It's April. The flowers are bursting with color, trees are coming back to life, people are smiling, walking a bit more jauntily; hope abounds. It can mean only one thing: Baseball season has begun. That, and the latest crop of pre-Earth Day surveys has invaded my in-box.
The news this year is not encouraging. The Great Recession has taken its toll, as has the "controversy" created by climate deniers -- those advocating that climate change either isn't real, or that it isn't caused by human activity, or if it is, the "fix" is too costly, especially during tough times. Interest in and commitment to environmental problems and solutions has dropped among Americans. With the exception of committed environmentalists -- a relative sliver of the populace -- the mood has switched from "What can I do to be helpful?" to "What's in it for me?"
Suffice to say, that self-centeredness makes it a tad tough to save the commons.
Herewith is the 2010 edition of what has become a (mostly annual) tradition: My assessment of what market researchers, academics, and others are finding out about Americans' desire to shop -- and live and vote -- with the environment in mind. (See previous installments here, here, and here.)
Spoiler alert: It's not a pretty picture.
"Americans are today no more environmentally friendly in their actions than they were at the turn of the century," begin the findings of a new poll from Gallup. And even the things Americans are claiming to do seem suspect. Example: A whopping 90 percent of Americans in 2010 say they are more likely to recycle household waste than any of the other environmentally friendly actions Gallup tests, the same percentage as in 2000. Frankly, I'm more than a little skeptical that nine out of ten Americans "voluntarily recycled newspapers, glass, aluminum, motor oil, or other items" in the past year, but that's what they're telling Gallup. On the other hand, if putting the plastic bottle in the right slot in a recycling bin from time to time qualifies someone to answer "yes," perhaps Gallup's finding is technically true. But talk about greenwash!
Similarly, Americans also say they're no more likely now than in the past "to engage in activist behavior to promote environmentally friendly actions by organizations, politicians, or companies," says Gallup. "Far less than half report engaging in any such actions, and again, those numbers have hardly changed over the past decade."
So, too, with those who say they have "voted for/worked for candidates because of their position on environmental issues" (28 percent in 2010); "been active in a group or organization that works to protect the environment (17 percent); or "contacted a public official about an environmental issue" (17 percent). The only appreciable change came in the number of Americans who "contacted a business to complain about its products because they harm the environment" -- they declined 39 percent since 2000.
Gallup also found that, over the past two years, Americans have "become less worried about the threat of global warming, less convinced that its effects are already happening, and more likely to believe that scientists themselves are uncertain about its occurrence." Said Gallup:
The percentage of Americans who now say reports of global warming are generally exaggerated is by a significant margin the highest such reading in the 13-year history of asking the question. In 1997, 31 percent said global warming's effects had been exaggerated; last year, 41 percent said the same, and this year the number is 48 percent.
All of which syncs with yet another Gallup finding: that Americans grew more content over the past year with the overall quality of the environment in the country. Their "excellent" or "good" ratings now total 46 percent, up from 39 percent a year earlier. Reports Gallup:
There has been a 25-point drop since 1989 in the percentage worried a great deal about air pollution, and an equal drop in worry about contamination of soil and water by toxic waste. The decline in worry over time has been rather dramatic for some of these threats. For example, in 1989, 72 percent of Americans said they worried a great deal about pollution of rivers, lakes, and reservoirs. Worry about this environmental issue averaged 62 percent in the 1990s, 54 percent in the 2000s, and is 46 percent today.
Those findings concur with the latest findings by the Green Confidence Index, the monthly tracking service published by GreenBiz.com. In March, it found American consumers pulling back from their earlier optimism on environmental issues, reversing a four-month trend. "The leveling off of unemployment has not translated into increased green confidence,” according to Chief Research Officer Amy Hebard of Earthsense, whose company creates the Index.
What about today's youth -- specifically, the Millennials, a.k.a. Generation Y, the 80 million or so Americans born during the last two decades of the 20th century? They've been dubbed the green generation, having come of age in an era of recycling, energy conservation, Al Gore, and Kermit the Frog. But according to the latest Eco Pulse survey, produced by the Shelton Group, "Millennials are only just starting to put their money where their mouths are," writes Shelton's Karen Barnes. She adds:
Across the board, Millennials are more likely to be talking about energy and water conservation, preservatives and chemicals in food, global warming and VOCs, but those conversations aren't producing change -- yet. Millennials are 23 percent less likely to have changed behaviors or made green purchases than the overall population.
So much for the power of youth.



















































































































