Green, green, everywhere it’s green. That seems to be a big focus in 2008, green power, green cars, green computing. It amuses us in a way — since we’ve been green since 1992 as a company and gardened green our entire lives — that the marketplace has suddenly turned so green, but it’s all good. We know it’s nothing new, but to those who have previously never embraced the concepts of environmental responsibility, sustainability, and other green goodness, this is a dawning moment and we’re happy to see it. It seems a good share of the world has decided to trade in their Hummers for hybrids in 2008 and that’s good, since we sure do need it.
This is a tender moment. Consumers have an opportunity to learn green facts and take steps that can make a real albeit small difference, and those who manufacture and market green have an opportunity to not blur lines, prey on ignorance, or take advantage of positive consumer intentions; an opportunity to market right, selling green for good, not green for green (money shouldn’t be the primary motivator). The almighty dollar is important, but if a purveyor of goods really cares, the good green will really come first. We have doubts at times.
We’re not alone. In the April issue of GardenCenter Magazine, from Branch-Smith Publishing, there was an excellent article titled “Consumers love (and hate) green claims” by Assistant Editor Sarah Martinez. It was noted in the article:
Eighty-four percent of companies surveyed believe it’s important to operate in a sustainable manner. However, only 3 percent of customers think businesses are being honest about efforts to be environmentally conscious, and 33 percent believe businesses exaggerate what they are doing. — Based on a poll taken by the
US Conference of Mayors and Zogby
Maybe the apparent skepticism we share comes from a personal experience with one or more of Six Sins of Greenwashing, also mentioned in the article, as follows:
- 1. Sin of the hidden trade-off.
- Suggesting a product is green based on a single environmental attribute.
- 2. Sin of no proof.
- An environmental claim that can’t be substantiated by easily accessible supporting information or reliable third-party certification.
- 3. Sin of vagueness.
- Claims that are so poorly defined or broad that real meaning is likely to be misunderstood.
- 4. Sin of Irrelevance.
- Making a claim that may be truthful, but is unimportant and unhelpful to customers.
- 5. Sin of fibbing.
- Making claims that are simply false.
- 6. Sin of lesser of two evils.
- Green claims that may be true within a product category, but risk distracting the consumer from the greater environmental impact of the category as a whole.
— Identified by TerraChoice Marketing
Retailers, even though they should be properly trained, and preferably experienced, are often at the mercy of the manufacturers or distributors with whom they deal to get the all-important facts about the products they offer. So, it’s buyer-beware, as well as retailer beware. Do research if you’re going to do green or sell green. And don’t get the wrong idea, we’re in favor of selling green, we always have been. We sleep better at night while making a living. But do it the right way and be prepared to know for sure.
Hopefully we violate none of those six sins (we try our best and always try to give you the good and bad). We have some products, like diatomaceous earth (DE), that we often see sold in a less than forthright way many times. DE is big on the label, a chemical is in the fine print. (Ours doesn’t, it’s a food-grade DE.) Another thing we see is the promotion of “natural” products that are still quite harmful. Some organically-derived compounds are more harmful than some synthetic ones. It’s not something you’ll find on the label, not even written as light green fine-print on a dark green background, but it is the absolute truth.
It’s really up to the supply chain to do it right, starting at the top — if you’re going to sell green mean it — but consumers owe it to themselves to understand the methods they choose, the ways they try on their greenness. People need to confirm that there will be an actual benefit to their practices, without consequences they can’t live with. Don’t worry, Kermit had it wrong, it’s easy being green. The hard part is accessing accurate information upon which educated decisions can be made.
The RTU Debacle - GreenMethods.com responds:
Posted: May 28th, 2008 at 12:27 am →
[…] We had recently written an article about all the green in the air this year. And since that article was written, about fifteen other articles have crossed our desk, all with the same theme: going green. It’s all good, a positive direction, a new level of conscientiousness. We’re happy about it. But some things still remind us we have a ways to go in some areas. Our RTU Debacle is one such area. […]