Green Washing

Table of Contents
Introduction - - - - - - - 4
Background - - - - - - - 6
Abstract - - - - - - - - 12
Secondary Research - - - 15
Primary Reserach - - - 21
Conclusion - - - - - - - 32
Works Cited - - - - - - 34

INTRODUCTION
The topic of this research paper was a
result of the budding eco-design movement,
dialogue of ‘green washing’ in marketing, and
what exactly is the right thing for consumers
to buy. It was a challenge to investigate the
buying behavior of an average consumer.
The original question that was to
be answered was, ““How much does green
branding effect purchases by consumers?”
This question was originally too broad
to research and come to a conclusion. The
topic was remodeled to allow for concrete
observations to be made in order to discover
a solid answer.. “Are green branding strategies
effective in shifting consumer perceptions
and/or buying habits?”
The purposed of conducting this
reserach is to investigate and understand
this question. Through research of consumer
buying trends, contextual inquiries and on-site
observations. A lot of what was discovered
showed insight to people’s true motivations
for buying products. At the same time
knowledge of price point and the importance
of the environment in the minds of the general
public. All in all what consumers purchase has
many determining factors including trends,
convenience, attractiveness and price. All of
whcih are addressed in this paper.
5

BACKGROUND
The attributes of a product being
considered green is an definition that is
very gray. There are many interpretations
and associations of what truly counts as
a green product. In an explanation of the
productitselfbeinggreen,oneconsidersthe
manufacturing process, biodegradability,
and its impact to the environment upon
use and disposal and packaging. The
manufacturing process includes observing
what materials are used, how far away
the materials are located and how far
they had to travel, and how efficient the
manufacturing is. A green product would
use local materials and or biodegradable
materials based off the product itself. The
further each material travels, adds to its
overall life cycle analysis and contributes to
its carbon footprint. The use of the product
also must not emit anything harmful into
the environment or hurt the environment in
any way. Also, a product is not considered
green if the product manufactured only
to be used for a short period of time and
then disposed of. It must be able to return
pack to the earth or recycled in order to
prevent it ending up in a landfill. This also
applies to the packaging of the product.
If a product is over packaged with a lot
of excess material that is thrown directly
7

BACKGROUND
into the garbage, this ends up hurting the
environment because of its wastefulness
of resources. Also a green product might
just be colored green to show freshness or
a specific sent or actual color. A lot of the
package design that was uncovered during
the research had a common look.
Note that these are restrictions for
a product to be completely green. This
however, is almost never the case when
looking most of the products that are
consideredgreeninthemarket.Consumers,
researchers and environmentalists
understand that all products cannot be
one hundred percent green. It is close to
impossible, but as long as it is not completely
unaware of its impact to the environment,
then it is a step in the right direction.
Another aspect of a green product is if
the company or corporation itself practices
eco-friendliness and sustainability.
There are many firms around the
worldthatmayconsidertheirproductstobe
green because of their longevity, quality, or
biodegradability, but if the infrastructure of
the business is unsustainable and hurtful to
the environment then all that is considered
void. As stated in the green product
overview, a company’s manufacturing
process is important to the greenness of
their products. There is a growing number
of large corporations in America that
have recently made movement towards a
greener business model. Recently Bank of
America implemented a internal recycling
program that saves the equivalent of more
than 200,000 trees a year, it also offers
employees who buy hybrid cars a $3,000
cash-back incentive. DuPont recently hired
aformerheadofGreenpeaceasaconsultant
who aided in reducing emissions of both
greenhouse gases and airborne carcinogens
in their manufacturing process. General
Electric and its Ecomagination product
line, such as solar panels, had sales topping
$12 billion in 2006, and has finally began
cleanup of its PCB dump in the Hudson
River. Coffee giant, Starbucks, has released
information on its “bean-to-cup” approach
that creates eco-accountability at every
stage of its supply chain, with recycled-
paper sleeves alone saving the equivalent of
78,000 trees in 2006. The organic foods
giant Whole Foods was the first major U.S.
corporation to purchase enough wind-
energy credits to offset 100 percent of its
electricityuse.Theformerbaneofthegreen
movement, Wal-Mart, now has one of the
most ambitious environmental plans of any
U.S. company, a proposal to power every
store with 100 percent renewable energy.
(portfolio) Other notable corporations are
8

