Dilbert - call it a humour offset
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Careful what you wish for
An interesting question in Brand Republic, that leads to a Marketing article that doesn't seem to work (for me at least. Curse these Mac/Safari browsers): Can the industry manage more than a long-term pledge to cut packaging?
All I ask is that such cuts are done in the name of genuine enviROI (actual benefit to the planet's future, which may or may not mean any fiscal returns) and not just for cosmetic or PR purposes.
I was at Total Packaging at the NEC not long ago, and one telling (if as yet unconfirmed) stat was that of such 'waste', 95% came from food and 5% from the packaging.
Now I know they will not compromise... much... on what helps shift from the shelves, but what I don't want to find is that the reduction goes in areas where the consumer gets stuff home and for whatever reasons do not consume fully - hidden bruising, shorter lifespan, etc.
For sure more effort needs to go into what enters the waste stream from the moment of manufacture, but we need a much more coherent approach, and cooperation between all necessary parties (govt, local, govt, etc) on joined up thinking towards effective recycling (and NOT another 'Recycle - it good for our tonnage-based bonuses' campaign) and, my personal favourite, re:use.
All I ask is that such cuts are done in the name of genuine enviROI (actual benefit to the planet's future, which may or may not mean any fiscal returns) and not just for cosmetic or PR purposes.
I was at Total Packaging at the NEC not long ago, and one telling (if as yet unconfirmed) stat was that of such 'waste', 95% came from food and 5% from the packaging.
Now I know they will not compromise... much... on what helps shift from the shelves, but what I don't want to find is that the reduction goes in areas where the consumer gets stuff home and for whatever reasons do not consume fully - hidden bruising, shorter lifespan, etc.
For sure more effort needs to go into what enters the waste stream from the moment of manufacture, but we need a much more coherent approach, and cooperation between all necessary parties (govt, local, govt, etc) on joined up thinking towards effective recycling (and NOT another 'Recycle - it good for our tonnage-based bonuses' campaign) and, my personal favourite, re:use.
I post this. And simply wonder why it is not on every other front page
The Earth today stands in imminent peril'...and nothing short of a planetary rescue will save it from the environmental cataclysm of dangerous climate change. Those are not the words of eco-warriors but the considered opinion of a group of eminent scientists writing in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.'
It's fairly clear-cut. And not too encouraging, really.
So why are we all not popping down to B&Q to get our self-assembly ark kit?
There could be many reasons. Climate fatigue, maybe? A bit like charity fatigue, only we're no longer up for saving ourselves.
Or a few too many headlines like this, that go on to copy like this: 'Six scientists from some of the leading scientific institutions in the United States...'. And an awful lot of ''might may be right".
I don't know. So I still wonder. And that... may be the problem.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)