Putting Green in Arm's Reach of the Desire to Consume

There's a big problem that needs to be overcome in the movement to convince people that they need to be "green" and live a more sustainable lifestyle.

After a lot of amazing work over the years by the environmental movement and other community leaders to communicate their concerns about the degradation of our planet, we're seeing that concern amongst the general public is at record levels. And we should be concerned. We're at point now where we need to make a decision to either start living lives that don't take from the earth without giving back or keep on the path we're currently going down and consume the human race into oblivion. The great thing is that a lot of people already want to "go green" and for those motivated enough there are a lot of green options available.

But there remains a big problem.

While many people are highly motivated to live sustainably, a vast number more of us are concerned but find it very difficult to live a sustainable lifestyle. In our busy day-to-day lives practicality often trumps our good intentions. For example, when I rush into a sushi shop 10 minutes before a meeting while chattering away on my cell phone , it's very unlikely that I will wonder whether the tuna sashimi I'm buying is sustainable or not. I just gotta eat and run. And it's not just me, we're all busier than ever. Many of our day-to-day choices come down to convenience rather than the laudable goal of saving the human race.

So what's the solution? I would suggest that one of the answers lies in thinking more like marketers than campaigners for change. In particular, we need to start thinking more like Coca Cola.

I'm sure many of you've heard the Coca-Cola business mantra: "within an arm's reach of desire." The idea is simple, Coke's goal is to make sure that when people feel like a Coke it's easy to find a Coke (disclosure: I'm addicted to Diet Coke). So for the green movement this means two things, one simple and one that is much more difficult.

The first goal is to ensure that "green" products are put within the reach of those who desire to go "green." That's the easy one and we're getting pretty good at it. I can now go into my grocery store and buy green soap powder and baby diapers. But this first goal only gets us so far.

The bigger goal has to be putting "green products" in arm's reach of those with the desire to consume. If we can do that, then we'll start to see the change we need to make to avoid wiping ourselves clean from the planet.

So what does it look like to put green products in front of those looking to consume? That's the tricky part. But in my humble opinion I would suggest that the time has come to start investing a lot MORE thought and time into figuring out how to make going green more convenient and a lot LESS time and energy spent convincing people of the need to go green and live sustainability. The people are already there and those that aren't will be dragged along when they see their peers going green and how easily they're doing it.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about that I came across while I was researching this piece. It's a very simple new iPhone application that uses local search so people can find green companies and services wherever they are.

So next time I'm running late and jonesing for some raw tuna, a quick tappy-tap on the iPhone will show me the closest sustainable sushi shop. Done and done, food and green living all wrapped into one. The challenge now is to make it that easy for everything we do, everyday.

Would be great to hear any other examples you might have. Leave them in the comments and I will compile them into an article here on Huffington Post.

Follow Kevin Grandia on Twitter: www.twitter.com/kgrandia

Comments

[Tom Larsen]

Thank you Kevin. I couldn't agree with you more about green meeting convenience. However, the retail landscape in America is driven by Wall Street stock performance. As long as sustainable options, like your sashimi example, costs more, which, under most current circumstances is the case as with any early market condition (think of iPod prices day 1 vs. now), most retailers are going to opt for the lower cost version. One of the respondents already noted their frustration over higher prices for green products.

An example; my Company makes laptop bags made from fabrics derived from recycled PET bottles. We were eliminated from a National Retailer for the upcoming Back to School season because our retail price, which meets expected consumer pricing for the category, would not achieve the retailers margin requirement at the lower retail price it targeted. We were not included in that consumer price conversation, simply asked for a Program price. As a result, tens of thousands of bottles will not be converted into bags, and all those consumers who would love to buy a green laptop bag that is price level, will not have that opportunity. Instead, more petroleum will be converted to nylon with 7 or 8 times the carbon footprint, and no consumer will be any the wiser.

Retailers have to be willing to stock it. Our communication needs to improve. Consumers only see a small percentage of what's truly available. That's changing at the same rate that consumerism was created. Slowly.