BACKGROUND
Hewlet-Packard, Dell, Johnson and Johnson,
Intel, and IBM. (newsweek) Most of these
corporations will be discussed more in
depth in the secondary research section of
the report.
One final aspect of the green
consumer goods movement is its deviation
from organic products. The difference is
simple, organic defines the way the product
is grown and processed while green refers
only to the impact of something to the
planet. The USDA has specific standards
that a product must meet in order to be
classified as “organic”. The USDA has also
set up levels of organic that determines the
way an item is labeled. Recycling, using
recycled products, conserving energy,
and conserving water are all ways to
practice a green lifestyle. None of those are
necessarily “organic”. So while using organic
products is considered a “green” thing to do;
using green products doesn’t automatically
mean that you are using organic products.
(associatedcontent)
On top of all aspects of green
products discussed, the marketing and
advertising of these products has recently
come under fire with the emergence
of ‘green washing’. Green washing is
essentially when a company who is not
necessarily providing a green product or
practicing renewability advertises itself
as such. An example of this is a company
that designs its packaging with green
grass, sunny weather, and other symbols
associated with the planet, when in reality
their practices are hurting the environment.
In the year 2000, BP, the second largest oil
companies in the world spent $200 million
on rebranding their company changing
their logo to a green and yellow sunburst
design. BP also financed a large advertising
campaign giving BP a greener appearance
to the public, which overpowered the
voice of activists. BP even changed
their slogan to “Beyond Petroleum” to
further their greenwashing campaign.
(Thegreenlifeonline) The company though
made little strides towards lessening their
environmental impact.
9

BACKGROUND
The Federal Trade Commission has
guidelines on how companies may create
advertisements, campaigns, and write copy
in regards to the environment. It also states
the right to prosecute false and misleading
advertisement claims. The problem with
these guidelines is that they were not
created to be used as an enforceable
guideline but instead were intended to be
followed voluntarily. (greencleancertified)
10

ABSTRACT
The transition of our research
question from “How much does green
brandingeffectpurchasesbyconsumers?”
to “Are green branding strategies effective
in shifting consumer perceptions and/
or buying habits?” came naturally to
the groups after having done thorough
researchconcerninggreenadvertisement.
This new environmentalism of reducing
material usage, improving workers
welfare, as well as companies procedures
helps increase profit by becoming more
efficient creating new market and often
attracting new investors.
Nowadays, consumers’ concern
and awareness on the environment’s
dreadful conditions has encouraged
changes on the public and individual
behavior. This has led most companies
to use greenwashing in order to mislead
consumers and generate their sales. When
going green a company is conscious
that by adding this broad, but of high
importance word, “Green”, will allow
them to change consumer’s behavior
towards the “environmentally sustainable”
products they are promoting.
“Greenwashing” is the act of misleading
the public regarding the environmental
practices of a company or the
environmental benefits of a product,
service,orbusinessline. Duetothepublic’s
increased awareness of environmental
issues, including global warming,
deforestation, and the loss of endangered
species, greenwashing has become a staple
of corporations marketing efforts [1].
However, the “green” movement of
US companies has a certain twist to it. The
firms that spend the most money on public
relation trying to show that they are
making a difference in the environment
are those who pollute the most.
The paradox is that the majority of
these companies are aware of the damage
they are causing and decide to give
generous donations to environmental
non-profit organization in order to look
13

