Subscribe
Recent Posts
Eyjafjallajoekull and all that
Sustainability in the Service Sector - video
Are you part of the problem...
Book Review: Confessions of a Radical Industrialis...
We're coming over all web 2.0...
Archives
News & Views From the Front Line
Monday, 11 January 2010
Clever green branding
On Friday I had a lovely, warming lunch in Blackfriars cafe in Newcastle. I was very taken with their placemats that showed the local suppliers they use. This is a fantastic piece of green branding. First of all, it doesn't scream green which would be out of place in a mid-market eatery. But it gets across a key message - "we source locally and from a lot of organic farms".
Secondly, it demonstrates green rather than claiming green. It says "here are the facts - you make up your mind".
Thirdly, it grabs your attention in the time between ordering and being served, providing a conversation piece. Restaurants which put food sources on the menu are competing for attention when customers are trying to choose a dish.
Very clever indeed.
Labels: food miles, green claims, green marketing
# posted by Gareth Kane : 09:57
0 Comments
Monday, 14 September 2009
It's amazing what you can do when you really try...
A year ago, Lexus were censured by the UK Advertising Standards Agency for running ads for their hybrid SUV, claiming it was a planet saving breakthrough. The ASA ruled that as the car emitted 192 g/km CO2 compared to 158 g/km CO2 for an average European car (of all classes), it could not be portrayed as green and banned the ad.Lexus have now bounced back with the 2010 model which emits 148 g/km CO2 - a big luxury car which emits less than the average vehicle. It's amazing how a little public humiliation can drive a technological breakthrough.
Labels: advertising, green claims, greenwashing, lexus
# posted by Gareth Kane : 07:00
0 Comments
Monday, 9 February 2009
Weekly Tip(s) #43: The Don'ts of Green Claims
This is the latest of a series of tips extracted from the Green Business Bible e-book:Avoid the following while making green claims:
- Lying: don’t be tempted.
- Manipulating life cycle data: WYGIWYN - the What You Get Is What You Need syndrome.
- Selective reporting: OK, so your new product may be made from 100% recycled material, but if it is also highly toxic, it would be a bit naughty to suggest it is ‘green’.
- Irrelevance: stating CFC-free on a product which is never likely to contain CFCs.
- Overstating the case: Shell recently got in trouble with the Advertising Standards Agency for implying that all of their CO2 emissions were used to grow flowers when only 0.325% were used in this way.
- Being vague: simply saying you are green is not good enough. Prove it!
Labels: green claims, green marketing, tips
# posted by Gareth Kane : 08:36
1 Comments
Wednesday, 12 March 2008
Know thine enemy...
"Know thine enemy and victory will be forthcoming" said Sun Tzu about 2000 years ago*. So who are the enemies of your green business?There are many people out there who love to see ‘green’ businesses ‘exposed’ as ungreen. I call them Hyenas as they are ready to pounce on any weakness:
- Fundamentalist greens who believe that business is intrinsically ‘bad’ environmentally and sees any attempt to build a green business as ‘greenwash’;
- The sensationalist press who know that a story entitled, say, ‘Organic Food Exposed!’ will sell newspapers and magazines;
- Reactionary smart-alecs who just want to be cleverer than everyone else (Jezza Clarkson et al);
- Unscrupulous business rivals who see green companies starting to eat into their market share. Note that in extreme cases front organisations are sometimes used to do the dirty work in these cases.
In my experience, none of these types are particularly bothered about the accuracy of their claims. But remember, Hyenas exist to fill a very important role in their eco-system - they keep the savannah clean and healthy. I recommend you use them as a spur to make sure that your green offering is as robust as possible and rebut any unfounded allegations in a sober manner, using third party assessments/accreditations wherever possible.
But for most green businesses, the most dangerous enemy is much closer to home. I have seen far too many green business managers believe their own hype, delude themselves and even blame their customers for not buying. This is commercial suicide and their business will never succeed with this attitude, nor does it deserve to. Don't fall into that trap.
* Actually, when I googled the first three words of this quote to check it, all the resulting versions were different. So I assume there's been quite a bit of paraphrasing over the millennia... did the ancient Chinese use the word 'thine'?
Labels: green business, green claims
# posted by Gareth Kane : 10:14
0 Comments
Wednesday, 5 March 2008
Greenwash Abounds!
I finally got around to reading the February edition of the ENDS report yesterday and was disappointed, but not surprised, to find four major stories on Greenwashing.- Two of these (mastic asphalt companies and British Gas) were claiming that their products had no carbon footprint as they were offsetting their carbon emissions. While I (somewhat controversially) believe in offsetting as a CSR strategy, it is very unwise to use it as a claim in this way. In my book, you can say "we offset our carbon emissions", but not "our products have a zero carbon footprint". Obviously the Advertising Standards Authority agrees with me.
- Another is a compost company, William Sinclair, putting a 'cradle to gate' carbon label on their peat products. This is a bit naughty as peat is a fossil fuel and will decompose in use to produce 5 times as much carbon dioxide as the figure on the label. A bit like saying petrol has a carbon footprint of X as long as you don't actually use it.
- The last story is about 'ethical' investment funds. These have been found to be sort-of ethical in that they avoid certain industries (such as the arms industry) but some only have 1% of their stocks in 'green' industries, despite the image they portray.
All of these examples show that green claims are a minefield and that you're better not doing it at all if you're not going to do it properly. As my primary school teacher used to say, you're only cheating yourself, you know...
Labels: carbon footprint, eco-label, green claims, greenwashing
# posted by Gareth Kane : 06:06
0 Comments
Monday, 21 January 2008
Greenwashing or Clear Communication?
