December 19, 2007
2007: Shades of Retailing Green
As 2007 winds down, RetailWire looks at the stories and issues that shaped the year in retailing.
Retailing came in a distinctive shade of green this year as companies climbed aboard the eco bandwagon in an effort to create points of difference from the competition while seeking to reduce operating costs at the same time.
Proof of the emphasis put on environmental issues in 2007 is abundantly clear when doing a search of the term “green.” No fewer than 16 RetailWire discussions (see list with links below) dealt directly with green topics while many others addressed environmentally related issues within a broader conversation.
- Tesco
Labels Itself Part of the Green Solution - How Many Environmentalists Does it
Take to Change A Light Bulb? - Green and the Retail Pot O’ Gold
- Wal-Mart Grades Suppliers on Packaging Math
- Eco Fashion Goes Upscale
- Retailers Make Green Moves Before Earth Day
- Retailers Come Together to Fight Climate Change
- BrainTrust Query: How will
assortments change in the green future? - IKEA Goes to Hybrid Passenger Car Fleet
in U.K. - Corporate Climate Change Attitudes Confound Consumers
- Consumers Get Climate
Change Scorecard - New Ways to Fuel Choice
- Kroger Pushes ‘Organics for Everyone’
- How Much Packaging Do We Really Need?
- Costco Offers Cash to Recycle Electronics
- Marketing to Green Buyers
While some have suggested that the environment is a fad that will soon give way to economic realities (high cost of green initiatives for business, consumer purchasing resistance based on green premium), there is little indication that the pace is likely to let up in the near term.
Discussion Questions: Has going green become a business imperative for retailers? Where do you see the greatest “green” opportunities for retailers on the cost and revenue sides of the business?
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Poll
Green = great publicity and good karma. You don’t have to go 100% green these days, just do something that’s meaningful enough to sustain attention. Every global warming story, every energy shortage story, etc, will reinforce sustainability issues for decades. And the stories come every day, with no decline in sight.
At present, “going green” is “feel good” marketing more than substance. However, I believe that over time it will become more serious and meaningful, and possibly for better or worse, much more regulated. One sign of a more substantive future is that Wal-Mart is starting to ask suppliers to use fewer boxes and their executives are taking courses and training on how to make meaningful impact. However, at present, “going green” for most consumers is still a trendy “reality” that has a good feel as long as it doesn’t cause too many inconveniences. When we went with some couples out here in suburbia to go see Al Gore’s movie, we noticed on the theater parking lot an “H3” with a bumper sticker that said, “Hybrid Hummer.” I think that explains the state where were right at the present in most retail stores.
Sad to say, but retailers seem to jump on any opportunity to pull the wool over their customer’s eyes. “Yes, we are green (but no one has actually defined green). We’ll be whatever kind of green you want! Just spend you money here.” I would like to see a retailer actually go green, organic, free range (other than grocery carts), make every body feel warm and fuzzy…. Give me a break!
It would be to everyone’s benefit to try and solve the “out of stock” problem. If retail can’t do that then I don’t think they have any business sticking their nose into trying to green up the store scape.
Green is not consequential when it comes to most purchasing decisions. We do not have environmental transparency into the retailers we endorse, and because of this, most folks cannot make an informed purchasing decision without this kind of transparency. This has been the status quo for quite some time and Americans have adjusted their expectations for this. Thus there hasn’t been as strong as a demand for this. This doesn’t preclude purchasing decisions based upon recycled materials, or companies who tout themselves as environmentally friendly.
“Green” is too all-encompassing to register with measurability or concrete results with the public. Trying is not achieving. As author Rick Page wrote, “Hope Is Not A Strategy.”
Look at some of the turf-tinted public failures: Bamboo-infused clothing actually contains no bamboo. NASA contradicts false interpretations of their data that support the hoax of global warming. Landfills record higher daily levels of plastic bags. Greenpeace decries whaling while simultaneously defending the rights of Inuit tribes to CONTINUE whaling in lieu of reducing our dependency on foreign oil by drilling in their whaling grounds. Despite the overwhelming success of modern nuclear power plants in France and Japan, we continue to fear them. “Organic” has no meaning and is proven not to be more nutritious or favorable to the environment. Studies show that atmospheric CO2 levels historically DECREASE prior to higher recorded temperatures rather than increase–thus negating theories of their impact as a so-called GHG (greenhouse gas). China continues to be a gross polluter and exporter of a wide variety of poisonous products to America, yet retailers consistently fail to protect their shoppers from them.