ABSTRACT
good in the eyes of the public. In early
2005 GE announced its $90 million
“Ecomagination” advertising campaign.
According to the company’s CEO,
“Ecomagination is GE’s commitment to
address challenges such as the need for
cleaner, more efficient sources of energy,
reduced emissions and abundant sources
of clean water.” The company said that
revenue from 70 Ecomagination products
and services would be $17 billion in 2008.
Since its inception, Ecomagination has
provided GE with countless opportunities
to reflect its corporate concern over the
environment. Arguably the whole effort
is greenwashing [1]. It’s ironic how these
companies are willing to spend millions
of dollars on ad campaigns trying to fool
the public into believing they are well
intentioned and making a change when
they can spend it on actual investments
that would result in concrete outcomes.
“Money is the language of
business. Translating environmental and
social issues into financial terms is a
vital element in motivating business to
take action.” said Jan-olaf wilum, senior
vice president of Storebrand, Norway.
It is only in recent years that more
businesses are buying environmentally
friendly technology as company’s start
adopting what is known as the “triple
bottom line” (TBL) measuring not only
how the company is doing financially, but
also regularly reporting the company’s
impact on the environment and society.
Looking carefully at the long term
profits, brand value, and sustainability of
some of the largest corporations in the
world, environmentally proactive such
as Prius, Tasla, Poland spring, Fiji, Edison
and compact fluorescent, will show the
links between non financial and financial
incentives (business ethics and company
reputation) and the strategies implemented.
This new environmentalism of reducing
material wastage and operating costs, as
well as improving workers welfare and
companies procedures, helps companies
increase their profits by becoming more
efficient, creating new markets and often
attracting new investors.
After pitching our approach to the
class as well as the professor, most of our
questions were related to information
that the companies were unwilling to
share, which led us to develop threw
constructive feedback, a new research
topic. “Are green branding strategies
effective in shifting consumer perceptions
and/or buying habits?” This new topic
research will lead us to understand
the psychology behind the different
motivation and influences that generate
the consumer’s behavioral change. More
importantly, our new research topic
examines the symbolic and conceptual
purposes a good or service creates in
addition to its basic function. Threw a
contextual inquiry process we will be able
to identify the social and psychological
impact on both mainstream and pro-
environmental consumer behavior.
14

SECONDAYRESEARCH
“Today it suffices to just slap some
green paint on a product to call it green
”Bernard Caron, director of marketing
for the Belgian company Ecover, told AFP.
Often companies make environmental
claims without providing any publicly
available proof, which makes navigating
the growing assortment of “green” options
tricky, said Scott Case, vice president of
Terra Choice. It is obvious that by adding
“green” claims and eco-labels to your
marketing strategy you may enhance
your brand image and secure your
market share among the growing number
of environmentally concerned consumers.
But experts say every single purchase
has hidden environmental costs, whether
it be in the ingredients, manufacturing,
or disposal of the product. Moreover,
around the world, there are few legal
requirements companies must adhere to
when marketing products as green or
sustainable.Asincreasinglyeco-conscious
consumers are faced with more and more
choices, experts warn that marketing
strategiesdubbed“greenwashing”couldbe
leading them astray. “I can give you a ton
of words that mean absolutely, positively
nothing, The word natural. The word
earth-friendly. It means nothing since it’s
not legally defined. Biodegradable, except
in California, doesn’t actually carry any
weight of law” said Daniel Velez, owner
of Greater Goods.
Some time in the last year,
environmentalism became the new
plastics, and--bam--the corporate world is
on a stunning green tear. But what’s a fad
and what’s real?
According to the US chamber
of commerce the momentum for the
recent green movement came from the
theory that human-generated release of
carbon dioxide into the atmosphere was
contributing to a warming of the planet.
Theseconcernscausedsomegovernments,
16

SECONDAYRESEARCH
businesses, and individuals to reexamine
their own roles in the release of carbon
dioxide and to attempt to reduce their
output. However, these groups seem to
have shifted from the notion of human-
generated release of carbon dioxide to
the mantra “reduce, reuse, recycle”, which
examines efforts to conserve our natural
resources, reduce our contributions to
landfills, and reduce pollution generally.
On one hand, companies that have the
capital to invest in advertisements to
change their brand image and gain market
share have done just that by “riding the
green wave”, on the other hand small
business have been slow to embrace the
green movement for one specific reason:
its expensive with little benefits in the
short run other than the satisfaction of
feeling that you were doing your part to
help. That psychic satisfaction has value,
of course, but rarely did it outweigh
the significant costs typically associated
with going green. What is shocking, is
that saving our planet has turned into
a “good feeling of oneself” instead of a
necessity. Nonetheless there is still hope
out there, for example in 2008 The New
York Times ran a story about a guy who
installed two small wind turbines on his
roof to supply some of his power needs.
The turbines costs $10,000 each, and the
owner admitted that he wouldn’t recoup
his costs for many years, if ever, but
that he didn’t care. Few small business
owners are willing to spend significant
sums of money without any prospect of
recovering the costs.
In addition, you could argue
that using the term “going green” to
describe these initiatives has served as
an impediment to their adoption because
17

