Conscious Consumer

COMM 486F, Sustainability Marketing, has been an exciting journey. Before taking this course, I was quite skeptical of green marketing. I was well aware of The Seven Sins of Greenwashing but was unsure how the goals of sustainability and marketing could align successfully . After analyzing case studies, interacting with guest speakers and working with local companies, my knowledge of green marketing has grown tremendously. I now have a greater appreciation for companies like Seventh Generation and Timberland after seeing what they are doing to innovate and mitigate their environmental impact.

Has it changed how you think about how you live your life as a consumer?

COMM 486F has changed how I approach shopping for everyday green products. In fact, I think I spend more time shopping for these items than I did before. I’m doing a lot more research now on the social and environmental benefits of a product before actually purchasing them. While price and efficacy are major determining factors for what I ultimately buy, I’m interested in they story behind the brand, as well as the impact I can make by purchasing the particular product. I’m looking for cues such as: third party certification, education initiatives and strategic partners. I also need to know the product I’m buying is good for both me and the environment.

Has it changed how you think about business?

I think I’m less skeptical about businesses going “green” than when I first started taking the course. Don’t get me wrong. There are still companies out there that haven’t gotten over their own Greenwashing issues (see Nestle’s Eco-Shape Bottle). However, I appreciate how some companies seem really committed to innovating or mitigating their environmental impacts. Airline companies, for example, are using carbon offsets to minimize their impact because the core of their business doesn’t allow much room for traditional reduction methods. The social venture model is increasing in popularity, and it isn’t difficult to see why consumers are rooting for companies who consider the 3P’s in their business models. While cost savings for companies are one of the biggest reasons why brands go green, I also see it as a joint effort with consumers. Consumers need to demand and inspire companies to re-design their products and to innovate for a sustainable future for everyone.

140 thousand tons of e-waste ends up in our landfills each year. E-Waste also contains toxic chemicals such as: lead, mercury and arsenic which threaten our water and air supply. The Story of Electronics attributes e-waste to planned obsolescence, lack of regulations and corporate greed. Much of this waste is illegally exported to developing countries where workers are exposed to these toxic chemicals on a daily basis. Here in Canada, only about 25% of this waste is actually recycled. There seems to be many barriers to the amount of e-waste in our landfills such as: lack of awareness, geographic accessibility to recycling depots and costs to dispose. While some provinces require manufacturers to develop/comply with product stewardship plans, these legislations are loosely monitored and are not federally applicable.

Traditionally, manufacturers found the handling of e-waste to be uneconomical. Disposal costs were essentially passed down to the government and consumers. Recently, Samsung has taken upon itself to recycle e-waste through its Samsung Recycling Direct program. In partnership with recycling company Global Electric Electronic Processing (GEEP), consumers will not have to pay a fee when they drop off their Samsung-branded electronics at the 40 depots across Canada. Other branded electronics cost a nominal fee to recycle according to their website. Some Purolator locations will also accept electronics for drop-off and they will be transported to GEEP depots.

Below is a video explaining Samsung’s Recycling Direct program:

I like that Samsung is taking the whole life-cycle into consideration and trying to remove common barriers to recycling e-waste such as cost and geographic accessibility. There’s probably an incentive for Samsung to recycle these electronics (other than the perceived altruism) perhaps in the form of reusing parts. Supporters of manufacturers taking back these electronics suggest than the increased cost in disposal will counter planned obsolescence and financially encourage manufacturers to make more recyclable and longer lasting products. It will be interesting to see how this e-waste recycling program will affect the life-cycles of Samsung products and whether other large manufacturers will join them in this area.

-JN

Imagine this. You are in a school cafeteria, and there are several apples to choose from. All of the apples look immaculate except for this one in the corner. This particular apple is slightly blemished and mishappen. You avoid picking the blemished apple and so do the several people after you. No one picks that particular apple and it is thrown into the trash at the end of the day. Perhaps we think that the apple is spoiled or not as nutritious as the immaculate looking apples next to it. As consumers, we are conditioned to want perfect looking fruit and we don’t realize that it generally doesn’t make a difference taste or nutrition wise.

Last month, the UN Environment Programme and the Food and Agricultural Organization launched a global campaign to reduce food waste. According to the UN, nearly one third of all food produced (1.3 billion tons) is wasted each year. 300 tons of this wasted food could feed the 900 million hungry people around the world.  The campaign is targeted to food producers, consumers and retailers. Inefficient processing by producers, extended travel times and bad habits by both consumers and retailers contribute heavily to the waste problem. Based on the concepts of Think. Eat. and Save, the goal of the campaign is to link all the conversations about food waste into one place and to encourage the sharing of tips, experience and good practices.

