Green Marketing

For reaching tough audiences, a free, three-part primer on green marketing issues

When environmental marketing needs to appeal to investors and investment fund managers, nothing short of the most mature, credible, and articulate presentation will do. These audiences make a large part of their living by assessing the veracity of companies' claims as well as their likely probability of succeeding. Of course, they may commit errors, just like the rest of us, and sometimes err on the side of cautiousness.

Consider three articles published by Financial Advisor magazine in its March 2008 issue.

• The Next Biggest Thing by Jeff Schlegel gives a reasonably balanced, somewhat cautionary view of green industries and markets. It's an excellent compendium if you're new to the field. Considering what we have learned even since March about the debatable merits of some alternative fuels (remember ethanol, anybody?), Schlegel's view seems very well thought out. And the advice to investors is probably as sound as one can get for now.

"For investors who aren’t into shorting stocks, the best bet is to grab some of the industry leaders—the market’s recent downturn brought some of them back to reasonable levels—and be prepared for the long haul. Other options include green tech-focused mutual funds such as the Calvert or Guinness Atkinson offerings, or some of the PowerShares ETFs based on the Cleantech or WilderShares indices."

• Green Sensibility, also by Jeff Schlegel, discusses in great detail the business and environmental merits of the Green Resource Center of Alabama. The article focuses largely on the Center's founder, Scott Walton, a financial advisor, and his approach to the issues. What I find particularly appealing about this article is the holistic perspective. It covers the business case and potential for Walton and the Center as well as the environmental advantages and economies of the building he's in.

"The resource center will dispense information about energy efficiency, creating healthier buildings and reducing one’s environmental impact, as well as host events and gatherings relating to sustainable living, development and design. Rubino envisions it being a hybrid library and museum, where people can read about all aspects of sustainability and see first-hand examples of how it works, such as an exposed wall area showing denim insulation that looks like a huge piece of blue jean lint."

• Finally, A Compelling Inconvenience by Tracey Longo takes a very different approach, at first glance, shockingly realistic, even threatening in presenting possible environmental events resulting from our collective impact on resources. Then Longo presents Richard Vodra, a financial planner who is trying to find ways to address these issues in a financially and environmentally prudent manner.

"Is it possible that people are realizing that oil, water, forests and even soil are finite—and that our uses of them are having crippling effects? As with all potential risks—the rise and fall of financial markets, the risk of overinvesting in real estate or the risks of undersaving and overspending—good planners could help us avoid some or most of the discomfort, right? Or at least they should be able to, shouldn’t they?
"Less than 15 miles away from the White House, Richard Vodra is pondering the same question from his office in McLean, Va.
"'Global climate change and energy and resource shortages are not theoretical problems,' the 22-year veteran of financial planning says in his hallmark, guy-next-door tone. 'If it’s a hot summer here in 2010, we will get to choose whether we want to turn up the thermostat on the air conditioning or walk down from the 20th floor of our office buildings.'"

The summary of this excellent article:

"While total solutions aren’t really possible—carbon dioxide, for instance, stays in the atmosphere and the oceans for hundreds of years—the problems may be slowed and contained if long-term action is taken fairly quickly. For instance, to slow global warming, it would mean cutting world CO2 emissions by 80% over 40 years. 'There aren’t any quick fixes,' argues Vodra, who also believes that humankind probably does have the will, when facing catastrophe, to avoid worst-case scenarios. 'Some of the worst things we predict won’t happen [think nuclear war and Y2K], but other things we haven’t thought of will happen,' the advisor predicts."

And there you have your three-part crash course in the attitudes, ideas, and opportunities of environmentally themed marketing. Please review carefully and apply to your clients' situation as appropriate.

For a lighter touch, more in line with traditional eco-marketing, you could check out financial managers Spectra Funds and that company's take on green marketing. How many times have you seen the image of hands holding soil with a plant sprouting? Too many to count. Me, too. Anyway, the content, as far as I can tell, is sound, although it's on the light side and apparently directed at an assumed, cautious audience that might already be ahead of the marketers. Certain terms, including "green" itself, are awkwardly overused. But, in a way, it's inspiring that statements that were closer to the green edge 10 years ago, are now safely in the middle of the road. Few people will deny the validity of the environmental business case, but most of us are looking for solid substantiation and strategies that are meaningful for the world and for the organizations we work for.

 

Regions 1 through 10: Your number's up, so get with the program.

Find your company mentioned on the EnviroMedia Greenwashing Index? Want to document your environmental credentials without hiring costly consultants to confirm your sound eco-practices? Need to instill some sobriety and practicality into your green practice so that you can communicate it more effectively and credibly? Consider the Climate Leaders program offered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In case you thought otherwise, the EPA still exists and environmental scientists and policy experts within it are doing the best they can under current political conditions.

