The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has on Wednesday upheld complaints against The Cheeky Panda, ruling that a series of environmental claims made across its Bamboo Nappies and Bamboo Baby Wipes listings were misleading.
The decision followed a challenge from Procter and Gamble UK over statements including “sustainable bamboo”, “100% sustainable bamboo fibre”, “biodegradable baby wipes”, and claims that products were “kinder to the planet” and “protecting the planet”.
Sustainable bamboo claims not substantiated
The ASA found that Cheeky Panda’s use of “sustainable bamboo” and “100% sustainable bamboo fibre” amounted to absolute environmental claims, which require a high level of evidence covering the full life cycle of the finished products – from raw material sourcing through to use and disposal.
While Cheeky Panda provided Forestry Stewardship Council (FSC) certification and fibre analysis reports, the regulator said these did not demonstrate the overall environmental impact of the nappies and wipes as sold. A life cycle assessment supplied by the company related to toilet tissue rather than the advertised products and could not be applied to nappies and wipes, which have different compositions and disposal routes.
The watchdog also noted that on-page messaging such as “Choose bamboo, for the love of trees!” implied the products used no tree-derived materials, further reinforcing the impression of broad sustainability benefits that were not adequately supported.
Biodegradable wipes ruled misleading
Claims that the baby wipes were “biodegradable”, would break down naturally with “no trace”, and decompose faster than conventional wipes were also upheld.
The ASA said consumers would interpret this to mean the wipes in their entirety would fully biodegrade under normal disposal conditions, without leaving harmful residues. However, the evidence provided related mainly to the bamboo viscose fibre rather than the wipes as a whole, which also contained water and other ingredients.
Testing showed around 80% biodegradation under controlled conditions, with carbon dioxide produced as a by-product – falling short of the “no trace” claim. The regulator added that Cheeky Panda had not made clear how long full biodegradation would take, what conditions were required, or whether contamination in real-world bins could interfere with the process.
“Kinder to the planet” not proven
The ASA also rejected claims that the bamboo nappies were “kinder to the planet” or “protecting the planet”, saying shoppers would reasonably understand this as meaning the products were environmentally superior to competing nappies.
Cheeky Panda argued the wording referred to replacing plastic and wood pulp with bamboo. However, the ASA said this basis was not clearly explained in the ads and that the supporting evidence – including reports comparing disposable and reusable nappies – did not demonstrate that the products offered a clear environmental advantage.
The ASA ruled that the ads must not appear again in their assessed form and instructed Cheeky Panda to ensure future environmental and comparative claims are clearly explained and backed by robust, product-specific evidence.
Cheeky Panda told the regulator it has already removed the challenged claims from its digital listings.
Responding to the ruling, Julie Chen, CEO and co-founder of Cheeky Panda, said: “We have always believed sustainability claims should be meaningful, clear and backed by evidence. This ruling is a helpful reminder of just how high the bar for clarity now is and we welcome it.
“Our aim was to highlight the properties of certain materials, but we recognise that our wording could have been read as a broader product-level claim. That distinction matters and we think it should be clearer across the whole category, so we’ve changed our language accordingly, and we’re taking responsibility for that.”
Chen added that the company is continuing to invest in product-level evidence needed further to support clearer, more specific claims in the future.
“Building a responsible business is an ongoing process, and our goal is to keep improving as expectations evolve,” she said. “If rulings like this push the entire industry towards better standards, more honesty and more accountability, that is ultimately a positive outcome.”