By Molly Erin McCabe, AKBD
Walk into any grocery, hardware, or even department store these days and you will be presented with a wide variety of “green” products – products that are “eco-labeled” as being friendly to the environment. Some products sporting these labels are authentically good and/or safe for people and the environment. However, as our understanding has deepened of the environmental impact of our purchasing and consumption decisions, and we strive to make more conscientious choices, unscrupulous marketers are taking advantage of our desire to do the right thing by promoting product as green when in reality they are not. This article is intended to help consumers ferret through the environmental hype, referred to as green washing, and learn what it really means to be green.
For the purposes of this article, an eco-label is defined as any mark, seal, or label that gives the consumer the impression that the product may be better or safer for them and the environment than a product that does not have such a label. Eco-friendly is defined differently by just about every person so for the purposes of this article, we will define eco-friendly as products/services that have limited and/or no negative impact on people or the environment during the manufacturing, installation, operation or consumption of the product or service.
What Is Green Washing?
Green washing is the marketing practice of making false, misleading, overstated, vague, improbable or exaggerated claims, with words, images, or product brand names, relative to the eco-friendly attributes or benefits of a product or service. For example, an appliance manufacturer claims their product is eco-friendly because it “does not contain ozone depleting CFC’s” (chlorofluorocarbon, historical used in refrigerants). CFC’s were largely banned in the US in 1987, thus this claim has no merit. Additionally, making statements that deliberately leave out or masks environmental short comings of a product/service is also a form of green washing. For example, an automobile manufacturer promotes a hybrid vehicle that gets 20 miles to the gallon as “fuel efficient.” Given that there are numerous vehicles on the market today that achieve 30-60 miles per gallon, the vehicle manufacturer’s claim of fuel efficiency is overtly obscuring its products short comings.
What is Being Done to Protect You from Being Green Washed?
Historically, there has been more to gain (financial and otherwise) than there has been to lose from green washing which encouraged many companies to use such claims as a strategic competitive advantage over their rivals. However, these opportunities are slowly coming to an end.
In 1992, the Federal Trade Commission issued the Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims or “Green Guides” under Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair and deceptive marketing practices. The Guides outline general principles that apply to all environmental marketing claims and then provide guidance on specific green claims, such as what can be labeled biodegradable, compostable, recyclable, recycled content and/or ozone safe. These Guides were subsequently updated in 1996 and again in 1998.
Enforcing these Guides has been hampered by two issues: 1) the Green Guides are only administrative interpretations of the law; they do not have the force and effect of law. However, technically if a company makes claims about the attributes or benefits of their product(s) that are inconsistent with the Guides, the FTC can take action under Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive practices; and 2) consumer protection has not been a top priority of the US Administration. Despite numerous marketing violations, not one company was prosecuted for a violation between 2000 and 2008. Fortunately, there has been a marked change in policy, with seven companies prosecuted during 2009 and 2010.
What Lies in the Future for Green Washing?
In January 2008, the FTC started soliciting input through a variety of workshops and public comment on revisions to the 1998 edition of the Guides. The comment period closed on December 10, 2010 and a revised set of Guides is expected to be issued in the spring of 2011. The proposed revised Green Guides can be found at http://www.ftc.gov/os/fedreg/2010/october/101006greenguidesfrn.pdf.
Of the proposed changes, the Guides directly address the basis of manufacturers and marketers claims relative to the content or performance of products as well as the legitimacy of “eco-labeling” to ensure that the labels accurately describe the environmental benefits or attributes of the product such as made with renewable materials, renewable energy, or renders carbon-offsets. Environmental claims, relative to packaging, such as recyclable or biodegradable will also be tightened. As a result, a package labeled recyclable, such as a #6 plastic, may only be labeled recyclable if the majority of municipalities actually have recycling for the material (many municipalities only recycle #1- #5 plastics).
Under the revised Guides, companies whose claims or labels do not comply with the FTC Guides can be forced to do one or more of the following: 1) refund a consumer for products purchased which have been found to have false or misleading claims, 2) suspend advertising campaigns that contain false claims, 3) issue corrective advertisements and/or 4) submit written reports to the FTC illustrating revised and compliant advertising claims.
Lastly, the revised Guides address the legitimacy of environmental certifications and seals of approval and warn marketers not to use unqualified certifications/seals that do not specify the basis for the certification. Currently, there are as many as 350 separate labels in use today. According to Kevin Tuerff, co-founder of EnviroMedia, “having one comprehensive national seal to identify green products would limit consumer confusion and also hold advertisers accountable to one set of standards.” Based on a 2010 survey conducted by Enviromedia/Opinion Research Corp, 65% of American say having one seal for all green products would give them more confidence that they were buying green. Only 26% said it would not. Additionally, 41% of respondents think the primary enforcer of green product claims should be a third-party certification system versus 26% who think it should be the government (FTC).
In conclusion, progress is being made in clarifying, both for consumers and marketers, what it means to be green. In the second installment of this article, we will look at how to avoid green washing by understanding green certifications and seals as well as resources for researching products based on their authentic green attributes.
