GREEN MARKETING: OPPORTUNITY FOR INNOVATION

Chapter 7: The Secret to Avoiding Backlash

< Prev	Next >
Table of Contents Featured Cases Table of Exhibits

Even for the most thoroughly researched communications, establishing credibility and avoiding possible backlash is a highly challenging feat. Representing one of the most significant obstacles of green marketing, unanticipated criticism can emanate from many sources; among them: regulators, environmentalists, the media, consumers, competitors, and the scientific community. Unsuspecting marketers can run afoul of inconsistent state environmental marketing laws. They can butt up against advocacy groups’ notions of the right of former polluters to tout green credentials of any kind, and they can unintentionally create skeptical consumers out of a general public short on facts.

Other credibility hurdles exist, too. Industry suffers from a well-publicized track record of oil spills, Superfund sites, and any number of industrial accidents and health and safety transgressions. And, despite initiatives such as environmental reports, corporate green ads and new products, consumers believe that industry is still not doing its fair share to clean up the mess. For example, in a random survey of over 1,000 adults conducted in 1995, 61 percent of respondents agreed that U.S. firms are "much more" or "somewhat more" responsible than they were five years ago, but 55 percent of the respondents believe companies are doing "somewhat less" or "much less" than they should, compared with only 15 percent who feel they are doing more than they should.¹

Finally, consumers perceive that it is not in industry's interest to promote environmental conservation or decrease consumption; the prevailing economic paradigm of course, is "growth equals profits." Planned obsolescence was invented by industry to ensure growth; advertising makes consumers want what they do not need. In the words of one environmentalist:

So it is not surprising that industry's environment-related communications suffer from low credibility, and the potential for backlash exists for claims that are seen as overcongratulatory or misleading. While credibility is generally higher for corporate ads, only 30 percent of consumers believe ads that say a product is better for the environment than its competitors.³

In many cases, backlash cannot be avoided. No company and no product can ever be truly green. Corporate efforts hinting at aspirations or suggestions will often find detractors. And warm-hearted depictions of furry animals that strike emotional chords with consumers may simultaneously incite the wrath of environmentalists. Pick your target, aim to please them, and follow the strategies discussed below to establish credibility and minimize the potential for backlash.

Position Green Products and Programs as Part of a Corporate Policy of Environmental Excellence

Companies that operate within sound environmental policies need not apologize for failure to achieve perfection. Consumers understand that the greenest of cars will still pollute, the simplest of packaging eventually needs to be thrown away, and the most energy-stingy light bulbs still burn their share of coal and oil at the power plant. Win respect by making progress towards worthy goals, communicating substantively, and, in general responding positively to the public’s concerns and expectations.

• The Chemical Manufacturers Association’s (CMA) "Responsible Care" advertising campaign explains that "Since 1987, we’ve cut the amount of waste we release to water by 56 percent. Clearly, we’re only part way there." For added credibility, the CMA advertisement includes a toll-free number to help consumers track progress of chemical companies in their area and helps them find needed answers. The advertising states, "We want you to know."

• An announcement explaining Apple's move to unbleached fiberboard shipping cartons explained:

• A memorable headline for an ad detailing Nissan's corporate environmental activities declared, "Since we can't live without the car, we better make a car we can live with."

Promote Responsible Consumption

Americans intuitively understand that it is not possible to spend our way out of our environmental crisis. At the micro level, simply switching one supermarket cartful of "brown" products with "green" ones will not quash environmental ills. Creating a sustainable society requires - among other things - that every one of us simply use less; companies that suggest otherwise put themselves at risk. Win your consumers' respect by articulating the need for responsible consumption publicly, while making it easy for your consumers to eat lower on the food chain, generate energy from renewable resources or minimize use of raw materials.

• In 1980, Esprit ran ads headlined: "A Plea for Responsible Consumption," and asking consumers "(not to) buy anything you don’t need, including our products." Although the ad only ran on a limited basis, the company received hundreds of letters from consumers as young as eight years old lauding the effort. Letters still arrive at the firm’s San Francisco headquarters.

• Ads for Danka Industries of St. Petersburg, makers of copier and fax machines encourage consumers to "Recycle at Work. Make a World of Difference". Views of nature and environmentally responsive workplaces are depicted as Danka acknowledges "Waste at Work" and its own efforts to be part of the solution, including distributing recycling bins and information to employees and customers.⁴

• To help offset future emissions, Chevrolet plants one tree for every Geo sold.