Following corporate examples
Excellent post, and no surprise to many of us in the sector.
Corporate sustainability programs show the same pattern - companies focus on activities that reduce costs and risks, generate revenue, appeal to consumers, etc. This is just good business practice and what they'd do anyway. The media champions these efforts, so consumers simply follow suit and engage in self-beneficial behaviors that happen to be 'green.' Companies need to set a higher bar and engage themselves and consumers past self-interest, and be willing to invest, because some 'green' practices and products DO cost more (de to lack of subsidies, smaller markets, etc).
A growing trend...
I think the whole concept of "green" has just gotten watered down by a combination of factors such as:
1. The casting of anyone who questions the inputs and conclusions of scientific data as a "denier." More and more people are waking up to the reality that the planet has been here for billions of years and has gone through these cycles over and over again. Science is specifically about debate. Data wants to be free. Suppressing it and squelching debate turns people off. I've seen this first hand.
2. The results aren't there. If all this green technology is meant to keep the earth from warming, and it's still warming, then what's the point? It's all a bunch of hot air and opportunists trying to make money for themselves.
3. One word: "Organic." Want to talk science for a minute? Organic means "contains carbon." That's it. Period. It's oxymoronic to want to fight carbon, yet embracing carbon. I guarantee you that 60-70% of people wouldn't be able to tell an "organic" tomato from a "pesticide-laden corporate farm in Chile" tomato. In fact, I'd go you one better. I bet if you took fraken-tomato and told someone it was "organic" or "locally grown" they'd say it tasted better.
I'm all for recylcing and conservation. It's easy and cuts down on waste. Everything else is a bunch of marketing BS.
It's always been about getting personal.
Joel, you inspired us to write a blog post on this topic. But I am afraid I'm sounding like a broken record. If green is going to have any real impact, you got to make it about "me". Bring your message down to earth. Make it personal. I don’t eat organic pizza to save the planet. I eat it because it tastes better. I don’t wear eco anything because of a melting iceberg. I wear it because it feels better and I look great in it. When you said, "With the exception of committed environmentalists — a relative sliver of the populace — the mood has switched from 'What can I do to be helpful?' to 'What’s in it for me?'" we always believed it was the latter that really moved the needle toward green from as far back as saving the ozone layer. Making ozone personal is what did the job. To read our take on all of this, check out our post "Get Personal" on www.greenmarketingblog.com.
Thanks for all your great work.
Carolyn Parrs
www.mindovermarkets.com
www.greenmarketingblog.com
Culture change takes time
We've got a long way to go, no doubt. But, the results aren't really that surprising. I've studied these same attitude tracking surveys since their emergence (most emerged in the early 2000's), and it's all part of an evolution in our cultural norms.
We're past the green for the sake of green. Now we have to do the hard work of making it relevant to each person on an individual basis. A much harder task, because it requires us all absorbing the macro issues and translating them into micro causes.
Why should it surprise us that most 'LOHAS' and what I'd call a LOH who really don't care about distant sustainability issues? My husband has come a LONG way, but he's a "car guy" and won't be in a hybrid until there are more models available. He won't be an early adopter because the only current model that he likes is the Tesla.
Your comment nailed it - Green does have to = BETTER. Better design AND better marketing at a competitive price. To really be successful, you need to excel on all fronts.
Valerie Casey's Designers Accord and other work on green design is crucial because designing a better mouse trap requires that we have our minds wrapped around ALL of the issues. Including the widespread array of individual consumer / audience perceptions, priorities and preferences.
So, I'm not surprised. But it does remind us that we have a long way to go in our cultural evolution.
http://www.twitter.com/brookebf
Progress was ignored
Joel, I don't think you need be quite so pessimistic. A consistent feature in every one of those polls was their neglect of the progress that's been made and it's impact on the public mindset. These are just perceptions, I know, but in the cases of air and water quality, for example, publicity about cleanups has been thorough and persistent. Since Obama and Chu, I believe we have a right to feel much more optimistic about progress, and therefore a little less concerned that the problems are being addressed.
Yes we are all self-centered since the G. R. but that will eventually pass. In sectors such as building standards and even urban planning, the logic and the marketing incentive have taken over, and now have their own momentum. The initiative Wal-mart is taking is already having worldwide impact. We are simply watching the onset of "the new normal".