resulting from the reactive positioning of organizations in relation to some environmental issue, as in the case of apologies.In other words, it was possible to group the articles analyzed around two main objectives: the first group focused on discussing sustainable practice, in a more general way, and the second aimed at analyzing the consequences of mitigating responses given by organizations in reaction to some repercussion.negative.Considering these similarities, the articles were grouped according to this logic, as discussed below.

Corporal Social Responsibility
Included here are five articles that discussed the effects of pressure from interested parties (stakeholders) in relation to organizations' Corporate Social Responsibility claims.: Economic Perspectives on Corporate Social Responsibility (Kitzmueller & Shimshack, 2012), Change of Mind: Marketing Social Justice to the Fashion Consumer (Heim, 2022), Corporate-NGO Partnerships through Sustainability Labeling Schemes: Motives and Risks (Poret, 2019), The impact of environmental supply chain sustainability programs on shareholder wealth (Dam & Petkova, 2014) and Authentic or cosmetic: stakeholders attribution of firms corporate social responsibility claims (Mombeuil & Zhang, 2020).Kirzmueller and Shimshack (2012) seek to synthesize the literature on Corporate Social Responsibility, through a theoretical essay, defining it from an economic perspective, in addition to developing a taxonomy that connects different approaches.The article pointed out a consistency of empirical evidence in favor of corporate social responsibility mechanisms related to consumer markets and private and public policies.Greenwashing is only mentioned in the discussion of one article, mentioning the possibility of negative consumer perception regarding corporate social responsibility.The boycott is presented as a sufficient threat, with a more significant impact in more competitive markets.However, there is no related discussion between both themes.Heim (2022) highlighted the objective of examining how fashion brands are experimenting with socially fair marketing strategies to transform consumer purchasing behavior (including boycott).Using a qualitative approach (with case studies of advertising campaigns), an opposite effect was observed as a result, in the sense of improving brand perception, with a consequent increase in consumption, instead of an effective change in purchasing behavior.Thus, the study brings

Source: Authors
the discussion of sustainability only in a comparative way to socially fair marketing, arguing the difference; Likewise, greenwashing appears as a counterpoint, as an unfounded appeal that can lead to market retaliation.
Also with a theoretical essay, Poret (2019) set out to examine the development of partnerships between multinational companies and large non-governmental organizations (NGOs) for voluntary product labeling programs.As a result, it was shown that these partnerships enable the sharing of objectives, viability and visibility, in addition to the exchange of essential resources, information and legitimacy.The article highlights that empirical studies related to boycotts are inconclusive in relation to effectiveness, citing Baron (2012), adding that this happens even in cases of well-publicized protests, in which there was no significant financial impact, according to Vogel (2005).The argument is that this movement is costly in terms of consumer utility, encouraging what he calls free ride (similar to carpooling), in which the consumer does not engage in the boycott, but expects it to work.As a consequence, buycott emerged, seen as a new form of ethical or political consumption by the consumer.Dam and Petkova (2014) aimed to investigate the influence of stakeholders, examining the possible financial implications of multinational companies' commitment to environmental supply chain sustainability programs.The authors conducted an event study followed by equation modeling, using a sample of 66 multinationals that have committed to such Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) programs.The study found that there is generally a negative (marginally significant) share price reaction to the announcement of this participation, leaving companies even less likely to communicate this, given consumer pressure.Greenwashing is brought up as a possibility of visualization in relation to the development of additional supply chain programs, without adding environmental or economic value, on the contrary, using more resources and harming the organization's performance.The boycott is exemplified from some real cases, although not conceptualized, illustrating what happened and arguing how the companies in question became more cautious in relation to sustainable communications afterwards.There is no related discussion between both themes.
Finally, Mombeuil and Zhang (2020) also sought to investigate the role of stakeholders, both internal (employees) and external (university students and agents from non-governmental organizations), in relation to corporate social responsibility appeals from companies in the beverage industry.Adopting a mixed methodological procedure (qualitative, with analysis of organizational campaigns and carrying out two focus groups, followed by quantitative, with the application of questionnaires), a widespread perception of these actions as cosmetic was observed.This result was in line with the argument made in the theoretical framework, which discusses greenwashing based on its cosmetic appeal, which seeks to divert the attention of stakeholders from the irresponsible and unethical behavior of organizations, which intentionally makes it difficult to identify and differentiate.towards authentic practices.Despite this, there is mention of the possibility of boycott in the identified cases, seen as a potentially harmful risk of loss of reputation.

