Good Stuff

Deeper luxury

I found this report very interesting reading. Deeper Luxury takes an in-depth look at the luxury brands market and some of the challenges and opportunities the issue of sustainability raises in this sector.

"We observe shifts in the luxury paradigm, emerging from major changes in social dynamics. In the future the highest quality product or service will be the one that generates the most benefit to all involved in it's production and trade. Consumers' knowledge of that benefit will be essential to their elite experience, and the prestige ascribed to them by their peers. In future, luxury brands could represent the greatest positive contribution any product or service could make to people and planet: they would identify the luxury consumer as a person who has both the means and the motivation to ensure that others do not suffer. The deeper and more authentic approach to luxury would require truly excellent social and environmental performance; consumers expect excellence in this, because they expect it in all aspects of a luxury brand."

I love the fact that they've chosen focus on topics such as celebrity endorsement, dedicating specific guidelines to this area. There are so many examples of celebrities making ill-advised decisions that are totally out of touch with shifting consumer opinion. I cringe every time I flick through the glossy magazines and see the face of some sports personality hawking sunglasses or perfume. It's just seems so shallow. I also love the fact that they've chosen not to overlook the importance of emerging luxury markets too. Factoring these issues in makes it a much richer document.

Download DeeperluxuryReport.pdf

Green Markerting Remix

John Grant posts his recent thoughts on Green Marketing here.

It's based on a talk he gave last week in which he outlines his thoughts since completing his book The Green Marketing Manifesto.

As always it's excellent reading and deeply motivating.

Green starter kits from Greensender

I must have missed this first time around but thanks to one of those 'ten best ... of 2007' lists I noticed it.

It's a business putting together green starter kits. I like the idea and it's cleverly put together. The whole idea of grouping these products is really appealing both from the users point of view but also from the manufacturers end. The sum is much greater than the parts. Oh, and it's much more energy efficient. Shopping online is great idea if you want to educe your carbon count as Tao Oliveto points out.

Springwise put it like this:

Most of us realize there are changes we should make in our lives to become more environmentally friendly, but overcoming inertia and actually doing it can be another matter. Now a few different companies offer starter kits to help make those changes happen. Greensender, which just launched in October, sells green gift boxes designed to help people start embracing simple green practices. Each Greensender box contains a reusable aluminium water bottle, a reusable organic cotton grocery bag, an energy-efficient compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulb and an organic cotton T-shirt—all selected for their easy integration into people’s everyday lives, Greensender says. Prices are USD 49.99 for the Big Greensender Box or USD 39.99 for a version without the T-shirt; individual items are available separately as well. Logo-emblazoned versions can also be purchased for corporate or event purposes, and New Jersey-based Greensender donates at least one percent of its sales to 1% For The Planet.

Quite a nice little idea and a twist on another trend Springwise are calling Tryvertising.

How to get talked about

Thanks to Greenway Communique for pointing out these interesting stats. We all knew that green business issues were getting talked about more these days but...woah, I didn't realise how much!

Heres the original post

More on greenwashing

This post by Joel Makower looks into a recent survey by TerraChoice Environmental Marketing. They sent out teams to investigate any products making green claims. After initially identifying 1,081 products making 1,753 separate claims they found "all but one made claims that are either demonstrably false or that risk misleading intended audiences."

Ouch.

The results of this research can be found in a new report 'The Six Sins of Greenwashing'

The "sins" identified by TerraChoice include:

Sin of the Hidden Trade-Off — claims that suggest a product is "green" based on a single environmental attribute (the recycled content of paper, for example) or an unreasonably narrow set of attributes without attention to other important, or perhaps more important, environmental issues (such as the energy, climate, water, or forestry impacts of paper). Such claims aren't usually false, but paint a misleading picture of the product than a more complete environmental analysis would support. This was the most frequently committed "sin," made by 57% of all environmental claims examined.

Sin of No Proof (26% of all claims examined) — any claim that couldn't be substantiated by easily accessible supporting information, or by a reliable third-party certification. TerraChoice determined there to be "no proof" if supporting evidence was not accessible at either the point of purchase or at the product website.

Sin of Vagueness (11% of all claims examined) — any claim that is so poorly defined or broad that its real meaning is likely to be misunderstood by the intended consumer, such as "chemical free" or "all natural."

Sin of Irrelevance (4% of all claims examined) — claims that may be truthful but are unimportant and unhelpful for consumers, such as CFC-free products, since ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons have been outlawed since the late 1980s.

