It's a survey Jim, but a tad more than we usually know it.
I got from this - Packaging helps supermarkets bag top spots in green poll - in the Guardian, to this from a wee while while ago, but still of interest, especially in comparison:
Research by WPP companies reveals UK consumers ripe for green business
As posted, E&EO:
A UK survey of 1,525 British adults found that although support for many green ideas is now mainstream, understanding of what it means to be green is shallow, confused and easily swayed by company messages. The Body Shop is the UK green brand of the year, according to the survey. It is viewed as far and away the most green company against brands in the eight tested categories. Next in line came car company Smart which manufactures small chic urban run-arounds. Others in the top twenty UK green brands include three supermarkets, two petrol companies and an airline. “There is no doubt that the universal adoption of basic green ideas has been possibly the swiftest shift in consumer attitudes we have witnessed in recent times. It has certainly been faster than the internet revolution and faster than the take-up of mobile phones,” said Phil Gandy, Planning Director of Landor Associates. “It is now almost the unquestioned norm that we all embrace some shade of green philosophy and behaviour. Yet just a year ago, the green agenda was out on the lunatic fringe for most people,” he added. The research also paints a picture of British consumers as deeply concerned and pessimistic about the state of the environment but not quite sure what to do about it. Climate change is seen as the most important environmental issue we face by two thirds of those questioned and more than seventy per cent of those asked rate society’s performance in addressing the issue as neutral or worse. Other environmental concerns include population growth, technology and international trade. Government is widely perceived to be ineffective in driving a green agenda. And in a clear warning to businesses that choose to ignore the environment, eighty per cent of those questioned believe that it is important that companies are environmentally friendly. However when it comes to defining what exactly being ‘green’ means in terms of their own behaviour, consumers have a rosy but confused view. The primary focus is on reducing their waste rather than reducing consumption. So over half of respondents reported driving cars that are fuel efficient, and most wash their cars by hand and without a hosepipe these days. The next most common green behaviour is recycling plastic bags followed by use of products that do not deplete the ozone layer. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions comes third, while ‘supporting organisations that protect the rain forest’ comes fourth. “It is clear that being green means different things to different people,” says Gandy. “There is a general awareness of an urgent problem and there is widespread belief that we are all part of that problem. But consumers have not yet come to the view that they need to address their consumption. It seems that most of us are still thinking in terms of reducing waste – throwing away less, rather than consuming less.” The research found that we may be very interested in greenness but when it comes to companies and brands, many can’t identify what that means. Twenty-three per cent of the population could not identify any steps a company should take to make itself green. Nonetheless companies that promote themselves as green or present themselves as ethically concerned can reap substantial rewards. Green brands are perceived as having higher quality and consumers say they are prepared to pay a ‘green premium’ for them. Six in ten for instance will spend more on energy saving household appliances. “The onus is squarely on brands to take a lead in setting the green agenda,” adds Gandy. “The almost universal take-up of recycling in the UK shows how people will get involved, if actions they can take to make a difference are made clear and simple to understand.” But the study also reveals that many of the brands widely perceived by the public as green simply include the colour green in their logo or use more natural packaging for their products. Overall winner The Body Shop has long used both the colour green and ‘alternative’ packaging. Said Gandy, “Just how consumers judge the greenness of brands is a complex mixture of perception and reality. Being seen to be ethically concerned is important but just being ‘modern and likeable’ – like Virgin or Google – can be enough to bestow a powerful green halo effect. “What is certainly clear is that consumers want to do the right thing but need genuine help to carry through into action. Brands which align themselves with environmental concerns at this relatively early stage of the debate can expect to secure a competitive advantage given that environmental concern can only grow in future.”
Industry ranking by greenness: 1. Body care 2. Grocery 3. Appliances 4. Automotive 5. Energy/Petroleum 6. Banking 7. Online Technology 8. Travel
Top 20 UK Green Brands: 1. The Body Shop 2. Smart 3. Waitrose 4. The Co-operative Bank 5. Tesco 6. Marks & Spencer 7. Dyson 8. Sainsury’s 9. BP 10. Aveda 11. Asda 12. Toyota 13. Virgin Atlantic 14. Nivea 15. Shell 16. Indesit 17. Npower 18. Bosch 19. Google 20. Eurostar
2 comments:
ow are we going to stop defining ourselves by how much stuff we consume?
Don't see it happening any time soon.
We are, after all, content to be viewed as (and hence described) as 'consumers', living in a capitalist system that by most measures has now reached across every corner of the globe.
In a way it is a reflection of the human condition as wealth, and the demonstrable trappings of having it, seems to have overtaken older Darwinian displays. Substitute a bigger car for a more colourful peacock tail spread!
There are of course simply the joys of stimulating the pleasure centres, which money does rather facilitate.
It's all a matter of degree. Certainly we seem to have lost sight of what is 'enough'. I see a footballer is now worth £250k a week. MPs seem to think £100k pa is necessary to attract their talent vs. those in business.
Thing is, after the essentials, what is one going to do with that money other than blow it on 'stuff'?
I can't see that changing much, especially in a media environment that thrives on, and hence celebrates 'bling'.
And it even extends to matters green. Just getting on with it and, especially, doing less, is seldom going to make good copy.
Hence you will seldom read about a celeb who doesn't go by helicopter any more, unless it is a one-off funded PR jaunt to a eco-resort with their own holistic massage in the Yurt.
Sadly I find most of these examples of 'good' green actions are usually still a factor of more money and/or time than most have, tend to involve extra stuff (or at best expensive substitutes), and hence devalue the whole notion by making them little more a transitory fashion accessory.
Post a Comment