Reaction to Negative Repercussions
Two articles aimed to study the organizational reaction to the repercussions of some environmental issue, both with a quantitative approach, namely: The influence of green advertising during a corporate disaster (Bodkin, Amato & Amato, 2014) and Corporate apology for environmental damage (Gilbert, James & Shogren, 2018).
Bodkin, Amato and Amato (2014) sought to explore the influence of green propaganda and social activism during one of the worst episodes of adverse public relations in history: the British Petroleum (BP) Deep Water Horizon oil spill.The study was conducted longitudinally, over four years, with questionnaires administered to university students.As a result, consumer activism showed a difference in all four attitude scales during the time of the oil spill, in relation to advertising, the brand, the company and its environmental commitment.Furthermore, green advertising led to the best attitude towards the brand's environmental commitment, compared to advertising without environmental content, but only at a later period.Therefore, the study concludes that the lack of adequacy between communications and actual corporate social responsibility performance increases the potential for a significant consumer reaction against the organization in question.The case is analyzed as a practice of greenwashing, considering that the company in question promoted itself as sustainable, the outbreak of which resulted in a boycott by the consumer market.Thus, even though it was not conceptualized, the boycott is investigated as a response to consumer social activism, which proved to be influential in all attitudes regarding.Gilbert and James (2018)  caused by companies, carrying out an experiment with a 3 x 3 factorial design in an oil spill scenario: total, partial or absent apologies, and the company's good, bad, or absent environmental reputation.The study highlighted the importance of both apologies and reputation, the latter being more significant.Furthermore, in the control group, the company's good reputation reduces the propensity for individual engagement in a boycott.Furthermore, generally speaking, the authors argue that consumers want those at fault to be held accountable, but do not necessarily engage in vengeful actions unless they feel that accountability is not actually happening.Therefore, similar to the previous article, the scenario is analyzed as a practice of greenwashing, which can, in some cases, even improve organizational reputation.There is explicit mention of the term among the keywords.The boycott is investigated as a metric of interest, being one of the punitive results of the practice of greenwashing, on a personal level.

