In my most recent lecture of Sustainable Marketing I learned about the potential of partnerships and the impact they can have on creating a sustainable industry. It makes intuitive sense – different brands, manufacturers, NGO’s, industry associations, and government should work together instead of against each other in our fight against pollution. An example given was the partnership between the Ontario Power Authority (government) and Air Miles Rewards which gave birth to the Power Pledge Program. An even more substantial example is the Sustainable Apparel Coalition, which boasts a member’s list that includes Nike, Burberry, IKEA among other household names. To  reduce the environmental and social impacts of the global apparel industry, the Sustainable Apparel Coalition has developed the Higg Index to aid clothing companies in becoming more sustainable.

Now you might be asking how ethanol fits into this discussion. Well, years ago agriculture groups in the United States and Canada lobbied government to pass laws requiring gasoline to be blended with up to 10% ethanol to ‘reduce carbon emissions’. The government of both countries passed these laws and to this day all of the gasoline we fuel our cars with contains a minimum of 5% ethanol. While not exactly a partnership, these groups did work together in order to implement this regulation in the name of ‘sustainability’ and were lauded by the public at the time.

A typical gasoline pump.

As it turns out, not all partnerships do what they claim to accomplish. Ethanol is not the solution to the global warming crisis we had hoped for. While ethanol does reduce emissions directly from vehicle combustion, the overall energy input required to grow and transform corn into ethanol is substantial. So substantial in fact, that ethanol actually has a negative net energy rating in some studies – meaning it requires more energy to make ethanol than burning ethanol gives back! Furthermore, ethanol blended gasoline deteriorates car parts which leads to costly repairs more often. For a more comprehensive reading on why ethanol is actually worse for our environment than straight gasoline, check out End the Ethanol Ripoff and The Great Ethanol Scam.

So if ethanol doesn’t benefit the environment, why did the agriculture groups and government agree to mandate ethanol use? I won’t say for certain but receiving approval from an industry as large as the agricultural industry certainly helps during elections:

Money and Politics, a match made in heaven.

For our second client challenge, many groups proposed that Vancouver Film Studios (VFS) ‘greenify’ their property by growing shrubs plants on unused areas and/or by decorating the exteriors of their boring concrete stage buildings with green images. These groups argued that people who ventured onto the lot would be encouraged to be more sustainable themselves after noticing the green buildings or abundance of foliage. However, none of the groups provided any evidence to support their claims that literally making a place greener would make people behave greener as well. The idea itself seemed very intuitive and simple to implement, but the lack of evidence prompted me to explore this idea further.

Would replacing the grey concrete with green paint and foliage really persuade people to behave more sustainably?

After some extensive Google searches, I was unable to find any studies that suggested green spaces transformed litterers into recyclers.

But hope is not lost! While green spaces do not change people’s environmental behaviors, they DO provide a number of other interesting benefits:

• Reduced mental fatigue and stress – spending time in natural settings relieves mental fatigue and soothes humans.
• Safer neighborhoods – buildings surrounded with greenery have lower crime rates.
• Increased compassion – tying into the point above, being around plants improves relationships between people and increases empathy towards others.
• Improved human performance – spending time in green settings heightens feelings of vitality, which in turn increases energy levels leading to improved work performance.
• Improved concentration and memory – similar to improved work performance, the influence of nature sharpens task accuracy and can improve memory and attention span by 20%.

Clearly, VFS should consider turning their lot greener. The points above were taken from multiple studies investigating the effect of plants on human well being – what company doesn’t want their workers to perform at a high level?

Along with VFS, I suggest my fellow classmates to also heed their own recommendations and ‘greenify’ their study areas since finals are less than a month away! Time to take a look at my garden to see what will look good sitting at my desk…

Sources:

Health and well-being benefits of plants

https://www.planning.org/cityparks/briefingpapers/saferneighborhoods.htm

https://www.popularresistance.org/hidden-benefits-of-community-gardens/

Before the advent of social media, companies would have difficulties conversing with their customers because they were limited to conventional promotional methods. It is understandably hard to engage with customers when your only communication channel used to be a 30 second ad on the radio or television! Now that technology has given us tools like Twitter, Youtube, Facebook, and Google, it has become easier for companies and consumers to connect and share ideas.

One very prominent example of the benefits of a dialogue between companies and consumers is the story of ‘Smart chopsticks’ by Chinese tech giant Baidu. The idea began as a simple April Fool’s joke released by the company in 2014:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BChk6WOBjsA

However, what the video achieved was more than just awareness of Baidu – it created significant buzz within the Chinese community who made it known that they supported the idea. Since China’s food supply chain is so vast (there are over 1 billion mouths to feed after all), there have been a number of food scandals in recent years. As a result, many Chinese have become wary of the food they consume and the thought of being able to conveniently test their food with a popular eating utensil resonated with them.

Fast forward 6 months and Baidu is introducing ‘Smart Chopsticks’ prototypes at it’s annual technology conference. While not as sophisticated as the chopsticks in the video, the ability to detect food that has been cooked with ‘gutter oil’ is definitely a step in the right direction towards strengthening food safety in China. Just another example of how necessity is the mother of all inventions, but this time the inventor was not tackling his own needs, but those of his customers!

What are your thoughts on ‘Smart Chopsticks’? Do you think we would find any use for this product in Vancouver or the rest of Canada?

References:

http://www.thehindu.com/in-school/signpost/april-fools-joke-inspires-smart-chopsticks-in-china/article6383670.ece

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/15018/20140907/smart-chopsticks-to-detect-chinese-food-gone-bad-why-not-says-baidu.htm