Green marketing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
.According to the American Marketing Association, green marketing is the marketing of
products that are presumed to be environmentally safe.[1] Thus green marketing
incorporates a broad range of activities, including product modification, changes to the
production process, packaging changes, as well as modifying advertising. Yet defining
green marketing is not a simple task where several meanings intersect and contradict each
other; an example of this will be the existence of varying social, environmental and retail
definitions attached to this term.[1] Other similar terms used are Environmental
Marketing and Ecological Marketing.
The legal implications of marketing claims call for caution. Misleading or overstated
claims can lead to regulatory or civil challenges. In the USA, the Federal Trade
Commission provides some guidance on environmental marketing claims.[2]

.[edit] History
The term Green Marketing came into prominence in the late 1980s and early 1990s.[3]
The American Marketing Association (AMA) held the first workshop on "Ecological
Marketing" in 1975.[4] The proceedings of this workshop resulted in one of the first
books on green marketing entitled "Ecological Marketing".[5]
The first wave of Green Marketing occurred in the 1980s. Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR) Reports started with the ice cream seller Ben & Jerry's where the
financial report was supplemented by a greater view on the company's environmental
impact. In 1987 a document prepared by the World Commission on Environment and
Development defined sustainable development as meeting “the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own need”, this
became known as the Brundtland Report and was another step towards widespread
thinking on sustainability in everyday activity. Two tangible milestones for wave 1 of
green marketing came in the form of published books, both of which were called Green
Marketing. They were by Ken Peattie (1992) in the United Kingdom and by Jacquelyn
Ottman (1993) in the United States of America.[citation needed]
According to Jacquelyn Ottman, (author of Green Marketing: Opportunity for
Innovation) from an organizational standpoint, environmental considerations should be
integrated into all aspects of marketing — new product development and
communications and all points in between.[6] The holistic nature of green also suggests
that besides suppliers and retailers new stakeholders be enlisted, including educators,
members of the community, regulators, and NGOs. Environmental issues should be
balanced with primary customer needs.[citation needed]
The past decade has shown that harnessing consumer power to effect positive
environmental change is far easier said than done. The so-called "green consumer"
movements in the U.S. and other countries have struggled to reach critical mass and to
remain in the forefront of shoppers' minds.[7] While public opinion polls taken since the
late 1980s have shown consistently that a significant percentage of consumers in the U.S.
and elsewhere profess a strong willingness to favor environmentally conscious products
and companies, consumers' efforts to do so in real life have remained sketchy at best.[1]
One of green marketing's challenges is the lack of standards or public consensus about
what constitutes "green," according to Joel Makower, a writer on green marketing.
[citation needed] In essence, there is no definition of "how good is good enough" when it
comes to a product or company making green marketing claims. This lack of consensus
—by consumers, marketers, activists, regulators, and influential people—has slowed the
growth of green products, says Makower, because companies are often reluctant to
promote their green attributes, and consumers are often skeptical about claims.[citation
needed]
Despite these challenges, green marketing has continued to gain adherents, particularly in
light of growing global concern about climate change. This concern has led more
companies to advertise their commitment to reduce their climate impacts, and the effect
this is having on their products and services[8]HYPERLINK \l "cite_note-8"[9].

[edit] Greenhouse gas reduction market

The emerging greenhouse gas reduction market can potentially catalyze projects with
important local environmental, economic, and quality-of-life benefits. The Kyoto
Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), for example, enables trading between
industrial and developing nations, providing a framework that can result in capital flows
to environmentally beneficial development activities. Although the United States is not
participating in the Kyoto Protocol, several US programs enable similar transactions on a
voluntary and regulatory basis.[1]
While international trade in greenhouse gasHYPERLINK \l "cite_note-9"[10] reductions
holds substantial promise as a source of new funding for sustainable development, this
market can be largely inaccessible to many smaller-scale projects, remote communities,
and least developed localities. To facilitate participation and broaden the benefits, several
barriers must be overcome, including: a lack of market awareness among stakeholders
and prospective participants; specialized, somewhat complicated participation rules; and
the need for simplified participation mechanisms for small projects, without which
transaction costs can overwhelm the financial benefits of participation. If the barriers are
adequately addressed, greenhouse gas trading can play an important role supporting
activities that benefit people’s lives and the environment.[1]