SECONDAYRESEARCH
of the political antagonisms that have
existed between environmentalists and
the business community. It is, in a sense,
a public relations problem. Perhaps the
business community would have been
more likely to adopt green technologies
had the movement been known as
“becoming more energy-efficient” rather
than “going green.”
On the brighter side of things,
the times, as they say, are a-changing.
With the initiatives governments have
taken in the Copenhagen summit things
seem to be headed the right direction.
Moreover, as environmental concerns
have increased and as the costs of green
technologies have come down, more and
more businesses owners--both large
and small--have begun adopting green
technologies. All the signs point to those
numbers continuing to go up in the
coming years. [3]
It might come as shocking to say that
companies such as Wal-Mart, Coca-Cola,
and Chevron are leading the way in this
resurgence of being environmentally
friendly but the following examples will
demonstrate the positive changes they’ve
made. It is obvious that a business can save
money by finding ways to spend less while
maintaining sales. By simply changing the
way it managed its enormous truck fleet
Wal-Mart was able to save $26 million per
year and eliminated the carbon dioxide
emissions equivalent to taking 18,300
passenger vehicles off the road. They
simply installed small auxiliary power
units Instead of running a truck’s engine
all night to heat or cool the cab during
mandatory 10-hour rest stops. In addition
Wal-Mart is lowering costs associated
with packaging materials. Wal-Mart now
sells only concentrated liquid laundry
detergents in North America, which has
reduced the size of packaging by up to
50 percent. They are trying to eventually
end up with no packaging waste by
investing in machines called called bailers
that recycle plastics that once would have
been discarded. And finally, another Wal-
Mart example shows how a company can
save money in the long run by buying
from a sustainable managed source.
Because most wild fisheries are managed
unsustainably, prices for Chilean sea bass
and Atlantic tuna have been soaring.
In 2006 Wal-Mart decided to switch,
within five years, all its purchases of
wild-caught seafood to fisheries certified
as sustainable.
Coca-Cola on the other hand, has
different problems in that they are largely
long-term goals. Their main issue is water.
They produce their beverage in over
200 countries that require a reliable local
supply of clean fresh water. But water
supplies are under severe pressure around
the world, with most already allocated
for human use. The little remaining
unallocated fresh water is in remote
areas unsuitable for beverage factories,
like Arctic Russia and northwestern
Australia. It can’t meet its water needs by
using other methods, such as desalinizing
18

SECONDAYRESEARCH
seawater since that requires expensive
energy. Most competing water use
around the world is for agriculture, which
presentssustainabilityproblemsofitsown.
“Hence Coca-Cola’s survival compels it
to be deeply concerned with problems
of water scarcity, energy, climate change
and agriculture. One company goal is to
make its plants water-neutral, returning
to the environment water in quantities
equal to the amount used in beverages
and their production. Another goal is to
work on the conservation of seven of
the world’s river basins, including the Rio
Grande, Yangtze, Mekong and Danube --
all of them sites of major environmental
concerns besides supplying water for
Coca-Cola.
These long-term goals are in
addition to Coca-Cola’s short-term
cost-saving environmental practices,
like recycling plastic bottles, replacing
petroleum-based plastic in bottles with
organic material, reducing energy
consumption and increasing sales volume
while decreasing water use” [4].
Chevron’s reason for being more
sustainable and environmentally friendly
is purely business oriented. They have a
lot to gain from adapting environmentally
friendly business practices, which is
evidence that if the real incentive, money,
is achievable company will keep the
planet healthy.
When asked how a publicly traded
company could justify to its shareholders
its expenditures on the environment,
Chevron employees and executives gave
five reasons.
“First, oil spills can be horribly
expensive: it is far cheaper to prevent
them than to clean them up. Second,
clean practices reduce the risk that New
Guinean landowners become angry, sue
for damages and close the fields. (The
company has been sued for problems in
Ecuador that Chevron inherited when
it merged with Texaco in 2001.) Next,
environmental standards are becoming
stricter around the world, so building
clean facilities now minimizes having to
do expensive retrofitting later.
Also, clean operations in one
country give a company an advantage
in bidding on leases in other countries.
Finally, environmental practices of which
employees are proud improve morale, help
with recruitment and increase the length
of time employees are likely to remain at
the company” [4].
Despite the fact that the government
could offer tax incentives, pass a cap-
and-trade legislation, and enforce tougher
standards on green advertising as well
as ensure that companies with cheap,
19

SECONDAYRESEARCH
dirty standards don’t have a competitive
advantage over those businesses
protecting the environment, American
businesses are going to play as much
or more of a role in our progress as the
government. And this isn’t a bad thing, as
corporations know they have a lot to gain
by establishing environmentally friendly
business practices.
20