Terra Choice, a US Green Marketing company has released a 'green paper' entitled the 6 Deadly Sins of Greenwashing. It details the results of a survey of over a thousand products with green claims - only one was regarded by the authors as being robust. The graph below shows how the company categorised the offenders against the six sins they identified:1. Hidden Trade-off - the claim only covered one item of the product's lifecycle impact;
2. No Proof;
3. Vagueness - eg "non-toxic";
4. Irrelevance - eg being CFC free when CFCs have been banned for over a decade;
5. Lesser of Two Evils - greening a 'bad' product eg "organic cigarettes";
6. Fibbing.
While I am completely against greenwashing, I have a problem with some of these alleged 'sins' and think the company may be guilty of chasing headlines.
For example, the biggest sin, 'Hidden Trade-off' suggests that single-subject eco-labels are taboo. Yet it is these labels that have proved the most popular with the public. The EU energy label (right) on white goods has been responsible for a huge shift in consumer preferences and it is so successful, it is being used for cars, windows and even aircraft. Why is it successful? It is clear, objective and people understand it. Conversely, the more comprehensive EU Eco-label is widely ignored. One person's 'vagueness' is another person's clearness. More people understand 'non-toxic' than know what BFR or LD50 mean. I'd tend to lump this one in with 'no-proof' myself.
Likewise, I'm not sure about the "lesser of two evils". People laugh when they hear the army is interested in lead-free bullets, but most rounds are fired in training, often in areas of great ecological importance, so it is important not to scatter toxic material around. If someone is going to kill themselves smoking, then I'd rather they did it with tobacco that hasn't been grown using toxic chemicals.
If you cut these elements out of the graph above, then relatively few products fail the tests - and only one percent were actively found to be fibbing. I've been harsh on Terra Choice, but many media commentators do the same thing - poke holes in the genuine efforts of others to do the right thing and communicate it to their customers. Having said that, every time the Advertising Standards Agency rap the knuckles of a genuine Greenwasher, I punch the air and shout "Yes!".
Labels: eco-label, green claims, greenwashing
# posted by Gareth Kane : 15:31
0 Comments
Wednesday, 14 November 2007
Watch out for green conmen!
Like any sector of industry, the environmental sector has its fair share of con artists and cowboys.At one end of the scale is dodgy green claims. The big guys can be as guilty of this as anyone - Shell was recently criticised by the UK's advertising watchdog for an advert featuring a drawing of flower heads emerging from refinery chimneys, implying the oil company used all its waste carbon dioxide to grow flowers.
More seriously, I've had more queries from people who have received dodgy literature from waste companies using scare tactics about the new waste treatment regulations. I've discussed this before, but here's the Environment Agency view on the new regs. You do need to check your waste company is treating your waste, but you aren't expected to do it yourself.
Finally beware of green shysters trying to sell immature or useless technology as the great new saviour of the planet. These guys run from the self-deluded through the dodgy Del-boys to the full-on criminal. The technologies can range from magnets which magically improve fuel efficiency through to full scale waste treatment facilities. My advice is always to treat environmental issues as you would any other business decision - get the facts straight, get third party references and, if it appears too good to be true, it usually is.
Labels: green claims
# posted by Gareth Kane : 10:35
0 Comments
Friday, 19 October 2007
Green Washers and Green Winners Survey
The Chatsworth FOOTSIE 100 Green Washers and Green Winners survey has found that UK big business puts image and consumer pressure ahead of genuine concern for the environment. The survey asked more than 1200 "opinion formers" from including included journalists and commentators from the UK national print and broadcast press, the environmental and business trade media, political groups and sustainability experts. The results were:- The main motivation for UK companies to adopt green policies is to protect their reputation (27%) followed by consumer pressure (20%) and good business sense (18%)
- Only 1% believe genuine concern for the environment is the key driver for UK companies to adopt green policies
- Marks & Spencer (45%) and HSBC voted the top green winners – the companies making the most genuine green effort
- BP, Tesco and British Airways considered to be most guilty of ‘greenwash’ by respondents
- BP, Tesco and Marks & Spencer have the highest profile and most effective green publicity campaigns in terms of coverage
- Majority of respondents (75%) believe it is better for big business to own up where they are not green and show willing to make any changes
BP and Tesco must be a bit gutted, spending all that money on publicity and getting branded "Greenwashers". I'm sure they'll be taking a close look at how M&S have converted their cash into credibility. The simple answer is "Walk the Walk AND Talk the Talk" - earlier this week they got voted joint greenest supermarket.
Labels: green business, green claims, survey
# posted by Gareth Kane : 08:42
0 Comments
Monday, 25 June 2007
9 out of 10 consumers don't believe your green claims
A survey by Consumers International last week made grim reading for those companies trying to prove their green credentials - only 10% of consumers believe industrialists when it comes to climate change, compared to 50% who trust green campaign groups and 60% who trust scientists.Certainly many of the more radical green campaigners seem to be setting the pace. George Monbiot has spent many column inches criticising biofuels on the grounds they will compete with food production, and the next thing we see is 75,000 Mexicans on the streets protesting that they can't afford tortillas because US bioethanol production is driving up the price of vegetable oil.
Business needs get its voice back in regard to this debate, but the only way it can do this is to make sure what it says is backed up by what it does. For example, Shell organised a recent environmental summit, but ended up being publicly lambasted by most of the big environmental groups for boasting about their relatively modest green projects while quietly expanding their "carbon-intensive tar sands operations in Canada" and "failing to put out its illegal flares in Nigeria". Shell tried to talk the talk and ended up with egg on its face - they now need to walk the walk.
Labels: climate change, consumers, green claims, Shell
# posted by Gareth Kane : 07:29
2 Comments
A highly accessible, practical guide to those who want to introduce sustainability into their business or organization quickly and effectively.