Climate Leaders has been around since 2002 and recently enrolled its 172nd "partner," so this program is not for the masses. But if you're serious about it, Climate Leaders helps you define realistic goals to reduce your organization's greenhouse emissions and develop practical approaches to mitigate its environmental impact. A process is in place to report your results regularly to the EPA and share them with the broader community. Here's what the EPA's program managers list as benefits of participation:

• Reduce impact on the global environment.
• Develop a credible GHG inventory and Inventory Management Plan.
• Set a comprehensive corporate-wide GHG reduction goal.
• Better manage GHG emissions and associated risks.
• Realize cost savings through energy efficiency.
• Receive expert EPA technical assistance on inventories and reporting.
• Participate in national public recognition campaigns.
• Engage with other partner companies demonstrating climate leadership.
• Access the latest GHG tools, technologies and protocols.
• Improve understanding of critical policy discussions.
• Integrate climate change strategies with state, regional, and international GHG accounting schemes.

Participants can receive up to 60 hours of free assistance from EPA resources, and no fee is associated with joining. EPA shares a list of program partners and their environmental goals. Note the absence of certain marquee names and the fact that goals are still under development for many of the companies. But you can observe some measurable, meaningful commitments. For example, Oracle "pledges to reduce U.S. GHG emissions by 6 percent per square foot from 2003 to 2010 for all non-data center space and to purchase 5 percent green power for data centers."

If you want to learn more about how companies are pursuing their green goals, take a look at the case studies. The many downloadable files, mostly PDFs based on presentations, amount to a concise director of environmental best industry practices. In many instances, you will need to think actively along and use your creative imagination to make sense of the content. I predict that, if you spend 15 minutes reviewing the documentation from the participating companies, you will come away with at least one good idea for environmental marketing and green practice in your own organization.

A while ago, I asked EPA how a smaller service organization that doesn't manufacture anything, does not have control of its physical location, and does not purchase its own energy, could participate in Climate Leaders. The response was that EPA was about to offer such a "Leaders Lite" program around May 20 and one should keep checking the site for updates. I'll stay tuned for that channel to open, because it will be of interest to lots of companies.

Elsewhere, the EPA offers excellent environmental reference materials that could be of great value as you educate your employees, customers, and other stakeholders. And, if you want environmental news from any of the country's regions, the free service is quite good. Click on the map on the homepage to see a list of news items from the region you care about, say, 10.

Ecological best practices in a leading catalog business

In business since 1935, Miles Kimball is one of the largest and oldest catalog businesses in the United States. Using its eponymously named brand and other, more targeted brands directed at more specialized market segments, such as Serenity Falls or Walter Drake, the company still conducts a large part of its business through catalogs, mailing approximately 75 million of them every year. As one might expect, telephone and e-commerce also play a big role in generating revenue.

Take a brief look at what the company offers, and, unless you're newly arrived in the United States, you immediately realize that Miles Kimball's products are ubiquitous. Maybe you own a few yourself. The company's presentation is wholesome, traditional, inspirational, and friendly. The products are not represented as environmentally valuable, and maybe some customers wouldn't even like it if Miles Kimball were to offer strongly phrased green marketing messages to them.

Don't let that fool you. Miles Kimball shares a wide-ranging environmental policy and vision statement that is extremely remarkable for its inclusionary approach. The introduction talks about the company's environmental commitment and strong values. One finds many corporate Web sites that drop the subject right at that point. Miles Kimball goes on to detail its plans in eight main areas, including many practical measures it takes to accomplish ecologically sound business practices and induce vendors and partners to do the same. As listed by the company, the main focus areas of the environmental effort are:

• List hygiene and data management
• Design
• Paper procurement and usage
• Printing and packaging
• Recycling and pollution reduction in our workplace and community
• Internal and supplier code of conduct
• Green building
• Social and community outreach

The amount of detail provided is amazing. For example, within the third main subject, "paper procurement and usage," Miles Kimball includes four different realms of action. The fourth one reads as follows:

"We Encourage Responsible Use of Forest Resources

• "We evaluate paper used for marketing pieces and internal consumption to identify opportunities for increased post-consumer recycled content, lower basis weights and other environmental attributes.
• "Whenever the economics are sound and the environmental benefits clear, we purchase paper with recycled content, including papers with post-consumer content
• "We negotiate with our paper suppliers about purchasing papers with post-consumer recycled content at a comparable price, environmental impact and performance to virgin papers
• "We print order forms, blow-ins and order envelopes on paper with a higher percentage of post-consumer recycled content whenever feasible.
• "We reduce the amount of raw materials used to make our products by encouraging the development of lighter-weight grades of paper that meet our organization’s functional and quality needs.
• "From 2005 to 2007 our use of lighter weight paper has reduced our total wood use by 1,472 tons, or 10,191 trees. The energy saved was 21,806 million BTU’s, enough to power 240 homes each year. Greenhouse gases were reduced the equivalent of 4,364,582 lbs CO2, or the emissions from 396 cars per year. Wastewater was reduced 10,219,474 gallons. Click here for more details. [sic — no live link there]
• "We work with our printers to reduce paper waste (reduced overage counts, make-readies, etc.)."