Consider the Environmental Impact of Your Marketing Methods

Environmentally conscious consumers scrutinize the medium in which eco-messages are placed. How many readers looked to see if this book was printed on recycled paper? Use media vehicles that use recycled paper, soybean inks, and are recyclable, or better yet, electronic. Some companies even go so far as to issue only "virtual" press releases and environmental reports.

Apple Computer’s carton insert, appropriately, was printed on unbleached recycled-content paper. Recognizing the environmental impacts of its direct mail solicitations, Working Assets uses only recycled paper, and figures out how many trees are used for each mailing and plant more. Many direct-mail catalogs let customers can specify how many catalogs they want to receive each year.

Use Meaningful Claims

Commonly used environmental marketing terms can easily mislead unsuspecting consumers. For example, products or packaging made from recycled content can be crafted from 10 percent recycled content or 100 percent recycled content. Recycled content can include "pre-consumer" recycled material such as factory trimmings, or "post-consumer" content such as used milk jugs and newspapers. A package may be recyclable in theory, but collection facilities may not be available to consumers in their communities.

Fortunately, help is available in the form of voluntary guidelines for environmental marketing terms issued by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in 1992 and updated in 1996 (see Appendix B). They include specific recommendations for the most commonly used terms including "recycled", "ozone friendly", "recyclable", "environmentally friendly", "compostable," and "degradable." With some exceptions, individual states including California, Rhode Island and New York, which had passed their own labeling laws that were previously inconsistent with the FTC guidelines, have since aligned with the Guides.

It is now easier for marketers of many types of nationally distributed products to promote environment-related attributes. Indeed, tracking research conducted by researchers at the Universities of Utah and Illinois shows the overall number of product or package claims found in five successive audits of a typical basketful of supermarket products increased 21 percent between 1992 and 1995. In addition, formerly questionable claims such as those relating to plastic trash bag degradability have all but disappeared, as have unqualified claims of "ozone - or environmentally friendly."⁵

A word of caution. While the climate for making environmental claims is sunnier at the end of the 1990s than it was at the start, the coast is still not clear. The potential to confuse and mislead consumers still exists, as does the possibility for crafty competitors to steal unfair advantage.

Considerable debate still reigns over the use of some individual claims. For instance, the packaging industry argues that an exhortatory claim such as "Please Recycle" on the side of a Pepsi can is an expression of free speech and should be allowed in order to keep up the positive recycling momentum. Regulators aren't so sure.

The 1996 FTC guidelines advises specifically disclosing the limited availability of recycling programs for the material specified, in addition to stating whether the chasing arrows imply recycled or recyclable. They fear that unqualified claims, including the chasing arrows may mislead consumers into thinking that many packages made from entirely recycled material may be recyclable in their communities when they may not be. This would cause unnecessary burdens for local recyclers stuck with unwanted material and consumers turned off by the apparent deception. On another front, aerosol manufacturers want to fight lingering perceptions that their packages are propelled with chlorofluorocarbons. The FTC fears that a "No CFCs" claim would suggest to consumers that the alternative propellant, hydrofluorocarbon, is environmentally benign.

If your products could be considered "non-toxic," "natural," "water-efficient," "reusable," or "designed for disassembly," you may be out of luck. The FTC has yet to offer use guidelines for these and other terms. Indeed, with "green" constantly evolving, marketers' desire to make safe claims may always be one step ahead of government's ability to respond. To help reduce the risk of confusing or misleading consumers, solicit proper legal counsel and use the following sub-strategies as a guide.?

Be Specific and Prominent. Marketers are liable for what consumers may incorrectly interpret as well as what they correctly take away. Prevent deception with the use of simple, crystal-clear language, and be sure to distinguish between product and package. The Wheaties box on your breakfast table likely carries the three chasing arrows symbol with an accompanying claim, "Carton made from 100 percent recycled paperboard. Minimum 35 percent post-consumer content." This claim is specific, and because it qualifies the exact amount of recycled materials, it prevents people from thinking the box is made of 100 percent materials collected at curbside, or is fully recyclable.

Don't play games with type size or proximity of the claim to its qualifiers. Packages heralding Hefty's questionable "photodegradable" trash bag claim had a large "degradable" moniker emblazoned across the package front, while the qualifier, "when exposed to the elements" was placed in small print on the bottom of the front panel.