[Rick Green]

I agree, it is important that green choices are as convenient as buying a Coke. However, truly sustainable choices mean that we cannot consume at our current rate. So, if we can't buy/consume what we want, convenience will decline, will it not?

I also have a problem with the current pace of life in North America. I think that because of it, we look to satisfy ourselves with things because we don't have the time to develop the strong social relations that are more meaningful and give us greater satisfaction. This is, ultimately, a losing proposition that manifests itself in widespread dissatisfaction within a population having significant material prosperity.

Living sustainably is going to mean slowing down and making our lives a lot less centered on work. Wasn't that the promise of the post-WWII tech revolution? Either we've been robbed or we lost our direction, substituting the means for the end.

[Manbearpigisreal]

The real problem is that so called "green" products are more expensive. I recycle and buy green whenever that product is comparable in price to its non green counterpart. However, the vast majority of green goods are so over priced that it’s starting to piss me off. I care about the planet and want to do my part to save it but I have a family to feed. If the makers of green products REALLY care about the environment they need to expand their market share by making this stuff affordable to most people.

[Tom Joad]

the real problem is many green products aren't green at all. they are marketing ploys. the better strategy is to simply reduce your consumption altogether. consuming less is the foundation of sustainable living. you can do it if you try. but you must try. we all must.

[Cristina Rogers]

Sure, plenty of greenwashing, but also plenty of consumer research happening too. Studies are showing that people are, in general, researching their purchases online before buying new products. The information is out there for people concerned - it's not that steep of a learning curve.
The green community is also making it easier to distinguish fact from fiction. For instance, the Environmental Working Group's website www.foodnews.org has an easy, printable guide to take to the grocery store. The EWG's www.cosmeticsdatabase.com is the best place to start for information about personal care (bath products, shampoos, etc.) ingredients and labeling issues.
Green America (formerly COOP America) rigorously screens companies for social and environmental practices before adding them to their Green Pages. You can find them at www.greenamericatoday.org.
The price/cost issue is huge. I had the same problem as Tom_Larsen, and I absorb the higher cost! One of our largest "green" national retailers kept trying to ratchet down the price even further - to below my cost. I agree with everyone about consuming less, buying better quality for longevity, and slowing down a bit.
Is it possible we buried our 9/11 grief in shiny, new things?

[Rick Green]

The reason that non-green products are a lot cheaper is because their manufacturers externalize their costs to the environment and to their workers. They make us pay for their pollution and their workers suffer poor working conditions so that they can sell goods at a cheap price.

As with any product when it first comes to market, it will be expensive. Only when a greater number of people accept it and buy it will economies of scale will bring down the price.

One way or another we ultimately pay the full price. When speaking of food, for example, eating cheap meals typically means a poor diet that will manifest itself as cancer or diabetes. If you eat organic and local, it will be more expensive, but the nutritional value of the food is much greater than industrial-scale food products. Therefore, you don't need to consume as much.

Instead of thinking just about price, think about a product's full cost.

[Tom Joad]

Who said living a sustainable lifestyle also means ultimate convenience? This is precisely the mindset that got us into this situation. Broad behavioral change is required to achieve more sustainable living. Everything you desire will not be 'an arm's reach away' - ex: why do you need sushi for lunch? Why don't you make your own lunch at home and take it to work? And if you do want sushi, why should something a joyous as sushi be reduced to the latest fast food fad? Sushi is intended to be savored, not swallowed whole. The change our president advocates takes many forms. CHANGE your life, live better, live more responsibly. You will find when you do, that convenience isn't the ' be all' and 'end all' of existence.

[blimie]

I would love to go more green, but honestly I don't know how. I recycle but 50% of the time the recycling centers are shut down when they should be open. I tracked how much trash I accumulated in a day and it's a lot. Plastic and packaging are everywhere. Going green should be easy and it should be a money making industry that provides jobs. We need more choices. I would do more if I knew how.