I also find it praiseworthy that Miles Kimball includes social and civic goals within its environmental positioning, drawing clear connections in a holistic approach to identifying what "environment" means to the company and its employees and customers. Take a look at the code of conduct for suppliers or the statements about social and community outreach. These people are profoundly serious about the ecological and social values they advance. Needless to say, the catalog business is not the greenest endeavor one could imagine, but Miles Kimball appears poised to transform it for environmental sustainability without risking what made the company successful.

My company, Washburn Communication, is currently working on a case study about Miles Kimball's implementation of Microsoft Dynamics AX to help run the business. Miles Kimball chose Microsoft Dynamics AX because it fit with the company's growth ambitions and long-range plans, and because it generates many thousands of dollars worth of savings in all areas of the operation. Environmental considerations were not a primary concern in picking a business management software solution. But Microsoft Dynamics has a green story to tell and keeps adding to it, so the Microsoft Dynamics software tools are certainly a good fit for Miles Kimball in that regard as well. We'll discuss the green aspects of Microsoft Dynamics another time, soon.

Leaving "sustainability" aside, what is "environment"?

When you wonder about the definition of the terms "sustainable" and "sustainability," and review what others have accomplished in this regard, you quickly experience the swirls of an ongoing debate. Definers of sustainability include:

• The British government
• Closer to home, the Washington State Department of Ecology
• Sustainable Measures, a consultant in Connecticut
• The U.S. National Park Service
• U.S. Forest Service scientists
• The Center for Sustainable Systems within the School of Natural Resources & Environment at the University of Michigan

Plus a large cast that includes Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, and hundreds of service vendors, not-for-profit organizations, corporations, and public-sector entities.

Some tired wanderers collect other people's definitions instead or in addition to their own. I can empathize with Andy Duncan of Oregon State University; he headlines his article "The definition of sustainability depends on who is speaking." To quote:

"Why is it important to have a common definition of sustainability? What will we gain?" said Denise Lach, a sociology professor at Oregon State University who is co-director of the university’s Center for Water and Environmental Sustainability. "I think the arguments over abstract definitions are masking the real work that’s getting done and needs to get done.

"Sustainability is like love and democracy—multiple meanings, not always perfectly realized, but always struggled for, at least by most of us. I think we do agree, basically, on what it is. We disagree when we must make specific choices in our lives. I think the major questions are: Who does not want a sustainable society? Why?"

"The word is just a symbol, a key to open the door to a room full of growth and development issues," said John Van Sickle, a scientist with a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency research laboratory in Corvallis, Ore.

Even if nailing down a widely accepted definition of sustainability is desirable, perhaps difficulty in doing that at this time is exactly what we should expect. Some claim the worldwide focus on the term is nothing less than the "toddler stage" of a major shift in the trajectory of life on the planet.

In the absence of consensus to get rid of the term or replace it with a better one, it will pervade our conversations, for better or worse. I've read declarations that define "sustainability" in terms of ecological health and social justice, continued growth and far-reaching technological innovation. I've also found mimimalist definitions that state the equivalent of "If it doesn't cause any damage to the environment, it must be sustainable." Those are usually brought forward by people who go on to criticize that approach as less than helpful.

In the green marketing context, "sustainability" (to my mind) implies that a basic, desirable, balanced state of the environment is not only definable, but that it also is clearly visible when that state is not present. I'm not sure that is true. Maybe it never was, and "sustainability" as an ideal comes to us from an earlier time or a simpler frame of mind, when we could imagine that human activities had not completely altered our world. Maybe we could leave "sustainability" aside and figure out what another frequently used term means to us, our societies, and the people and companies we work for: environment.

Maybe environment as a term is part of our problems. Ask the people around you, check the dictionaries, or look up references in articles and magazines. Almost immediately, you discover the notion that the environment "is what surrounds us" or "the world we are in" or "the background of our lives and activities." When using "environment," the idea of separation is always close. If the environment is what surrounds me, where does it stop and where do I begin? If I am not the environment, how do I relate to it? Does my customer's environment differ from mine? Is "environment" a shared notion, or does it mean different things to people in diverse cultures and countries?

These are not abstract questions. After all, when we work on environmental marketing communications, the idea is that a company's products, services, business practices, ideas, or values are of benefit to the environment and the societies that exist within it. Often, we connect those benefits to the qualities of air, water, and soil, and to the well being of people and animals. Is that the best way to go about it, or would it be more helpful to verify what we mean when we say "environment"?