PRIMARYRESEARCH
After conducting secondary
research, our main focus was to construct
a survey, a “set of questions that create
a structured way of asking a large
group of people to describe themselves,
their interests, and their preferences”.
Each question was intentionally based
on a rigorous and systematic design
and execution in order to generate the
Reponses we were aiming for. They
were built through a thorough planning,
a well-considered development, and an
effective piloting.
Once the overall goals for the
survey were enumerated and analyzed
based on previous primary and
secondary research, we have written
a good number of questions that were
divided into characteristics categories,
behavioral categories and attitudinal
categories. Each question contained
one of the concepts we were trying
to investigate. Moreover, the questions
order were done as if it was a dialogue
that’s electively revealed information on
the person answering the question. In
some way this survey is like a story of a
consumer’s journey.
The essential concepts we focused
on while constructing the survey were
the two most influential characteristics of
a consumer behavior culture, which refers
to a set of basic value perception, wants
and behaviors learned by a member of
society from family or other institution;
and the social class of each individual,
measured by occupation, income and
education.
Money is one of the most crucial
and critical characteristics that affect
the consumer’s buyer behavior in the
sustainable market. Often his underlying
motive is different from his stated motive.
The price of an object influences the
consumer mind to actually purchase the
good. Moreover the economic situation
22

PRIMARYRESEARCH
of a consumer affects his lifestyle and
limits his spending and choice.
The way an individual perceives
an external stimulus will influence his/her
reactions. Advertisers use this sensibility
when branding a product. Their most
effective tool is the use of eye-catching
colors. Color can influence our emotions,
our actions and how we respond to
various people, things and ideas. Much
has been studied and written about color
and its impact on our daily lives. In our
case it is the very well known green color.
It symbolizes life, nature, environment,
youth, money, renewal, hope, and power.
It is a color that soothes people, reduces
pain, and makes us feel safe. Associated
with ecological values and with the
environment, green is the color of healing.
In advertizing, color is the most important
element, its use is more important than the
actual wording of the ad. The reason for
this is that colors (and graphics) capture the
consumer’s attention that causes them to
read the ad. Nowadays, people associate
the color green with the “green movement”.
Therefore, a company relies on the role of
emotionsthatwillinfluencetheconsumer’s
behavior to stimulate potential customers
to make a purchase and increase their
awareness in the marketplace. The color
green on packages creates a feeling of
consciousness and well being.
The ordering and information
provided by the questions of the final
exemplary of the survey shown below
were all thought through very carefully.
Each part give out additional and crucial
insight of a consumer’s behavior.
23

PRIMARYRESEARCH
Peter Lesser
Age: 26
Hometown: Concord, MA
Occupation: Free lance designer
Currently lives in: LES
Opinion on green products: Price is the most important
element of his purchase.
Nancy Brown
Age: 23
Hometown: Springfield, IL
Occupation: Sales person
Currently lives in: Williamsburg
Opinion on green products:
Really worried about the over consumption by today’s
youth but is a shopaholic herself.
24

PRIMARYRESEARCH
George Costanza
Age: 41
Hometown: Washington, DC
Occupation: Engineer
Currently lives in: Albany
Opinion on green products: Pretends to be fascinated
by green products but isn’t really. Also is forced to be
vegetarian by his wife
Cristi Gerlach
Age: 24
Hometown: Augusta, ME
Occupation: Writer
Currently lives in: NJ
Opinion on green products: Believes she is a true
environmentalist, and does everything she can to help
make our planet a healthier place. Vegan
25

PRIMARYRESEARCH

“Goinggreen”,isasocialmovement
concerning the improvements of the
state of the environment. The ecological
concept and ideas behind that movement
were adopted almost everywhere.
Most importantly, it generated changes
on the society’s individual behavior by
promoting sustainable management of
resources and the protection of the
natural environment.
By taking into consideration
that even us as consumers, have shifted
our behavior towards sustainable
product with completely different
motive behind our purchases, noting
that we don’t consider ourselves being
environmentalist. We were curious
to find out the reasons behind the
consumer’s purchases of sustainable
or non eco-friendly goods. Therefore,
we pursued our eagerness to find out
more on that subject by having a long
discussion on the consumer’s behavior,
and getting secondary research. We then
decided to take matters into our own
hands and ask through small and quick
surveys with a range of 1 to 5 questions,
the thoughts that runs into his/her mind
before purchasing any good and the
things that influenced his/her decisions.
This pre-research survey allowed us to
narrow down the things that cause the
consumesr to choose many of his/her
goods, into the three most influential
effects: income, lifestyle and branding.