This is also a huge carbon footprint problem. Think of all the wasted energy and resources used to grow and distribute food in the first place. We really need to reconsider how we eat and our consumption patterns. So what can we do? Luckily, the Think. Eat. Save. campaign has shared some tips on reducing our carbon footprint and our grocery bill:

1. Shop Smart—plan meals, use shopping lists and avoid impulse buys.
2. Buy Funny Fruit
3. Understand Expiration Dates— in the US, “sell-by” and “use-by” dates are not federally regulated and do not indicate safety, except on certain baby foods. Most foods can be safely consumed well after their use-by dates.
4. Zero Down Your Fridge—eat food that is already in your fridge before buying more or making something new, which will save time and money.
5. Say Freeze and Use Your Freezer—frozen foods remain safe indefinitely.
6. Request Smaller Portions—restaurants will often provide half-portions upon request at reduced prices.
7. Compost—composting food scraps can reduce climate impact while also recycling nutrients.
8. Use FIFO (First in First Out) as a kitchen rule.
9. Love Leftovers –tonight’s leftover chicken roast can be part of tomorrow’s sandwich.
10. Donate—non-perishable and unspoiled perishable food can be donated to local food banks, soup kitchens, pantries and shelters.

-JN

Stonyfield Farm (Stonyfield) is a popular organic yogurt maker found in many supermarkets. Stonyfield is know for it’s commitment to educating consumers on organic ingredients and the environment. Their website is informative and they are quite transparent on their farming practices.

The Whole Carbon Footprint

In the past, companies have prided themselves on measuring the carbon footprint of only a small portion of the supply chain. Conversely, Stonyfield has measured the full carbon footprint of over 150 of their 200 products. What is impressive is that they have considered the whole product lifecycle from raw materials to disposal.

So how do they do it? Stonyfield uses a special software created by SAP to track the real time GHG emissions produced by each process of the lifecycle.

When an order is placed for production, the software immediately assigns a carbon footprint to each of the materials. Some processes require people across the supply chain to manually input data into the software.

Stonyfield has found most of their emissions are generated by milk production (52%) followed by manufacturing (13%). To address these issues, Stonyfield has created cross-functional teams to come up with solutions. Nicknamed MAP Teams, these teams have come up with innovative solutions from decreasing farm energy use to alternative fuel sources.

Future Implications

Measuring the GHG emissions for a single product is challenging and requires a lot of time and money. It is rare to see a company in North America invest so heavily in trying to measure the whole carbon footprint of a product. The closest I have seen is probably what Carbon Trust is doing with consumer products in the UK. Working with clients through Climate Smart in Comm 388 has allowed me to realize the interest that small to medium sized businesses have to calculate their full carbon footprints. Hopefully, Stonyfield’s work in carbon management will inspire others to quickly follow suit.

-JN

Luxury fashion e-tailer Honest By claims to be the “world’s first 100% transparent company.” Honest By offers sustainable, fully supply chain transparent clothing for men and women. For every product, the company reveals: where the materials were sourced, where it was manufactured, the whole cost breakdown (down to the safety pin) and the carbon footprint. The company invites designers to create limited edition collections for the website, but designers have to adhere to strict rules regarding Honest By’s sustainable practices.

Some of these practices include using materials that are:

1. Certified-organic
2. Cruelty free
3. Vegan
4. Ethically sourced

-JN

I recently stumbled upon ethicalDeal or what some consider as the “Green Groupon”. While I’m often skeptical about the long term success of the daily deal model (see Groupon), I am curious about ethicalDeal’s focus on a “green lifestyle”. ethicalDeal is a Vancouver startup offering consumers green products based on their ethical criteria and aims to educate consumers on the health and eco benefits of their products. I see the company addressing common barriers to buying green such as: too expensive, not sure where to find them or don’t know which companies are greenwashing. What I particularly like is the added convenience of redeeming a deal at your local grocer such as Whole Foods or Donald’s Market.

Personally, I get overwhelmed when I’m standing in front of a grocery aisle and trying to figure out which green product to buy. Featuring local green companies who meet their strict standards at a discount is a great way to introduce consumers to a carefully selected number of green products and services. Their blog is worth checking out. It features local community events and education on topics such as Fair trade certification.  While the company does use a lot of green buzzwords and images in its marketing, ethicalDeal offers a unique value proposition in a crowded and arguably declining industry.