Provide Complete Information. When comparing your product's environmental benefits to those of a competitor’s, provide enough information so that consumers can make relevant decisions. Make sure the basis for comparison is sufficiently clear and is substantiated by scientific test results. A claim such as "This shampoo bottle contains 20 percent more recycled content than our previous package" is preferable to the more ambiguous "This shampoo bottle contains 20 percent more recycled content."????

Do Not Overstate. Safe Brands of Omaha, Nebraska, learned this lesson the hard way. They ran into legal trouble in 1993 when they attempted to market their Sierra Anti-Freeze/Coolant as "essentially non-toxic" and "biodegradable." Emotionally appealing advertising heralded, "It’s not just anti-freeze, it’s safety freeze ... safer for kids, pets, and wildlife in the environment." Such claims were based on the fact that Sierra anti-freeze is made with propylene glycol, while other coolants contain ethylene glycol. The problem was that proplyene glycol, although less toxic in absolute terms, still poses a hazard to pets and small children. By marketing Sierra as "safe," Safe Brands took the risk that consumers would be less cautious with a hazardous product. In addition, the "biodegradability" claim was essentially meaningless since all antifreeze is biodegradable.

Agitated by the prospect of losing business to a frisky competitor, First Brands Corporation, makers of Prestone, filed a false-advertising lawsuit that was eventually settled out of court. Safe Brands has since changed its claims: and although they boast about a "less toxic" anti-freeze, the claims of "safety-freeze" and "biodegradability" are absent.⁶

Avoid vague, trivial, or irrelevant claims that can create a false impression of a product’s or package’s overall soundness. Broad labels such as "environmentally-safe" or "ozone-friendly," if used at all, should be qualified so as to prevent consumer deception about the specific nature of the environmental benefit being asserted; preferable alternatives include: "This wrapper is environmentally friendly because it was not bleached with chlorine, a process which has been shown to create harmful substances."

Qualify terms such as "energy-efficient," "compostable," "recyclable," "made from recycled content," "refillable," and "reusable." Answer questions such as: How much? For how long? By whom? Where? Compared to what?

Similar rules apply for corporate advertising. Consumers understand that even the most well-intentioned companies still use resources and create waste. Overstating the environmental benefits of one’s efforts–wrapping one's company in a green cloak–creates skepticism and invites backlash. Describe where you were before environmental improvements were made. Err on the side of understatement. Also, avoid generalities or sweeping statements such as "We care about the environment" with no connection to projects you have undertaken. Quantify plans, progress and results. For example, if you announce that your company prevents pollution, explain what kind of pollution and how much. Explain the specific emissions-reduction steps taken both internally and vis-à-vis specific products consumers can buy.

• Panasonic, a division of Matshushita Electric, demonstrates its contribution to environmental protection with corporate ads that talk about how global R&D and manufacturing facilities develop sophisticated technologies like sensors that assist scientists in evaluating ozone layer destruction. Ads also talk about innovations in consumer products, such as dry-cell batteries and fluorescent light-bulbs that lower energy consumption, require fewer resources to manufacture, and are easier to recycle. The headline reads, "There’s a lot of talk about saving the ozone layer. We’re doing something about it."

Tell the whole story. Decide for yourself: do you take issue with the fact that advertising conducted by the U.S. Council on Energy Awareness touts the clean air benefits of nuclear energy but doesn’t mention the radioactive waste it generates? That Chevron's long running "People Do" campaign highlights initiatives that may be required by law? That the Chemical Manufacturers Association runs ads citing its industry’s attempts to reduce emissions while backing legislation to reduce or eliminate the Toxic Release Inventory, a public database of corporate reports on which and how much of 650 toxic chemicals are being released into plant communities?⁷ To be certain that your ads or other environmental communications do not confuse or mislead the consumer, test all messages among your target first.

It pays to be specific. Researchers at San Diego State University found that environmental claims perceived as specific and information-rich fostered positive perceptions of the product as well as the advertiser (see Exhibit 7.1). They were also more likely versus claims perceived as vague to be persuasive and to lead to higher levels of purchase intent.⁸

Research conducted at Clemson University discovered that, counter-intuitively, the more "expert" the judge, the less likely were claims to be found misleading/deceptive. This suggests that better educated, well-informed consumers may be less skeptical or more receptive to green-oriented advertising provided that it is accurate.⁹

Enlist the Support of Third Parties. When it comes to environmental-related messages, the American public believes just about any societal group — not-for-profits, the U.S. E.P.A., local government officials, even the press — before businesses large or small. Third parties can help bolster industry's weak credibility.