Sin of Lesser of Two Evils (1% of all claims examined) — environmental claims that may be true, but that risk distracting the consumer from the greater environmental impacts of the category as a whole, such as organic tobacco or green insecticides.

Sin of Fibbing (less than 1% of all claims examined) — claims that are simply false, typically by misusing or misrepresenting certification by an independent authority, when no such certification had been made.

I agree with Joel Makower's point that not all of these are necessarily greenwashing and that some of the cases are probably down to sloppiness.

"marketers' efforts to place a green sheen on a product, perhaps rightfully so, but without offering some basic proof points."

But what does this all mean or green marketing and for those brands that really do help us minimise our impact on the planet. Well, it's basically bad news isn't it? Any genuine effort to offer a greener product or service could be met with scepticism. The last wave of green marketing we saw during the nineties eventually died a death because it too was based on a lot of marketing hot air and people saw through it.

Case (Terrachoice):

I think the real danger is if people are successful with their greenwashing efforts, then the truly green, the truly innovative companies — the ones that have really figured out how to reduce their carbon footprint, how to produce a nontoxic product, how to make products out of renewable materials that can be reused — the truly innovative products are going to lose out.

Wiping out greenwashing

An interesting article from The Guardian which takes a hard line against the greenwashing of brands; a debate which I find fascinating.

Brands should think very carefully about marketing their green credentials. "You can't put a lettuce in the window of a butcher's shop and declare that you are now 'turning vegetarian'." explains John Grant, author of The Green Marketing Manifesto.

Of course, it is totally counter-productive to claim to be something you're not, when everyone has the ability to see through it. This kind of tokenism will be seen for what it is very quickly.

It seems there are many examples of bad practice in this area but also an encouraging amount of truly brilliant examples of companies who've grabbed this Corporate Social Opportunity and done something fantastic and innovative with it.

I love this example which The Guardian article points out:

"Popular, well-trusted brands have the potential to build on the relationship that they have with consumers, encouraging them to make adjustments towards a more sustainable lifestyle. Kia Motors, for instance, has been backing a walk to school initiative for the last three years. The car firm estimates that 20% of the traffic on the roads at 9am is connected to the school run and wanted to launch a project that helped tackle that congestion. To date, 250 "walking buses" have been set up involving 53 local authorities and 8,000 children. In 2006, Kia estimated that the initiative saved 100,000 commuter miles every week."

Such an initiative can only be seen as positive, surely? Even if it was initiated by a car manufacturer.

yes!

Don't you just love it when someone has a good idea. I love the way this company has re-thought food retail. I guess in a market where food retailers are much of a muchness, this concept could do really well here in Denmark.

What I really love about it is the way it's been put together. (without having been into a store) You know that feeling you get when you hover outside a health food shop and wonder whether you belong in their or not? I really get the feeling this place is for me. Their site is stylish and inclusive. I would imagine their stores are too. I wish them all the success in the world and hopefully we'll see one opening in Copenhagen soon.

Thanks to John Grant for pointing it out.

The roar of concious consumerism and green marketing

Triple Pundit point to this new marketing study which looks at concious consumer attitiudes in the US.

"A new marketing study reveals that conscious consumers expect accountability and transparency from companies that claim to be “green.” Companies that fail to do so put themselves at risk of a consumer backlash.

Who are these “conscious consumers”? According to the inaugural BBMG Conscious Consumer Report, almost 90% of Americans say this term describes them well. When shopping for products that are of equal value and price, these consumers would choose items that are energy-efficient, promote health and safety benefits, support fair labor and fair trade, and are made according to environmentally-friendly standards.

Some of the most interesting findings of this study include:

• Health and wellness are most important: Conscious consumers expect the products they buy to have a positive personal and direct impact.
• “Conscious consumer” is the preferred term: Americans prefer to call themselves “conscious” or “socially/environmentally responsible” over “green.”
• Price and quality are still #1, but locally-produced, healthy, and energy-efficient qualities are increasingly important to consumers.

The study also reveals that consumers are savvy when it comes to detecting “greenwashing” marketing attempts. “In a world of green clutter, conscious consumers expect companies to do more than make eco-friendly claims. They demand transparency and accountability across every level of business practice. Avoiding the green trap means authentically backing your words with socially responsible actions.” says Raphael Bemporad, founding partner of BBMG.

Consumers value honesty and are paying more attention to how their purchases impact the world beyond the supermarket. Producing conscious goods and services, and successfully communicating their authenticity, is the way to capitalize on this new consumer trend."