Farm-to-Table is a popular movement with the aim of connecting local food producers to local consumers. Several restaurants in Vancouver have embraced this concept (here and here), and they are prime examples of using a sustainability issue as a marketing tool. Using local, in-season ingredients isn’t a new idea, but it doesn’t seem like restaurants have used it as a major differentiation point in the past. Advocates of the movement claim economic, environmental and health benefits to consuming local food.

“Food Miles”

Do these claims have merit? Well it depends on how you look at it. Money stays in the local economy and I personally find the taste of local food fresher. A major argument about supporting local food is that it travels less “food miles”, therefore less carbon emissions are generated. But “food miles” doesn’t show the whole picture. If 1 large truck traveled 1000 km and carried 1000 apples, and 10 local farmers carried 100 apples each and traveled 100 km, they basically covered the same distance for the same amount of food (assuming they burn about the same amount of fuel). “Food miles” actually makes up a small percentage of the overall carbon footprint of food (11%).  How food is actually grown makes up about 83%. We really have to consider the whole lifecycle, from fertilization to disposal. Currently there is no standard for measuring the carbon footprint of food. It is difficult to try and come up with the exact emissions for a food product because there are many factors to consider and not every one of these factors is being measured.

What can we do?

A couple months ago, while I was having dinner at Fable Kitchen (which prides itself on the Farm-to-Table concept), I had the chance to speak with the Head Chef, Trevor Bird. He stressed the need to be an educated consumer and that it is often much easier to measure the carbon emissions from local farms. It is also beneficial for businesses to build relationships with local food purveyors and other food establishments to try and figure out efficient ways to improve the local food economy. He was also looking into programs such as Bullfrog Power. It is akin to buying carbon offsets. You are paying for the Bullfrog Power to inject green, renewable energy into the grid on your behalf. I’m not convinced with the Bullfrog Power model but I digress. So what are we to do in the meantime? I probably won’t be trying to calculate the carbon emissions from my grocery trips, but I can eat less meat (growing livestock is a very inefficient process) and buy certified organic whenever possible.

-JN

Living away from home can be a challenge, especially when it comes to making household purchasing decisions. When it comes to everyday personal care and household products, I try to look for products that are both eco-friendly and safe for my body.  Three major cues I look for are: ingredients, claims and environmental impact.

Dawn Antibacterial Dish Soap

You might’ve seen Dawn’s antibacterial dish soap commercial before. If not, click here.

The heartwarming message of saving wildlife affected by oil spills, and donating money to the cause, were some of the reasons why I used to use this product. However, one of the main ingredients, Triclosan (anti-bacterial function), has been discovered to be a potentially dangerous chemical in larger quantities by different organizations. Environment Canada noted that Triclosan is hard to degrade in the environment, is an irritant and can be toxic to aquatic wildlife.

Triclosan Everywhere?

I actually found Triclosan in the supposedly “natural” deodorant and toothpaste I use. While some of the ingredients are in their natural, unrefined states, the use of greenwashing on the labels doesn’t really convey the whole picture. Only some of the ingredients are naturally occurring, and we haven’t even considered how it was produced. The Canadian Medical Association cites the extensive use of Triclosan (found in many labeled and unlabeled household products) can contribute to antibiotic resistance.

Proctor & Gamble (P&G) was asked by CBC if their Dawn antibacterial dish soap products were “in compliance with current legal and regulatory requirements in Canada”. P&G claims Dawn products to be in compliance, but is that enough these days to win over consumers? Regulatory requirements and regulations are baselines. They are the lowest expectation. Rather than responding to general regulatory requirements, why aren’t companies making strategic decisions to go above and beyond these measures and setting new standards through education and transparency? Perhaps Seventh Generation is a rare case of strategic green marketing.

This Seventh Generation ad  promotes the brand’s green philosophy and has a link on the bottom left educating customers about optical brighteners.

There is Hope!

Seventh Generation is a brand of green cleaning and personal care products. The company has an integrated marketing plan showing its commitment to the environment through its social media channels, website and print ads. The company is very transparent about its ingredients, third party certifications and strategic corporate social responsibility. The website is very informative and the social media channels are interactive platforms for consumer involvement and its green initiatives.

Do you know any other companies out there with transparent green marketing philosophies and campaigns?

-JN