After interpreting the result of the
first survey and integrating it into chart to
a better visualization of what is actually
happening, we were then able to see how
many consumers purchased sustainable
goods and what are the different motives
behind it.
Those responses helped us
determine the concepts that we were
going to investigate with more research
and when constructing the final survey.

26

PRIMARYRESEARCH
The first part of the survey shows all the
“characteristic category” of a consumer,
whichincludesthedemographicquestions:
Name, age, Sex, Email, Address, income?
. Such personal information allowed us
to show the accuracy of our data but
most importantly it helped us place each
person in a specific demographic profile.
The demographic profile provides enough
information about a typical member of
this group to create a mental picture of
his hypothetical aggregate and lifestyle.
The next four questions of the survey,
how would you define “Green”? Which
product would you consider green?
Why? On a scale from 1 to 5, rank each
product on how green they are? Are
considered under a knowledge category
through which we are able to measure
the expertise, and skills acquired by
the consumer through experience or
education; and his understanding and
awareness on this subject. The last
questions of the survey, which would
you choose If money was not an issue?
Why? Which product is your eye
drawn to first? Why? How would
you define going green? Combine the
concepts we are trying to investigate.
Referring to the attitudinal category
of the survey, this section will allow us
to conduct and interpret carefully our
data, which Reveals the characteristics
of the consumers behavior when faced
satisfaction, preferences, desires of a
consumer, in addition to the limits and
influence that the consumer encounters.
Name ____________ Age: under21 21-24 25-40 41-54 55+
Sex: MALE FEMALE City, State: __________________________
Occupation: ________________Email: _____________________
Income: under$15,000 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$44,999
How would you define “Green”?
$45,000-$74,999 $75.000-$99,999 $100,000+
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Green Washing Study
DESIGN RESEARCH METHODS
Which products would you consider “green” (Circle One)
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Seventh Generation Simple Green Green Works
Colgate Herbal Tom’s Natural Desert Essence
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Green Works Gain Fresh Awakenings Green Mountain
If you had to buy one of these products without knowing the
price, which one would you choose? (Circle One)
50 fl. oz.
32 loads
45 fl. oz.
30 loads
32 fl. oz.
32 loads
Green Works

Gain Fresh Awakenings

Green Mountain

On a scale from 1 to 5, rank each product on how green they are
 1 2 3 4 5 I Don’t Know
 1 2 3 4 5 I Don’t Know
 1 2 3 4 5 I Don’t Know
Not GrEEN GrEENESt PoSSibLE
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Green Works Gain Fresh Awakenings
Green Mountain
Knowing the price, which one would you choose? (Circle One)
$10.99
$10.69
Which would you choose if money was not an issue? (Circle One)
$11.99
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Which product is your eye drawn to first? (Circle One)
How would you define “Going Green”?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME!
Printed on 100% Recycled Paper
27

PRIMARYRESEARCH
Income: under$15,000 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$44,999
$45,000-$74,999 $75.000-$99,999 $100,000+
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Top 5 Answers
1) environmentally friendly, sustainable
2) a lifestyle promoting the preservation of the earth natural ressources
3) the new trend in production consumption behavior
4) anything that is made to last’
5) eco conscient product
Top 5 Answers
1) color of packaging
2) it says natural
3) there are plants on it
4) herbal comes from the Earth
5) looks clean
Name ____________ Age: under21 21-24 25-40 41-54 55+
Income: under$15,000 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$44,999
$45,000-$74,999 $75.000-$99,999 $100,000+
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Green Washing Study
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
14% 20% 1%
Name ____________ Age: under21 21-24 25-40 41-54 55+
Income: under$15,000 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$44,999
$45,000-$74,999 $75.000-$99,999 $100,000+
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Green Washing Study
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
15% 40% 10%
Name ____________ Age: under21 21-24 25-40 41-54 55+
Income: under$15,000 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$44,999
$45,000-$74,999 $75.000-$99,999 $100,000+
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Green Washing Study
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
THE RESULTS:
28