[Tom Joad]

blimie: start with the little things. consume less. ask yourself every time you go to purchase anything 'Do I really need this?" you will be surprise how often you say "no". walk or ride a bike if you can for short errands. turn off lights that you don't need in your home. unplug appliances you aren't using (like electronics in 'stand by' or 'sleep' or 'ready' modes - this is easy to do - have them plugged into power strips with off switches. take shorter showers/baths. turn off the water when you lather up in the shower. turn the water on again only to rinse. put in low flow shower heads. there is much you can do and you will be surprised how little these changes impact your life once become accustomed to your new behaviors.

[Bitsko]

If we just banned soda pop than we wouldn't even have to go green.

[robineee]

Thanks for this great post Kevin. Let’s encourage people to shop green AND encourage producers to make products as sustainably as possible too. Fortunately, we have huge opportunities for both.

One thing that would definitely help would be to require all products to include a label indicating how sustainably it is produced. For products too difficult to label (like produce) the label could be put on the rack where it’s shelved. Independent certifying agencies could be set up for each industry and criteria established through the EPA to determine how sustainable products are. Once the labeling system is in place it will be much easier for consumers to evaluate how green a product is and whether it’s worth it to buy them.

Fortunately, the UN is engaged in a process to develop a Ten Year Framework on Sustainable Production and Consumption (the Marrakech Process). The Obama Administration should play a lead role in developing the Ten Year Framework and establish a policy supporting Sustainable Production and Consumption in the US. See: http://www.nasca.icspac.net

I am also coordinating an effort urging the Obama Administration to develop and implement a US Strategy for Sustainability that would include sustainable consumption and production which we can use to act on ideas like this. See: http://www.change.org/ideas/view/develop_implement_a_national_strategy_for_sustainability

Thanks,

Rob Wheeler
robineagle­@worldciti­zen.org
www.citnet.org/leadership
FaceBook Cause: http://apps.facebook.com/causes/190111

[wdw505]

the green choice needs to be cheaper and as easy as my non-green choice.......to work for me

[tcagle]

I would just settle for a store. No renewable energy stores in Wichita, KS at all, incredible to me with all the wind and sun available here.

[ejgertz]

Hi Kevin,

I completely agree with your last reply, that arguments to give up this or that desired product don't resonate with the general public. People want stuff, they're told they want stuff, and right now, the American economy would collapse if people didn't buy stuff; in fact that's part of what's already happening, right?

The "live simply" morality is a deep current in American environmentalism. I don't necessarily disagree on a personal level that it's a nice way to live, but as a mass-organizing principle, it's a proven non-starter.

Ultimately, however, creating some sort of easy mobile phone guide to finding "green" products is a stopgap.

Materials and manufacturing themselves need to be transformed so that labeling something as enviro-friendly becomes beside the point.

Make something out of materials that can be easily cycled back through the manufacturing process into other things. Make things out of materials that *start out* being safe to dispose of without degrading into toxics, or buried virtually unchanged for a century in dump.

The bible for this is William McDonough's "Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things," as I'm sure you know.

Cheers,

Emily Gertz, Editor, Change.org's Stop Global Warming blog
http://globalwarming.change.org

[Kevin Grandia - Huffpost Blogger]

Agreed Emily, you make some great points. But I don't think the iPhone app is a "stop gap" - while it is small in its overall impact it speaks to the correct mindset. It doesn't convince, it instead makes convenience,

And yes, manufacturing does need to change, but my point is that instead of pushing manufacturers to go "green" we spend the time figuring out how to make it easy for them to go green.

And from your comment, and the great work you do, I know you get that I just really like to repeat my point ad nauseam :)

[Tom Joad]

Disagree. People don't really 'want stuff' - at least to the extent mass marketing has made us believe we want stuff. Consumerism is the primary problem. SUggesting our economy would collapse if we stopped consuming so much is a silly argument. You are basically saying, 'I'm morbidly obese, but I need to keep eating as much as I can, because if I don't, I won't continue to be morbidly obese." In addition, all that 'wanting stuff' is the source of tremendous unhappiness in our society and worldwide. Stop 'wanting stuff' - it is a source of great personal strife. Enjoy the simple delight of a sunny warm day. go outside and enjoy it. life is short.

