First of all, I would like to take this opportunity to declare a permanent moratorium on the phrase “It’s not easy being green.” It seems that almost every article or blog post in recent memory has featured this as a head or subhead. It makes me want to get rid of all my Muppets albums!
That said, unless you’ve been trapped in an underwater pyramid for the past 18 months, you know that so-called “green” initiatives—that is, environmentally responsible and sustainable business practices—are becoming ever more crucial for consumers and, ergo, businesses, and the printing industry (which we could argue has been green for decades, is no exception.
For example, DoubleClick (via eMarketer) has found that:
60% of US adults who make online purchases say that it is very or extremely important to them that a company is environmentally conscious.
Almost half of those who make online purchases said they specifically search for environmentally-friendly products at least some of the time.
More importantly, 45% of respondents who make online purchases said they would pay at least 5% more for a product that is promoted with environmentally-friendly attributes. An additional 22% were willing to pay at least 10% more.
38% of respondents said the most attractive type of environmentally-conscious marketing focused on specific user benefits such as saving money on bills or products lasting longer.
Specific environmental benefits were a distant second, cited by 21% of those surveyed as the most attractive type of environmentally-friendly marketing.
As a result, companies are clambering to beef up their “green cred,” but questions remain. To that end, WhatTheyThink has recently released a special report, Printing Goes Green: A WhatTheyThink Primer on Environmental Sustainability in the Commercial Printing Industry, which includes the results of a survey conducted by the WhatTheyThink Economics and Research Center. It found that, among commercial printers, the issue is front and center, even if few have taken many steps beyond using and/or recommending recycled paper.
A Google search or two turns up no shortage of companies that tout their environmentally responsible practices, but, as it turns out, companies often oversell the extent of their greenness. Yes, we’re shocked, shocked, to discover that companies sometimes misrepresent themselves. This is often referred to as “greenwashing,” and anecdotal evidence suggests that consumers increasingly insist that businesses put their money (long green?) where their mouths are. But how to prove it?
One way—which we discuss in the WhatTheyThink report—is known as “chain of custody” certification programs, in which an oversight organization (such as the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) offers official guarantees about the production of certain products; that is, the path taken by that product’s raw materials from its origin (like a forest in the case of paper products) to the consumer, including all successive stages of processing, transformation, manufacturing, and distribution. Chain of custody certification corroborates the promise that is being made to consumers. So, for example, printers and other companies who work with paper products can either be FSC-certified or use FSC-certified materials.
Now, it probably goes without saying (but I’ll say it anyway) that not everyone believes that environmental sustainability and/or climate change are especially crucial issues, some folks feeling that it is simply “political correctness run amok.” (See, for example, this Brandweek story about a small but vocal minority of "Never Greens.") It’s become a curiously political issue, for reasons passing understanding. Even if the vast majority of climate scientists are wrong (and, by the way, getting scientists to agree on anything is nothing short of a miracle, which is itself tacit evidence that there may very well be something to it), it’s hard to see how focusing on environmental sustainability is a bad thing. For example, why can’t “green” technologies be an economic growth area—or do people prefer large, illusory, unsustainable economic bubbles (as per this Onion article)? Or do people just really like pollution?
And free-market, small-government advocates should be content in the fact that the pressures companies face to go green are exactly what proponents of market-based solutions say should happen: the market is demanding something, and businesses can either respond accordingly or lose business. After all, the emphasis on environmental sustainability has come without any interference or pressure from the government. The trick is for companies to see green initiatives as an opportunity, not an imposition. Just like any other business challenge.
That said, there is the danger that if everyone starts going green, then it stops becoming a differentiator and becomes a moot point. Well, let’s jump off that bridge when we get to it! And, of course, you can probably say the same thing about any competitive advantage.
Whether the green movement simply the fad du jour and everyone will lose interest in a year or two remains to be seen. (Remember when ISO 9001 certification was the talk of the town? Now how many companies make any reference to it?) But for now, it’s the way things are, and consumers are expecting some level of “greenness” on the part of the companies they choose to do business with. And, again, printers are no exception.
Admittedly, some people grudgingly go green...but As Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee for President said, in an address at an Associated Press event held on April 14, 2008, which I attended, “Even if we're wrong and there is no climate change, the worst that will happen is we leave a cleaner planet to our kids.”
So to help printing companies, their suppliers, and their customers navigate turbulent green waters, WhatTheyThink’s Printing Goes Green report is there to help guide the way.