If a retailer thinks (not feels) it’s important to be seen as “green,” why not pick a fight they can win, report, and celebrate? Something that defines a problem in terms that resonate with customers and whose success can be calculated, measured, and demonstrated? How about a supermarket taking responsibility for the number of plastic bags in their local landfill? Or reporting their actual energy savings to the public and reducing prices commensurately? If a retailer really believes it’s beneficial to be seen as “green,” why not do something real?
Being seen as a micro-mini contributor to reducing the silly nonsense of global warming is NOT real. Selling only energy-saving light bulbs IS real (especially when it’s backed up by installation of same in all stores). Selling logo-infused cloth shopping bags is NOT real. Eliminating plastic bags from checkout counters IS real. Pressuring suppliers to do a better job of checking products for safety is NOT real. Establishing an in-house safety inspection system for all products IS real. Supporting PETA initiatives is NOT real. Supporting animal rehabilitation centers IS real. See the difference? The NOT real stuff is NOT measurable. The IS real stuff is (depending on what “is” is–you grinned, I know it). Customers deserve this kind of accountability and will respond positively to it.
How about some “green” victories, retailers? Were you ever interested in victories–or just the perception that you “cared?” Don’t you want to celebrate with your customers?
I applaud Al Gore and Live Earth! for making green “cool,” and this “cool factor” is affecting the things that people buy. However, it is also important to recognize that the rising costs of energy, which translates also into the costs of production, has now tipped the scale so that investing in green technology is cost effective. Auto manufacturers have had the technology to produce hybrid cars for well over a decade. Businesses and homeowners fought replacing their lightbulbs with energy efficient ones because the upfront investment didn’t outweigh the cost of relatively cheap energy. Many supermarkets offered a few cents back to the customer for every reusable bag, but didn’t market it because no one really cared. Energy used in manufacturing has recently become so expensive that it makes economic sense to invest in the technology to reuse water, install solar panels, and to take a look at a triple bottom line. Once again, this technology is not new. It just became cost effective.
Those who have worked in the environmental field for many years have been blocked in the past from pushing initiatives through because it made more economic sense to waste. Now, the doors have opened for environmentalists to work with retailers and manufacturers to implement the very same programs that the business community once ignored.
Sure some companies may exploit the concept of green. But, the age of information will help consumers sort out who is really green and who is not. If companies work with credible organizations that have standards for green programs–such as the Organic Trade Association, BALLE (Business Alliance for Local Living Economies), J Ottoman Consulting–we will make great progress to create green businesses and a sustainable economy.
More Discussions
Has Same-Day Delivery Become an Expectation Across Retail?
Are expectations around retail delivery speed in flux?OpenAI Names the Infrastructure Standard for Agentic Commerce
Will OpenAI or Google (or another entity) set the gold standard for agentic commerce?Is Five Below Poised For Even Greater Growth?
Five Below is hitting serious growth numbers. Can this trend continue?
Green = great publicity and good karma. You don’t have to go 100% green these days, just do something that’s meaningful enough to sustain attention. Every global warming story, every energy shortage story, etc, will reinforce sustainability issues for decades. And the stories come every day, with no decline in sight.
At present, “going green” is “feel good” marketing more than substance. However, I believe that over time it will become more serious and meaningful, and possibly for better or worse, much more regulated. One sign of a more substantive future is that Wal-Mart is starting to ask suppliers to use fewer boxes and their executives are taking courses and training on how to make meaningful impact. However, at present, “going green” for most consumers is still a trendy “reality” that has a good feel as long as it doesn’t cause too many inconveniences. When we went with some couples out here in suburbia to go see Al Gore’s movie, we noticed on the theater parking lot an “H3” with a bumper sticker that said, “Hybrid Hummer.” I think that explains the state where were right at the present in most retail stores.
Sad to say, but retailers seem to jump on any opportunity to pull the wool over their customer’s eyes. “Yes, we are green (but no one has actually defined green). We’ll be whatever kind of green you want! Just spend you money here.” I would like to see a retailer actually go green, organic, free range (other than grocery carts), make every body feel warm and fuzzy…. Give me a break!