[cristycristy]

Nice post, Kevin. But what are your thoughts on going green for the social classes that don't have the option of turning to their iphone for green tips? Sustainable living crosses the minds of the not-as-privileged as well.

[David Sassoon - Huffpost Blogger]

Hi Kevin

I suppose.

Though I think the more fundamental problem we have to face is our relationship to consumption. I wrote about this at the end of the year in a piece called "For 2009, A Plea for a New Abolitionism." You can read it here: http://solveclimate.com/search/node/abolitionism.

Dr. Pachauri takes heat for telling the world we have to eat less meat -- same idea. Our consumption patterns are not sustainable, even if you green them up.

I saw him speak recently and he predicted that after a period of economic stabilization, the world is going to realize it cannot continue doing what it does, and a new model will emerge. I agree with him.

So sure, green products would be better, but that's a strategy for not confronting the elephant in the room.

[Kevin Grandia - Huffpost Blogger]

Point well taken, I agree that over-consumption is at the heart of the problem. But I have very little faith that North America will curb its consuming ways - there's nothing to indicate that we will. And then of course there are the developing nations that will continue to increase consumption as more and more of their citizenry emerge from poverty to live the "American Dream."

[HilaryLambert]

Hi Kevin.
Excellent topic, though I tend to respond to the Huffpost-e­ditor-impo­sed headline along the lines of 'it is easy to live green -- and it begins with NOT buying that Coke.'
Part of living sustainably is living far more simply -- with less. It is that easy.
I have been doing this for years due to earning a nonprofit wage as part of a similarly-employed community of like-minded folks. My clothes are old, handed down (although I'd love some new ones). I have lived until very recently at COLD indoor winter temps and have friends who do with even less -- it worries me to hear from them that they are huddled under blankets. Living with LESS. I have been eating low on the food chain and increasingly on locally produced and in-season foods. And so on.
Living with LESS. Like most of the world.

[Kevin Grandia - Huffpost Blogger]

Er, sorry about the poor use your instead of "you're" - shortcuts due to writer fatigue I'm afraid :)

[OneVoiceInACrowd]

I like the topic as well. Article was good too and I am grateful that there is more opportunity to go green from buying locally grown sustainable food to putting my recyclables out on the curb. But it feels like it is not near enough. I don't mean generally, I mean personally. I try to be as conscious as possible (now that I have left my 20's) with regards to this. But until mainstream providers of stuff adopt a green policy I think I will come up short just because of lifestyle, which is pretty scaled back already. Additionally, when green stuff is competing with the not so green stuff cost is a huge issue.

I do have hope though, i read here on huffpo that Pepsi was looking into calculating its CO2 footprint on its orange juice. That is a start. Now if we can somehow turn that into a green competition between the marketers we might get somewhere.

What do you say, I'm drinking a coke right now, dare to switch to Pepsi with me?

[Kevin Grandia - Huffpost Blogger]

Thanks for the compliment. A healthy dose of competition to get these products into the hands of average consumers would be great, but we're going to need a will to innovate by industry and we're seeing more and more of this everyday.

This post was actually inspired from a retreat I attended with a small group of some of best thinkers in North America on behavioral change. I have a lot more to write on what I learned from these amazing folks.

[BElkin]

Kevin, you're spot on. We need to design green into everyday things and services. That's what the folks at Worldchanging.com are advocating in their 'bright green environmentalism'. It's what the European's are doing. Take high speed trains. They're all over Europe, connecting to buses and rapid transit. Spain plans to have a highspeed train connection within 30 minutes of every citizen by 2010.

Think about it - no more short hop, or even long hop plane trips. Grab the bus from home to the train station. No parking. No long lineups and waiting for security. Just hop on in Grenada and an hour later, you're in Madrid. Way less emmissions. Lots less stress.

Green design in housing, business, industry is the key to making sustainability easy for people to do.

Great article. Thanks.