If this month’s stories demonstrate anything, it’s the scale of the barriers preventing consumers from making the right choices when it comes to ethical buying. Many people simply can’t afford to buy the responsible goods and services at their current premium prices. For those who can, the confusion created by the multitude of labels and certifications means that they never feel certain of the products’ exact social or environmental credentials. Finally, when surveyed about companies’ corporate responsibility performance, consumer rankings do not seem to be based on tangible or rational criteria. For instance, J&J is present at the top of BostonCollege’s CSR Index survey, despite the nine product recalls they faced in the last year.
So what is the solution to help consumers consume ethically? Tightening rules for “green labelling” is a good first step to take blatant greenwashing out of the equation. But this won’t be sufficient to address the vast gap in knowledge, education, and affordability we are currently facing.
Is choice editing the answer? Some retailers are making the decision for their customers, for instance by offering Fairtrade bananas or MSC certified fish only. This is perhaps one answer but the movement would need to go further, by progressively phasing out unethical choices altogether, so that ethical goods become the norm.
What about a SEDEX-type industry initiative for common measurement of products’ credentials? If companies have been able to work together to develop a common and consistent assessment framework for suppliers, the same could be done to measure product impacts, which would allow standardised ethical marketing claims. Collaboration has many times demonstrated its benefits in the past, and should be the way forward to turn the UK into a real ethical consuming society.
Myriam is a consultant at Corporate Citizenship. Email her at myriam.galopin@corporate-citizenship.com to discuss campaigns, responsible sourcing and community investment.
Communications providers need to do more to publicise services for disabled customers
Ofcom has called on communications providers to do more to publicise services that are available for disabled customers. Recent research into the advice prospective customers were given about these services by BT, Orange, O2, TalkTalk, T-Mobile, Virgin Media, Vodafone and 3 revealed that 37% of mystery shoppers were provided with information about at least one service available for disabled customers without further prompting. This figure rose to 75% after prompting. This is a significant drop since Ofcom’s 2006 research when 91% of calls resulted in information being provided about at least one service after prompting. Ofcom has discussed the findings of the mystery shopping with the relevant providers and has asked them to set out an action plan with reasonable timings for improvements. Most providers have shown willingness to improve the situation, and Ofcom will be working with them to ensure that this happens.
A new report by Shoppercentric aimed at reviewing the ethical and economic issues facing UK shoppers has revealed that 55% of shoppers feel they cannot afford to act on their ethical principles, and 77% admit that higher prices are preventing them from buying more environmentally friendly products. However, the younger generations seem to be showing the most interest in shopping “ethically”; 65% of under 25’s are keen to do their bit by buying environmentally / socially friendly products compared to an average of 52%. Whilst the impact of the tough economic situation on ethical shopping is clear. Danielle Pinnington, Managing Director at Shoppercentric, argues that businesses must work hard now to convince shoppers of their ethical credentials, in order to benefit from the ‘green pound’ when it re-emerges.
More than 95% of consumer products claiming to be green are committing at least one of the “sins” of greenwashing, according to a study released in October by environmental marketing company TerraChoice. Greenwashing is defined as the act of misleading consumers about the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service. However, the 2010 study reveals that greenwashing has declined slightly since 2009, with 4.5% of products now “sin-free”, compared to only 2% in 2009. The study also finds that marketers and product manufacturers are getting better, with greenwashing down among those who have been focused on environmentally preferable practices longer than others. The proportion of “sinfree” products is five times greater in “mature” categories like building, construction and office products than in “immature” categories like toys and baby products.
Federal Trade Commission Proposes Revised “Green Guides”
On 6 October, the Federal Trade Commission proposed revisions to the guidance that it gives marketers to help them avoid making misleading environmental claims. The changes to the “Green Guides” are designed to update the Guides and make them easier for companies to understand and use, and include new guidance on marketers’ use of product certifications and seals of approval, “renewable energy” claims, “renewable materials” claims, and “carbon offset” claims. “In recent years, businesses have increasingly used ‘green’ marketing to capture consumers’ attention and move Americans toward a more environmentally friendly future. But what companies think green claims mean and what consumers really understand are sometimes two different things,” said FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz. “The proposed updates to the Green Guides will help businesses better align their product claims with consumer expectations.”
Sustainable food labelling ‘complex and confusing’
Research into sustainable food choices by consumer watchdog Which? has revealed that there is little awareness and understanding of most environmental and broader ethical labelling schemes on the market. The focus group research found that even people who said that they are more motivated to think about ethical and environmental issues when choosing food found information about what to do inadequate, and some people had never noticed the labels, despite buying the products on which they appear. Some, such as Fairtrade, were much better known than others, but there was also confusion about what they actually mean. Seven in ten people interviewed in the survey said that they would pay more attention to the environmental impact of the foods they buy if labels were clearer.
While 84% of consumers say they regularly buy green or sustainable food and drink, some are unaware of what the claims actually mean. According to research by market intelligence provider Mintel, 45% of sustainable food and drink users cite a perceived belief in superior quality as the reason behind their purchases. Meanwhile, 43% say they buy sustainable food and drink because they’re concerned about environmental/human welfare and 42% say they’re concerned with food safety. “These reasons vary in importance across different demographics. What’s most important to young adults may not be the primary deciding factor for affluent consumers,” notes David Browne, senior analyst at Mintel.
Public views U.S. companies as more socially responsible than a year ago
Johnson & Johnson, The Walt Disney Company, Kraft Foods Inc., Microsoft, PepsiCo and Apple have all been categorised as excellent in a Boston College Center/Reputation Institute study into public perceptions of U.S. companies’ social impact. The Corporate Social Responsibility Index was developed to understand how companies’ reputations are affected by public perceptions of performance related to citizenship (the community and the environment), governance (ethics and transparency) and workplace practices. Rankings in the CSR Index are based on a survey conducted in January and February 2010 of 7,790 online consumers in the United States. The study indicates that in the eyes of the American public, businesses overall are more socially responsible than a year ago.
Contact: BostonCollege Centre for Corporate Citizenship
COMMENTS