PRIMARYRESEARCH
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
50 fl. oz.
32 loads
45 fl. oz.
30 loads
32 fl. oz.
32 loads
Green Works


Green Mountain

 1 2 3 4 5 I Don’t Know
 1 2 3 4 5 I Don’t Know
 1 2 3 4 5 I Don’t Know
AVERAGE:
3.5
Don’t Know - 2%
AVERAGE:
3.5
Don’t Know - 2%
AVERAGE:
2.5
Don’t Know - 2%
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
50 fl. oz.
32 loads
45 fl. oz.
30 loads
32 fl. oz.
32 loads
Green Works


Green Mountain

 1 2 3 4 5 I Don’t Know
 1 2 3 4 5 I Don’t Know
 1 2 3 4 5 I Don’t Know
40%
“Looks ecofriendly”
“Packaging”
“Know the Brand”
Name ____________ Age: under21 21-24 25-40 41-54 55+
Income: under$15,000 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$44,999
$45,000-$74,999 $75.000-$99,999 $100,000+
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Green Washing Study
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Colgate Herbal Tom’s Natural Desert Essence30%
“Looks appealing”
“Most Loads”
“Trust the Brand”
30%
“Best Ratio”
“Eco”
“Small Company”
29

PRIMARYRESEARCH
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Green Mountain
$10.99
$10.69
$11.99
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
30%
“Only a few dollars
more, but looks eco-
friendly”
40%
“Most Loads for Money”
30%
“Most affordable”
Income: under$15,000 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$44,999
$45,000-$74,999 $75.000-$99,999 $100,000+
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Green Mountain
$10.99
$10.69
$11.99
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
40%
“Seems to be best for the
environment”
40%
“More for Less”
20%
“All Natural/Organic””
Name ____________ Age: under21 21-24 25-40 41-54 55+
Income: under$15,000 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$44,999
$45,000-$74,999 $75.000-$99,999 $100,000+
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Green Washing Study
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
30

PRIMARYRESEARCH
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
45%
8%
2%
30% 5
Why?
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Top 5 Answers
1) using eco-friendly products and lessening your impact on the plant
2) recycling and concerving energy
3) respecting the environment
4) being sustainable
5) ecologically responsible
31

CONCLUSION
This research has concluded
that green branding strategies have had
an impact on consumers’ perception
since there is a massive supply answer
a demand. Moreover, our fieldwork
showed us that most people are aware of
the green washing but would still choose
the product that sounds or looks more
eco-friendly. This movement’s growth
has been simulated by a widespread
acknowledgment that by simply adding
the word “green” a company’s image
would improve in the eyes of the public
as well as gain market share by reaching
out to consumers who are aware of
the ecological crisis of our planet.
Nonetheless, there are corporation who
are trying to make a sincere difference
in the environment, and some may argue
that they’re doing it for the wrong
reasons (financial incentive) but at least
they found a way to make money and
reduce their effect on the world.
It is understandable that no one,
or maybe a few exceptions would
change the way they function to a more
sustainable one if it’s not a lucrative one.
In order for there to be a dramatic
shift in the way we produce, sell, and
buy our products the government should
play a bigger role by implementing strict
and precise rules for the manufacturers
and advertisers. Furthermore, as
environmental concerns have increased
and as the costs of green technologies
have come down, more and more
businesses owners--both large and small-
-havebegunadoptinggreentechnologies.
All the signs point to those numbers
continuing to go up in the coming years.
33

WORKSCITED
Difference Between Organic
Associated Content
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1008646/what_is_the_difference_between_organic.html
11 Green Companies
Porfolio.com
http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/national-news/portfolio/2008/02/19/11-Green-Companies/
Best Green Companies
Times Online
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/related_reports/best_green_companies/
Green Ranking
Newsweek
http://greenrankings.newsweek.com/
Beware the great ‘greenwashing’ con, experts warn By Erica Berenstein (AFP) Dec 4, 2009
US Chamber Small Business Nation
http://www.uschambersmallbusinessnation.com
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/opinion/
35

THE END
Green Washing
A Study of Consumer
Buying behavior in
conjunction with
‘Green Branding’
Conducted By:
Alex Levin
Omar Naccache
Tina Tchamitchian
Design Research Methods
Parsons School of Design

“Its Not Easy Going Green”
-Kermit The Frog

Green Washing

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie Green Washing

Ähnlich wie Green Washing (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Green Washing