by Maria Pinochet, President, Kore Acces; Ethical Markets Advisory Board
A lively online debate, conducted by Ethical Corporation and sponsored by InterfaceFLOR on October 8th, 2010, explored the practice of “greenwashing,” a means by which a company, especially through its advertising or public relations department, will proclaim a green image without truly dedicating its efforts to green practices. The debate was led by Ramon Arratia, director of sustainability for Europe at InterfaceFLOR, and Kristian Steele, a senior engineer at Arup.
The global participants discussed how setting standards that consumers could easily understand and that companies could correctly apply might be the best way to alleviate the problem of greenwashing. Such standards would help consumers to distinguish labeling that reflects true and appropriately earned claims about environmentally safe products from the claims that come from greenwashing efforts.
The discussion continued on to consider the type of standards needed: e.g., the GHC protocol and WRI/WBCSD PAS 2050 and 2060, along with 100% organic and other well-known labeling practices. Some voiced a concern that, even with good labeling, consumers would not understand what to choose. Do you buy a 100% organic shirt or a 100% carbon neutral shirt?
The participants also discussed how a requirement of Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) for every component part of each product would impact businesses, especially if those businesses had to carry the full financial burden of the LCA. In addition, they addressed the question of which agencies would bear the burden of verification.
Read a summary of the debate.
As I listened to the many partisans from the various countries and from different industries, I realized just how complex the labeling issue can become, even with the best of intentions by the noblest of business people.
As a marketing professional, with many decades of practice, my deepest concern is that green communications are being spearheaded by the public relations (PR) departments of companies. “Green” should not be simply a point of view that the PR department can use to communicate the ongoing organizational activities; rather, green must be a corporate value that is in alignment with the corporate mission.
When green is a core value that transforms the corporate culture, green becomes a heuristic for decision making and a valid reporting benchmark. When this is the case, communications about green initiatives will be viewed by stakeholders, not as a public relations effort to brand a company green, but rather as an honest communication about a truly green-functioning enterprise.