Third party support can come in many forms: local regulators, environmental groups, private consulting organizations that perform independent life cycle inventories (as discussed in Chapter 4), and non-government organizations and government bodies that certify claims and award "eco-seals of approval." Roper found that "having a company or its products endorsed by an environmental cause or organization," was among the most believable types of corporate environmental protection efforts (see Exhibit 7.2)

• A key to the success of the introduction of ARCO’s EC-1 gasoline was opening lines of communication with the South Coast Air Quality Management Board. This local regulatory board endorsed ARCO’s reformulated gasoline advertising, and, as such, helped to protect ARCO from the wrath of potential skeptics who favored "purer" solutions such a electric cars and alternative fuel vehicles.

• Before announcing Starkist "Dolphin Safe" policy to the Heinz Board of Directors and the public, CEO Anthony O"Reilly consulted with David Phillips, executive director of the Earth Island Institute, the environmental group which had been spearheading the nationwide boycott of tuna canners. Phillips set high standards for Heinz to meet, including a ban on dolphin-unsafe tuna throughout Heinz’s operations worldwide. Records of Heinz’s compliance had to be open to inspection by Earth Island Institute, and Heinz had to support the Dolphin Protection Consumer Information Act.

• Although they may help to divert empty soda bottles or used paper from landfills, products made from recycled content are not necessarily environmentally superior to their virgin counterparts. Acknowledging this, Wellman commissioned an independent organization to conduct a comparative life cycle analysis to help consumers understand that its recycled content Ecospun fabric also helps to reduce air and water pollution.

In the future, disclosure of product-related environmental impacts and processes could be required by law. Get a jump on competitors and regulators–and score some points with consumers– by promoting as much about your own products voluntarily.

• Pitney-Bowes is just one company that boldly touts its Energy Star certification on packages, ads, product documentation and other communications.

Not all third parties are created equal, so if you opt to go this route, choose wisely. Consider your potential partner's credibility, awareness of the seal or group among consumers, and appropriateness of the group or symbol to your target audience and product category.

Consider Eco-Seals. Eco-seals, independent symbols of environmental preferability granted by governments or independent organizations, as well as statements of environmental independent claim certification, have much to offer green marketers, but are not without risk. On the plus side, as the mark of a third party, they can enhance consumer confidence in environmental promises. Because consumers tend to pick up eco-labeled products off the shelf, they represent a cost-effective marketing tool. They can also halo corporate imagery.

At least twenty-five countries around the world now offer eco-seal programs (see Exhibit 7.3). Most are run by governments who make their awards on the basis of specific environmental attributes of particular relevance to the respective product category, e.g., emissions of volatile organic compounds and paints, or a form of life cycle analysis.

In the U.S., aside from the Energy Star certification program for electronic office products and major appliances, the Federal Government has opted to let the private sector hold sway in the area of general eco-labeling, subject to the same regulations as environmental marketing claims. Indeed, a number of independent programs granting their own eco-seals have sprung up. Should one’s product or service meet their specifications, it can bear any number of specific eco-seals including "dolphin-safe," "forest friendly," "certified organic," and even "ecotel," a certification program for hotels.

Green Seal, a not-for-profit group founded in 1990 by a coalition of environmentalists and other interested parties, will provide a seal of approval for products which meet specific criteria on a category by category basis. Companies pay a fee to have their products evaluated and annually monitored. Products that meet or exceed the standards are authorized to display the Green Seal mark on the product or promotional material. All manufacturers of products in a category are eligible to apply for the Green Seal. The group has finalized standards covering 84 categories including general purpose cleaners, compact florescent lamps, re-refined engine oil, printing and writing papers, water heaters, washers, dryers, and refrigerator/freezers. The United States Postal Service, Carrier, and The Trane Company are just a few organizations whose products now bear the Green Seal certification mark — a blue globe with a green check (see Exhibit 7.4).

A second organization, Scientific Certification Systems of Oakland, California will certify specific claims or provide manufacturers with a detailed "eco-profile" of their product’s environmental impact akin to a nutritional label for display on product labels. Companies whose product claims have either been certified or who bear an eco-profile include Wellman, Schuller, Glidden, and Owens Corning.