It would be to everyone’s benefit to try and solve the “out of stock” problem. If retail can’t do that then I don’t think they have any business sticking their nose into trying to green up the store scape.
Green is not consequential when it comes to most purchasing decisions. We do not have environmental transparency into the retailers we endorse, and because of this, most folks cannot make an informed purchasing decision without this kind of transparency. This has been the status quo for quite some time and Americans have adjusted their expectations for this. Thus there hasn’t been as strong as a demand for this. This doesn’t preclude purchasing decisions based upon recycled materials, or companies who tout themselves as environmentally friendly.
“Green” is too all-encompassing to register with measurability or concrete results with the public. Trying is not achieving. As author Rick Page wrote, “Hope Is Not A Strategy.”
Look at some of the turf-tinted public failures: Bamboo-infused clothing actually contains no bamboo. NASA contradicts false interpretations of their data that support the hoax of global warming. Landfills record higher daily levels of plastic bags. Greenpeace decries whaling while simultaneously defending the rights of Inuit tribes to CONTINUE whaling in lieu of reducing our dependency on foreign oil by drilling in their whaling grounds. Despite the overwhelming success of modern nuclear power plants in France and Japan, we continue to fear them. “Organic” has no meaning and is proven not to be more nutritious or favorable to the environment. Studies show that atmospheric CO2 levels historically DECREASE prior to higher recorded temperatures rather than increase–thus negating theories of their impact as a so-called GHG (greenhouse gas). China continues to be a gross polluter and exporter of a wide variety of poisonous products to America, yet retailers consistently fail to protect their shoppers from them.
If a retailer thinks (not feels) it’s important to be seen as “green,” why not pick a fight they can win, report, and celebrate? Something that defines a problem in terms that resonate with customers and whose success can be calculated, measured, and demonstrated? How about a supermarket taking responsibility for the number of plastic bags in their local landfill? Or reporting their actual energy savings to the public and reducing prices commensurately? If a retailer really believes it’s beneficial to be seen as “green,” why not do something real?
Being seen as a micro-mini contributor to reducing the silly nonsense of global warming is NOT real. Selling only energy-saving light bulbs IS real (especially when it’s backed up by installation of same in all stores). Selling logo-infused cloth shopping bags is NOT real. Eliminating plastic bags from checkout counters IS real. Pressuring suppliers to do a better job of checking products for safety is NOT real. Establishing an in-house safety inspection system for all products IS real. Supporting PETA initiatives is NOT real. Supporting animal rehabilitation centers IS real. See the difference? The NOT real stuff is NOT measurable. The IS real stuff is (depending on what “is” is–you grinned, I know it). Customers deserve this kind of accountability and will respond positively to it.
How about some “green” victories, retailers? Were you ever interested in victories–or just the perception that you “cared?” Don’t you want to celebrate with your customers?
I applaud Al Gore and Live Earth! for making green “cool,” and this “cool factor” is affecting the things that people buy. However, it is also important to recognize that the rising costs of energy, which translates also into the costs of production, has now tipped the scale so that investing in green technology is cost effective. Auto manufacturers have had the technology to produce hybrid cars for well over a decade. Businesses and homeowners fought replacing their lightbulbs with energy efficient ones because the upfront investment didn’t outweigh the cost of relatively cheap energy. Many supermarkets offered a few cents back to the customer for every reusable bag, but didn’t market it because no one really cared. Energy used in manufacturing has recently become so expensive that it makes economic sense to invest in the technology to reuse water, install solar panels, and to take a look at a triple bottom line. Once again, this technology is not new. It just became cost effective.
Those who have worked in the environmental field for many years have been blocked in the past from pushing initiatives through because it made more economic sense to waste. Now, the doors have opened for environmentalists to work with retailers and manufacturers to implement the very same programs that the business community once ignored.
Sure some companies may exploit the concept of green. But, the age of information will help consumers sort out who is really green and who is not. If companies work with credible organizations that have standards for green programs–such as the Organic Trade Association, BALLE (Business Alliance for Local Living Economies), J Ottoman Consulting–we will make great progress to create green businesses and a sustainable economy.