By Richard Romano on July 16th, 2008
First of all, I would like to take this opportunity to declare a permanent moratorium on the phrase “It’s not easy being green.” It seems that almost every article or blog post in recent memory has featured this as a head or subhead. It makes me want to get rid of all my Muppets albums!
That said, unless you’ve been trapped in an underwater pyramid for the past 18 months, you know that so-called “green” initiatives—that is, environmentally responsible and sustainable business practices—are becoming ever more crucial for consumers and, ergo, businesses, and the printing industry (which we could argue has been green for decades, is no exception.
For example, DoubleClick (via eMarketer) has found that:
60% of US adults who make online purchases say that it is very or extremely important to them that a company is environmentally conscious.
Almost half of those who make online purchases said they specifically search for environmentally-friendly products at least some of the time.
More importantly, 45% of respondents who make online purchases said they would pay at least 5% more for a product that is promoted with environmentally-friendly attributes. An additional 22% were willing to pay at least 10% more.
38% of respondents said the most attractive type of environmentally-conscious marketing focused on specific user benefits such as saving money on bills or products lasting longer.
Specific environmental benefits were a distant second, cited by 21% of those surveyed as the most attractive type of environmentally-friendly marketing.
As a result, companies are clambering to beef up their “green cred,” but questions remain. To that end, WhatTheyThink has recently released a special report, Printing Goes Green: A WhatTheyThink Primer on Environmental Sustainability in the Commercial Printing Industry, which includes the results of a survey conducted by the WhatTheyThink Economics and Research Center. It found that, among commercial printers, the issue is front and center, even if few have taken many steps beyond using and/or recommending recycled paper.
A Google search or two turns up no shortage of companies that tout their environmentally responsible practices, but, as it turns out, companies often oversell the extent of their greenness. Yes, we’re shocked, shocked, to discover that companies sometimes misrepresent themselves. This is often referred to as “greenwashing,” and anecdotal evidence suggests that consumers increasingly insist that businesses put their money (long green?) where their mouths are. But how to prove it?
One way—which we discuss in the WhatTheyThink report—is known as “chain of custody” certification programs, in which an oversight organization (such as the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) offers official guarantees about the production of certain products; that is, the path taken by that product’s raw materials from its origin (like a forest in the case of paper products) to the consumer, including all successive stages of processing, transformation, manufacturing, and distribution. Chain of custody certification corroborates the promise that is being made to consumers. So, for example, printers and other companies who work with paper products can either be FSC-certified or use FSC-certified materials.
Now, it probably goes without saying (but I’ll say it anyway) that not everyone believes that environmental sustainability and/or climate change are especially crucial issues, some folks feeling that it is simply “political correctness run amok.” (See, for example, this Brandweek story about a small but vocal minority of “Never Greens.”) It’s become a curiously political issue, for reasons passing understanding. Even if the vast majority of climate scientists are wrong (and, by the way, getting scientists to agree on anything is nothing short of a miracle, which is itself tacit evidence that there may very well be something to it), it’s hard to see how focusing on environmental sustainability is a bad thing. For example, why can’t “green” technologies be an economic growth area—or do people prefer large, illusory, unsustainable economic bubbles (as per this Onion article)? Or do people just really like pollution?
And free-market, small-government advocates should be content in the fact that the pressures companies face to go green are exactly what proponents of market-based solutions say should happen: the market is demanding something, and businesses can either respond accordingly or lose business. After all, the emphasis on environmental sustainability has come without any interference or pressure from the government. The trick is for companies to see green initiatives as an opportunity, not an imposition. Just like any other business challenge.
That said, there is the danger that if everyone starts going green, then it stops becoming a differentiator and becomes a moot point. Well, let’s jump off that bridge when we get to it! And, of course, you can probably say the same thing about any competitive advantage.
Whether the green movement simply the fad du jour and everyone will lose interest in a year or two remains to be seen. (Remember when ISO 9001 certification was the talk of the town? Now how many companies make any reference to it?) But for now, it’s the way things are, and consumers are expecting some level of “greenness” on the part of the companies they choose to do business with. And, again, printers are no exception.
Admittedly, some people grudgingly go green…but As Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee for President said, in an address at an Associated Press event held on April 14, 2008, which I attended, “Even if we’re wrong and there is no climate change, the worst that will happen is we leave a cleaner planet to our kids.”
So to help printing companies, their suppliers, and their customers navigate turbulent green waters, WhatTheyThink’s Printing Goes Green report is there to help guide the way.
Posted in Environment and Sustainability - 10 Comments
Main Content Feed