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The systematic review was guided by two research questions, which are explored below.Firstly, in relation to the current academic production on the topics of boycott and greenwashing, a relative recentness could be observed, with a significant increase in academic interest over time, especially more recently (after 2019).The study appears to be quite diverse, both in terms of publication origin (such as journals and areas of interest) and in relation to authorship.The production also proved to be scientifically relevant, especially considering the journals with the highest recurrence of publication.A consonance was verified regarding the scope of the journals in which they were published, with a more comprehensive view of organizational practices.Furthermore, the links between the texts and the themes of organizational responsibility, whether social, environmental or sustainable, are clear.
Despite this, such production does not actually seem consolidated, an argument that can be verified by considering the pattern in the methodological bias and the more generalist character.Regarding the method, there was a predominance of theoretical studies, followed by empirical articles focused on the collection and analysis of secondary data.As for the depth of discussion, there were almost all isolated and specific mentions of terms of interest in the texts, with few studies actually focused on indepth discussion.Still, even with a more detailed analysis of these few articles that stood out in terms of mentions of both terms, the more closely linked relationship between boycott and greenwashing was practically non-existent, as was the joint deepening of both concepts.Therefore, it is argued that knowledge about the boycott movement related to the practice of greenwashing is not mature, a point that will be explored later.
Secondly, regarding the study of consumer boycott related to the practice of greenwashing, the previous discussion is reinforced, in which few contributions were identified in this regard.This is evident in both the general and detailed analysis.In the first case, for example, the mention of the terms together was not found in any of the analyzed criteria: title, keywords and objective.There appears to be a slightly greater expression of greenwashing (10 times in keywords and six times in both titles and objectives), compared to almost no mention of boycott (just once).Even in these, two articles only cited the same reference, that 77% of consumers claimed to boycott a company if they had been deceived, according to a survey by Cone Communications in 2012.It is worth noting that an article cited a more recent version of the survey, from 2015, in which this number rose to 90%.Finally, one of the studies even permeates the topic, addressing negative environmental word of mouth, but only mentioning the boycott as a possible consequence of it (Guerreira & Pacheco, 2021).
In the detailed analysis, the process of grouping the articles itself reinforces the above argument.In the first set, there was a more comprehensive discussion of the social, environmental or sustainable responsibility of organizations, with superficial mention of boycott behavior.Furthermore, there was a contradiction regarding the effectiveness of the boycott, with two studies referring to the possible reputational risks arising from it (Dam & Petkova, 2014;Mombeuil & Zhang, 2020), but another citing the ineffectiveness of some real cases (Poret, 2019).In the second set (Bodkin, Amato & Amato, 2014;Gilbert, James & Shogren, 2018), an investigation of the possible organizational reaction to the negative repercussions of some environmental issue was identified, in which the boycott theme appeared as a contextualization or even a backdrop, as a potential punitive response to misleading practices.In this way, the focus was more on the possibility of retraction by the organization, rather than on the boycott movement that could have given rise to this need.
It follows precisely from these points, with the identification of an important research gap, the suggestion for future studies.Given the lack of understanding, such suggestions are diverse.In general, a more comprehensive understanding of movements to boycott the organizational practice of greenwashing is necessary, both in terms of operating mechanism and in relation to effectiveness.In the first point, points are listed such as knowledge of the consumer's motivations for joining and remaining, the capacity for dissemination and engagement of these actions, the critical factors that differentiate actions with different levels of adherence, among others.In relation to effectiveness, the aim is to map the potential and real damages caused to organizations, as well as monitoring the reactions derived from the initial movement, both on the part of the target organization and the consumer market.It is worth highlighting that such investigations are relevant whether related to real cases, with the elaboration of case studies, conducting interviews or the application of questionnaires, or simulated ones, with the development of experiments.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS
The article aimed to evaluate academic production regarding greenwashing and the consumer boycott movement.With this, it was possible to evaluate the current state of the art on the subjects, consolidating what has been studied so far, in addition to making it possible to suggest future studies to advance the topic in academia and in practice.More specifically, the systematic review was guided by two research questions: how is the current academic production on the topics of boycott and greenwashing characterized, and how does the relevant literature study consumer boycott relate to the practice of greenwashing?
After applying the search procedure, considering the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 203 articles were selected.The results showed that academic production is relatively recent, but with growing academic interest, given the significant increase after 2011, with a greater peak between 2021 and 2022.Furthermore, it is scientifically relevant, with half of the articles published in high-impact journals, mainly in the areas of Public and Business Administration, Accounting and Tourism.The recurrence of periodicals that have as their scope a more comprehensive discussion of organizational performance, considering possible impacts on society and the environment, also emerged.A similar result was found in the analysis of keywords and article titles, revealing a strong association with terms such as corporate social responsibility, sustainability and environment.Despite this, it can be argued that production is not consolidated, with the majority of studies being merely theoretical, followed by the collection and analysis of secondary data.More importantly, when the mentions of the two terms were investigated, it was possible to identify four general groups: (1) the largest of them, composed of articles that only mention (once or twice) both terms, without, however, delving deeper into their discussions, making it possible to interpret that they do not actually work with any of the themes; (2) on the one hand, a minority made up of articles that work with the theme of greenwashing, and only mention (once or twice) the term boycott; (3) on the other hand, another minority of works that work with the boycott theme, and only mention (once or twice) the term greenwashing; (4) and the last group, also a minority, composed of seven articles that have significant mentions (at least three) in both terms, jointly.
Focusing on this last group, which is of special interest to this work, the production appears even more recent and relevant, organized around two main objectives.The first objective focused on discussing sustainable practice, more generally, studying how organizations approach corporate social responsibility under pressure from stakeholders and how these practices can be perceived as greenwashing.The relationship between boycott and sustainability was addressed, with some research questioning its effectiveness.The second objective was aimed at analyzing the consequences of mitigating responses given by organizations in reaction to some negative repercussion, examining how societies react to negative impacts, such as environmental disasters.Analysis revealed that public apologies and company reputation play an important role in public reactions and impacts on consumer behavior, including boycotts.
In summary, this systematic literature review contributes by identifying an important research gap, with several suggestions for future studies.In general, a more comprehensive understanding of movements to boycott the organizational practice of greenwashing is necessary, both in terms of operating mechanism and in relation to effectiveness.
appeared the Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal and the Organization & Environment, with five articles each, in addition to the Social Responsibility Journal and the Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, both with four articles, and Business Strategy and the Environment, International Journal of Operations & Production Management and Environmental and Resource Economics, with three articles each.

Table 01 :
Relationship between searched terms and search platforms

Table 02 :
Cleaning steps until final selection.