Empirical evidence suggests that independent seals of approval can lend credibility to environmental messages and help to attract business among environmentally conscious consumers. Environmental marketing managers report that the presence of the Green Seal opens the door to conversations with distributors and retailers that might not otherwise have occurred. Markets that are potentially receptive to eco-seals and independent claim certification include government agencies and their contractors looking to procure environmentally conscious goods, retailers anxious to stock green goods but lacking the ability to decide what is "green" for themselves, and consumers in Germany and Scandinavia, where eco-seals are well established.

Caution: eco-seals are not without controversy. Critics, including many multi-national companies, charge that the science upon which eco-labels are based is too subjective; the specific criteria upon which they are based can limit product innovation; the use of symbols does not educate consumers about the actual environmental attributes of products; and, finally, eco-seal criteria varies from country to country. (Note: Efforts at standardizing the plethora of eco-seals are underway via the European Ecolabel Organization; the International Standards Organization, which is developing general voluntary standards for eco-labeling; and the Global Ecolabeling Network, an international association of ecolabeling programs.) The situation not only creates a logistical nightmare for multi-nationals, but also raises potential barriers to free trade because their criteria are often based on national or regional priorities.¹⁰

Considering an eco-seal for your product? Maximize its potential value and avoid backlash by sticking to these strategies:

• Choose wisely. Take care to ensure that the organization behind the seal you choose is well respected and its methodologies are accepted by leading environmentalists as well as by others in your industry. Also, try to use seals with as broad a following as possible, or risk desensitizing consumers with a proliferation of labels.

• Educate. Eco-seals in isolation can mislead consumers into thinking that the product that bears it is environmentally superior overall. Educate your consumers about the specific criteria upon which your eco-seal is based. Also, teach consumers how to use your product responsibly.

• Extend environmentalism to other parts of your company. Logically speaking, greener products spring from greener companies, although this is not always the case. To avoid backlash, make sure your eco-seal or claim certification is backed up with positive corporate achievements. Ideally, like environmental product attributes in general, eco-seals should be positioned as an extension of one’s corporate environmental commitment.

• Promote your seal. Considering that individual seals are not widely recognized, enhance their value by promoting them via advertising and other communications efforts.

Ideas for Action

Ask the following questions to evaluate opportunities to add credibility to your environmental communications.

• Are our claims consistent with the laws that may exist in the states where we distribute? Are we following guidelines for environmental marketing claims issued by the Federal Trade Commission? Does our company's legal department have its own guidelines for the use of environmental marketing claims?

• Are our claims specific? Have we tested their communication among consumers?

• Should we have our product's environmental benefits certified by a third party?

• Do eco-seals represent an opportunity for our business either in the United States or other countries?

• Are the print media with which we advertise or promote using recycled paper and soy-based inks?

• Do consumers know how to use and dispose of our products responsibly?

• Have we thoroughly considered all that can go wrong so as to minimize the chances of backlash and enjoy the full benefits of positive publicity?

Notes

1. "Public Still Critical of E-Performance," Environment Today, September 1995, p. 10.

2. Letter to J. Ottman from Hannah Holmes, associate editor, Garbage, March 13, 1992.

3. Roper Starch Worldwide, as quoted in Stisser, Peter A., "A Deeper Shade of Green," Amercian Demographics, March 1994, p. 27.

4. "Selected Environmental Advertising Campaigns, 1993," Green MarketAlert, Carl Frankel, ed., December 1993, p. 5.

5. Cude, Brenda J., University of Illinois et al., "Trends in Environmental Marketing Claims Since the FTC Guides: Technical Report," May 1, 1995, p. 5.

6. Green MarketAlert, Carl Frankel, ed., December 1993, p. 5.

7. Helvarg, David, "The Big Green Spin Machine, Corporations and Environmental PR," The Amicus Journal, Summer 1996, p. 15.

8. Davis, Joel J., "Strategies for Environmental Advertising," Journal of Consumer Marketing, Volume 10, Number 2, 1993, pp. 23-25. MCB-University Press 0736-3761.

9. Kangun, Norman, Les Carlson, and Stephen J. Grove, Department of Marketing, Clemson University, "Environmental Advertising Claims: A Preliminary Investigation," Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Volume 10, Number 2, Fall 1991, p. 53.

10. Shimp, Robert J., Ph.D., Procter & Gamble Company, "The Reality of Eco-Seals: Barriers to Environmental Progress in the Global Marketplace," delivered at the "Take it Back" conference, May 2-3, 1996, pp. 1-2.