Think the eco-movement is driven by designers, scientists and builders? Environmental marketing consultant Jacquelyn Ottoman begs to differ, offering that it's a role surprisingly reserved for marketing professionals. She really contends that it's a group effort, but one in which marketers can essentially make or break a product or idea.
For example, eco-friendly products and practices have been around for decades (well, forever really- but let's go with the 20th century posing the most threat to the environment, thus the resulting protestors). Up until the last 10 years or so, the "movement" was reserved for hippies and tree huggers - ‘granola' being the most over-used adjective to come to mind.
Because the hard-core greens are already on board, the mainstream is the target audience, so call in the marketing pros to reel them in, and use celebrities to help do it.
While it certainly has a generational barrier to overcome (my dad knows nothing about global warming except that it's not our fault), the green movement is becoming chic, stylish and frankly a cool bandwagon to jump on (hopefully moving from bandwagon to common lifestyle as more and more aspects gain popularity and affordability).
Jacquelyn points out a great example of trying to reach adults who might be set in their ways. What if, instead of having toothbrushes and toothpaste in tubes and cardboard boxes that all need to be replaced every couple of months, as well as all the resources required (like water) to produce them, we moved towards a more efficient, teeth-cleaning system that involves "edible chewing gum laced with germ-fighting enzymes." Brilliant- but are the aforementioned adults going to buy into that potentially "ick"-inducing premise after years of brushing and pasting? She suggests targeting the kids by enlisting the help of a "Sesame Street" character to help parents teach children how to care for their teeth. Interesting, no? This brings a whole slew of manipulative thoughts to mind. Marketing and advertising professionals have gotten a bad wrap - now is a chance for them to use their power for good. And it seems to be working.
Celebrity input holds a great deal of weight as well. Aside from the occasional enthusiastic activist (thanks Leonardo, among others), celebrity endorsed products and style choices can really start a trend (but leave it to marketing to grab the celebrity). I caught a clip of Zem Joaquin of Ecofabulous on Kimora: Life in the Fast Lane and undeterred by Kimora's bravado and celebrity, Zem presented her with the facts on just how destructive her extravagant lifestyle is to the environment. Admittedly, I have no idea the impact on Kimora's eco-choices, but the fact that the two stylish divas were together is a good sign.
The point here is really to motivate non-professionals in the sustainable world to think even bigger than "outside the box" - the box has been recycled and it's time for a new format with more and better bells and whistles - codeword change. And the audience is listening - finally.
Julie,
Please don't take this personally.
"eco-friendly products and practices"? Shouldn't that read "eco-friendly products and the purchase of them"? I believe the marketing industry needs to get to grips with some basic assumptions.
Primarily; Consumerism is the problem.
I'd be more willing to to accept the premise of this article if I knew of an example of a marketing professional that makes a living promoting something that doesn't involve consumerism. Sure, Ecover is better than Tide. But the local soap maker here in Sheffield has a tiny marketing budget if any, she runs it herself. Her soap works just fine. Why do I need an international corporation with a huge marketing budget transporting it's product all over the planet?
The very nature of the marketing industry is antithetical to the changes that need to be made.
You might say, "what about things like renewable energy technology?, Can you get that down the street from a local shop? Renewable energy technology will need to be sold, instead of fossil fueled alternatives." Or would it? I would prefer it be mandated and given to citizens at the expense of the taxpayer. It would be cheaper than oil wars and corporate welfare bailouts.
Perhaps the transition to RE and the need for it does need to be marketed. Or does it? I believe learning to generate ones own energy is a self sufficiency skill. Self sufficiency skills need to be taught, not marketed.
Another example; organic fruits,grains and vegetables will need to be sold, instead of meat and dairy products. Or would they? If the livestock industry and industrial agribusiness were required to pay for the damage they cause to the environment the cost of their products would quickly sort that out, no marketing necessary. Growing ones own food at whatever scale and the need for it is another skill people need be taught.
But in the short term these technologies and concepts will be sold. Will they be sold in a way that emphasizes reductions in consumption? PhotoVoltaic panels are a perfect case in point. If someone is truly serious about reducing their carbon footprint they would go off grid with a small system that requires that they drastically reduce consumption of power which has knock-on reductions in the cessation of the use and purchase of needless consumer electronics and other electrical devices. Smaller systems that are self installed cost far less, require less or no debt, and have quick payback. When was the last time you saw an advertisement for that type of system? Instead, we see grid tied systems marketed that require far more PV panels be installed to achieve a reduction in the power bill and require no reduction in demand. Huge debt, long payback, big profits for corporate finance and bigger sales for the installation company. This is part and parcel of the consume more approach. Any of these installers could help you go off grid if you ask for it. Will you? Probably not because the industry is geared up for business as usual solutions.
Similarly, the green marketing industry is geared up to sell you more more more. What we need is less, less, less.
Architects touting their latest eco, or is it ego, designs while ignoring the majority of housing stock that need true eco renovation. Carmakers touting their latest hybrids while still manufacturing gas guzzling SUV's. Even Supermarkets touting organic produce, oops it's from South Africa. Biofuels, Clean Coal, Clean Green Nuclear Power, all ideas marketed as green. Buy this instead of that, never do you hear, don't buy at all.
More green stuff is still just more stuff.
Julie, perhaps you know of a marketing campaign that isn't about selling this or that, I'd be interested to hear about it.
Written in October 2008