Discussion
By Charles Pierce on Jul 16, 2008
I was interested to read your blog. 20 years ago I had a book published on different economic concepts to point the way to a sustainable world economy. Someone who liked the book recently contacted me to suggest that I update and re-publish it as a blog. She set up the blog and is posting the book in sections as I write and send it to her. Here is the link:
http://www.economicsforaroundearth.com
From Charles Pierce
By Michael Jahn on Jul 16, 2008
I stopped reading after I read this;
"For example, DoubleClick (via eMarketer) has found that:"
Okay, well, why do we (or should we) think that is some valid source of accurate statistical reporting then...?
Okay, I lied, I really really stopped reading after I read this;
60% of US adults who make online purchases say that it is very or extremely important to them that a company is environmentally conscious.
yeah, okay. 60% of US Adults make up what percentage of the online purchases ?
oh, never mind. It is all lip service - show me a random office desk not littered with 1/2 empty water bottles and I will then be hopeful for real change.
By Suzanne on Jul 17, 2008
There's an entire biz language growing up around green: see following from http://www.idealbite.com/tiplibrary/archives/terms-of-endearment/
The Words
Biodynamic: organic crop cultivation that emphasizes the interrelationship of soil, plants, and animals.
Example: Even though it was produced in tandem with the lunar phases, the biodynamic wine Jen drank still gave her a moon-sized hangover.
Carbon footprint: the amount of greenhouse gases emitted through the combustion of fossil fuels due to human activities.
Example: Sara's recent weekend in Puerto Rico was dreamy, but the CO2 emitted by the plane didn't help decrease her carbon footprint or the number of her global warming-related nightmares.
Cradle-to-cradle: an efficient, waste-free production technique - all materials are recycled, reused, or composted.
Example: Hilary's new cradle-to-cradle office chair was made from sustainable materials that can be recycled when death do them part or after she gets fired (whichever comes first).
Greenwash: to pretend you're green when you're not in order to impress potential customers or friends.
Example: The Biter Team found that the oil company's ads - featuring a baby deer nuzzling an oil barrel - bordered on greenwashing.
Light-green: making incremental, not drastic, life changes to help the planet.
Example: Biters who drive their hybrid SUV to the organic wine bar live a light-green lifestyle - the fact that the wine was imported from Italy...not so much.
Locavore: someone who prefers eating locally produced food.
Example: As a locavore, Kay likes getting sauced on beer made in her neighbor's basement.
Sustainable: capable of continued production with no long-term effect on the environment.
Example: The desks (that occasionally collapse because we assembled them ourselves) in the Biter offices are made of wood from sustainable forests that aren't cut down faster than they're replanted.
Xeriscape: landscaping that incorporates drought-resistant plants and doesn't require much watering.
Example: Since Toshio's parents xeriscaped their yard - taking out the lawn and planting Southern California climate-appropriate shrubs - they've relegated the Slip 'n Slide to the garage.
By Bryan Yeager on Jul 17, 2008
Dear Michael-
I'm sorry that you have such a negative view on green initiatives and sustainability in general, and also within the printing industry. However, the world, and also the industry, is evolving into more sustainable practices.
Not only does the WhatTheyThink report outline this, but here at http://www.infotrends.com" rel="nofollow">InfoTrends, we found very similar results in our Emerging Strategies research on Green Print and Sustainability. Some of our findings will be published in an upcoming issue of http://www.piworld.com/" rel="nofollow">Printing Impressions Magazine.
I think Frank's John McCain quote (who I normally do not see eye-to-eye with on most political issues) sums it up best: “Even if we’re wrong and there is no climate change, the worst that will happen is we leave a cleaner planet to our kids.”
By Tom Stodola on Jul 17, 2008
I have heard all the arguments about how people are willing to spend more for products that are environmentally friendly. I don't beleive it. If it were true the export economy of China would collapse today.
FSC and SFI certifications in and of themselves do nothing, NOTHING for being green. I can (and have) bought these papers withoug being certified. Does that mean I am not as environmentally concious?
Sustainability goes far and beyond the trees.
It has always been about what you, or your company do to reduce and conserve natural resources. Leave the trees and paper to the paper companies and concentrate on you own house or shop.
By David Fox on Jul 18, 2008
Tom,
One does not need to be chain-of-custody certified to purchase a certified sheet. If a purchaser wants to make an on-product claim about their print job printed on said certified sheets, then they need to be certified first. We are SFI and FSC certified and we buy certified stocks without any reporting all the time, it's all dependent on what our customers want on their pieces.
Even if "Green Thoughts" is flawed, which I do not think it is, the point is that articles like this and others are stimulating conversation on the topic. If we start thinking about conservation and environmentalism, we start wanting to participate, once we start participating, we start making a difference.