[edit] Popularity and effectiveness

[edit] Ongoing debate
The popularity of such marketing approach and its effectiveness is hotly debated.
Supporters claim that environmental appeals are actually growing in number–the Energy
Star label, for example, now appears on 11,000 different companies'[11] models in 38
product categories, from washing machines and light bulbs to skyscrapers and homes.
However, despite the growth in the number of green products, green marketing is on the
decline as the primary sales pitch for products. (NEEDS CITATION) On the other hand,
Roper’s Green Gauge shows that a high percentage of consumers (42%)[12] feel that
environmental products don’t work as well as conventional ones. This is an unfortunate
legacy from the 1970s when shower heads sputtered and natural detergents left clothes
dingy. Given the choice, all but the greenest of customers will reach for synthetic
detergents over the premium-priced, proverbial "Happy Planet" any day, including Earth
Day. New reports, however show a growing trend towards green products.[13]

[edit] Confusion
One challenge green marketers -- old and new -- are likely to face as green products and
messages become more common is confusion in the marketplace. "Consumers do not
really understand a lot about these issues, and there's a lot of confusion out there," says
Jacquelyn Ottman(founder of J. Ottman Consulting and author of "Green Marketing:
Opportunity for Innovation.")[13] Marketers sometimes take advantage of this confusion,
and purposely make false or exaggerated "green" claims. Critics refer to this practice as
"green washing".[citation needed]

[edit] Statistics
According to market researcher Mintel, about 12% of the U.S. population can be
identified as True Greens, consumers who seek out and regularly buy so-called green
products. Another 68%[13]HYPERLINK \l "cite_note-13"[14] can be classified as Light
Greens, consumers who buy green sometimes. "What chief marketing officers are always
looking for is touch points with consumers, and this is just a big, big, big touch point
that's not being served," says Mintel Research Director David Lockwood. "All the
corporate executives that we talk to are extremely convinced that being able to make
some sort of strong case about the environment is going to work down to their bottom
line."[13]

[edit] Green marketing cases

[edit] Philips Light's "Marathon"
Philips Lighting's first shot at marketing a standalone compact fluorescent light (CFL)
bulb was Earth Light, at $15 each versus 75 cents for incandescent bulbs.[15] The
product had difficulty climbing out of its deep green niche.[15] The company re-launched
the product as "Marathon," underscoring its new "super long life" positioning and
promise of saving $26 in energy costs over its five-year lifetime.[16] Finally, with the
U.S. EPA's Energy Star label to add credibility as well as new sensitivity to rising utility
costs and electricity shortages, sales climbed 12 percent in an otherwise flat market.[16]

[edit] Car sharing services

Car-sharing services address the longer-term solutions to consumer needs for better fuel
savings and fewer traffic tie-ups and parking nightmares, to complement the
environmental benefit of more open space and reduction of greenhouse gases.[citation
needed] They may be thought of as a "time-sharing" system for cars. Consumers who
drive less than 7,500 miles a year and do not need a car for work can save thousands of
dollars annually by joining one of the many services springing up, including ZipCar (East
Coast), I-GO Car (Chicago)[17], Flex Car (Washington State),[18] and Hour Car (Twin
Cities).[19]

[edit] Electronics sector

The consumer electronics sector provides room for using green marketing to attract new
customers. One example of this is HP's promise to cut its global energy use 20 percent by
the year 2010.[20] To accomplish this reduction below 2005 levels, The Hewlett-Packard
Company announced plans to deliver energy-efficient products and services and institute
energy-efficient operating practices in its facilities worldwide.

[edit] Introduction of CNG in Delhi

New Delhi, capital of India, was being polluted at a very fast pace until Supreme Court of
India forced a change to alternative fuels. In 2002, a directive was issued to completely
adopt CNG in all public transport systems to curb pollution.[21]