"Environment" is everything in the world that connects to us and touches our bodies and minds in any way, known or unknown, visible or invisible, loved or unloved.

Will that work, or do you have another idea? Please let me know if you do!

Ducks get it again as greenwashed oil flows south from Canada

In a classic case of green-themed marketing vs. the real world, hundreds of ducks die, an energy technology formerly touted as environmentally sound has become even more questionable, and an oil company's fortunes are at risk. And it seems Canada is reevaluating its practice of exporting most of its oil to the United States. I hope to have good news for ducks some other time, because they seem to have turned into an environmental bellweather species. A quacking canary, so to speak, needing much attention and support, which in turn give rise to more strident marketing claims, mentioned in this blog a while ago.

I'm sure you've followed the story. In Alberta, Canada, Syncrude extracts oil from vast sand deposits by a combination of mining and building wells. Unfortunately, oil extraction from sand results in the creation of toxic lakes of sludge. Eventually, after lengthy and expensive cleanup, the water can be recycled, but in the meantime it's pure poison. Following regulation by the province of Alberta, the company operates noise-making equipment to deter migrating birds from landing on the poisonous ponds, but that equipment only runs from spring until fall. And, since weather conditions in Alberta this year have been extremely cold and winter-like until now, the equipment wasn't running and didn't do anything to scare off a flock of approximately 500 mallards that landed on a so-called "tailings pond." All the birds got poisoned, became unable to fly, and died.

Damage control ensued. Company officials make excuses and offer apologies. Greenpeace is demanding a public inquiry. And, seemingly overnight, the poor ducks have become a "new symbol of oil sands activism." Syncrude finds itself the target of a governmental probe.

The province of Alberta has become wealthy through the oil business, so people are wondering how extensive any scrutiny or penalties for Syncrude and other oil companies will be. In the meantime, Syncrude still offers as a "quick fact" on its Web site that it "is one of Alberta's largest and most respected employers." They offer an apology, as well. The language is soothing, remarkably balanced, not overly bureaucratic, and noncommittal. It's almost as if the company is daring a reader to push for practical follow-up in a tangible manner: What are they going to actually do about this problem?

"We understand you expect the best from Syncrude in environmental management and the protection of wildlife. It’s a value that we share, and we are committed  to making the necessary changes to our long-established practices to help ensure a sad event like this never happens again. This is a promise we make to you and all those who depend on our crude oil product to fuel their daily lives.

"As we go forward, we will learn from what happened, we will improve our practices, and we will meet your expectations for responsible development."

In the history of greenwashing, this apology deserves careful study and consideration. Please read it a couple of times and watch the content vanish into thin air.

In the meantime, if you want more background and substantial information about Alberta and its oil industry, including factual responses to the industry's and governments' environmental claims, one great resource is Tar Sands Watch by the Polaris Institute. Tar Sands Watch calls for a moratorium on increased tar sand exploitation until "a set of basic environmental and social conditions has been achieved." Bear in mind that the organization is not at all hostile to business or petro-based energy. They even advocate that Canada amass strategic petroleum reserves. As far as I can tell, the information and calls to action on the Tar Sands Watch site are well balanced and reasonable, in addition to being articulated in an engaging, friendly manner. Consider participating or at least following as they present the story.

At home? Got a minute? Try a green, social browser.

If you are an environmental marketer who would like to see how social networking channels can help you get your green story out, try a new browser that combines social networking features with environmental news feeds. I suggest you do it at home or on a standby computer first, before you get serious about it.

The browser is Flock. In time for the recent Earth Day, it was released in a so-called Eco-Edition that arrives preset with news feeds from online environmental resources, including Treehugger and the Environmental News Network. The current iteration of Flock, green or beige, seems to be all consumer directed, nothing much of interest for B2B marketing or networking. But maybe that will come at some point. After all, version 1.1 of the Flock browser is still quite new and there are bound to be plans for many more. If Eco-Flock would help glean information from interesting sites and resources outside of the usual suspects that everybody either looks at regularly or has written off, the green browser could be very valuable.

Services supported by or at least connected to Flock include blog editors that directly connect to your blog, sharing of photos and videos, and webmail. I'd love to see them include LinkedIn and reach a wide audience of professionals. That would give a lot more exposure to the green content, and feedback from the expanded audience would contribute to make the content provided by green bloggers and sites more interesting and worthwhile.

So, try it out, let me know what you think, if you like, and get in touch with the Flock people to urge them to make their product more relevant to those of us who think business and marketing can benefit the environment and our societies. (Hey, Flock: Why is there no e-mail link from the site? I know it's old fashioned, but a lot of us still use it.)