By Tom Stodola on Jul 18, 2008
David: I agree with most of your comments. However, the point I am making is that FSC and SFI have gone to great lengths to give the impression that by becoming certified you are better than those who don't, and that you are doing more than others. This is not true. I have seen personally what happens when given a choice between giving a client a certified sheet without spending the money on certification and buying down their electricity with renewable power or having a logo, the logo wins out every time, just as it was pointed out to me at a US Green Building Council meeting that given a choice between granite counter tops or solar panels to reduce electricity consumption, the granit wins out 99% of the time. (this meeting was in March of this year.
As I have said, leave the certifications and sustainable forest issues to the mills and forestry folks and concentrate on what you can do internally (water reduction/efficiency, better efficiencies with lighting/power. Concider the compostability of similar items and pick the one that will break down more effectively.
Thanks again.
By Michelle Schott on Jul 18, 2008
Personally I AM willing to spend more on organically grown and sustainably produced products. I know many others as well, when our budgets permit it. This growing preference IS changing the choices available to consumers on a daily basis.
But I think Tom is correct - Sustainability must go beyond the trees to include what we do individually and as a company. We should ask ourselves, what resources are used to power our homes and our shops? Is there a way to reduce our electricity, natural gas, gasoline, oil and water consumption? Doing so would save precious fossil fuels and reduce our contribution to pollution and global warming. And the price of fuel being what it is now, it could have a great impact on our bottom line.
(Correct me if I'm wrong, but) FSC Certification does not guarantee that a paper mill or printer be committed to sustainable printing practices. It just insures that the paper used was made from trees that come from sustainably managed forests. It's a good first step, but is there something more out there more big-picture/carbon footprint minded? How do you quantify that? That's the next step. Babysteps.
By peter booth on Jul 20, 2008
I'm in Australia and read with interest. in Australia, there is only one 100% recycled paper that is FSC certified. Therefore, the whole FSC push in this country mainly sees jobs printed on Virgin Fibre! this is not a good result for the environment!
the very best in low impact printing should be centred around 100% post consumer recycled paper, using a waterless printer, who is powered by 100% renewable energy, is carbon neutral and has 'whole of life cylcle' certification. - quite simple really - just do it!
(i do like the chain of custody part of FSC though, it helps to cut out stock switching).
By Bob Johnson on Jul 21, 2008
Richard,
Excellent comments from your "Green Thoughts" article. We can all do a much better job from a personal and corporate citizen level. For instance it can be as simple as recycling, smart use of energy, to using new technologies from companies such as Green Earth Technology. This new company offers a wide variety of earth friendly products that companies and individuals can use.
Our little steps can become huge leaps if everyone gets involved.
Bob Johnson
By Bruce Flournoy on Jul 24, 2008
To Peter Booth:
You seem to be well informed about low impact production. Have you ever seen any info about the environmental impact of recycling fiber for printing paper (where it has to be de-inked and somehow bleached) vs. recycling it for packaging (brown boxes, bags, etc.) where the d-inking & bleaching processes are not required? it seems to me that the recycling process for printing papers might not be all that benign...
By peter booth on Jul 24, 2008
Reply to Bruce,
Thanks for your comments. I am aware that some recycled papers are somewhat harmful to the environment, due to the de inking and re bleaching. You could hold up a paper we buy over here (produced in the USA) called Mohawk pc Options against much cheaper Asian (or any others) recycled papers and i'm sure the environmental impact could be very different between the two. The same could be said for papers produced with virgin fibres, by different mills and processes. All this is an age old argument, but i think if you put the best method of producing virgin fibre paper up against the best method of producing recycled, then the recycled should win hands down?
On top of that, I think one needs to bear in mind that with recycled, you are not ripping a carbon sink out of the ground and you are also reducing methane emissions, by saving paper going into landfill? I would love to see a totally independantly produced report of the inputs for producing one ton of each (virgin v recycled). It has possibly been done at some stage somewhere in the world you would imagine? Paper companies that offer both products would have a good idea, but how independant are they? they may sway the outcome to favour the product that returns the better margin?
The answer may even be a 50/50 - virgin / recycled mix?
Anyone know of any good reports?
By Heidi Tolliver-Nigro on Jul 25, 2008
One of the critical points from this post that I think that is being overlooked is that, if 60% of US adults who make online purchases say that it is "very or extremely important to them that a company is environmentally conscious," this means that at least green is on the radar screen. Sometimes, that's half the battle. At least they're paying attention, even if it's with half an eyeball.
The other issue is that, whether people actually purchase green products or not (or whether it just makes them feel good to give environmentally friendly answers), it means that green marketing pitches work. Even if these statistics mean only that marketers will start "greening" themselves and their products to make them more appealing to consumers, that's still a good thing.
Discussion
Only verified members can comment.