Is Green Worth the Fuss?
How can we incentivize people to overcome the collective action problem, stop free-riding and take action when the benefits are so long term and indirectly seen? One common solution is to “vote with your wallet” and buy green or sustainable products whenever possible, even when making small purchasing decisions like buying a bottle of water.
Over the last decade we have seen “green washing” occur as the next big marketing opportunity. Just like the fight against fat, carbs, and recently gluten created niche-marketing opportunities for food producers, the crusade against waste in the undeniable face of changing climate has created a marketing opportunity for producers of all kinds of products. Green leaves have popped up on cars and plastic water bottles alike, seemingly juxtaposed to the products themselves. This push to go green and be “more sustainable” has even lead to preference signaling and competitive altruism – as described by Steve Sexton, a PhD student at U.C. Berkeley, “a sort of keeping-up-with-the-Joneses type concept but applied to efforts to make society better. So, I’ll be competing with my neighbors to donate to a charity for instance or to reduce energy conservation, or environmental impacts (Freakonomics)”.
But, as its discussed in Andrew Szasz’s book, “Shopping Our Way to Safety: How We Changed from Protecting the Environment to Protecting Ourselves”, — perhaps “buying green” is allowing people to be lulled into a false sense of security. A person can buy a water bottle that is marked “green”, and believe they are helping the environment reducing the likelihood that they make any large scale- real changes that could actually help the planet. The article implies that the “greening” of products, which at first glance seems like an pro-environment move, might actually be working to increase the barriers to overcoming the collective action problem as people no longer feel personally or morally responsible to act.
So, if you can make educated environmentally conscious choices when shopping do. But, do not stop there if you really care. Write a letter, make a call, donate some of your time, and take the action necessary to affect real change.
Freakonomics. (2011, July 07). Hey Baby, Is That a Prius You’re Driving? Full Transcript. Retrieved April 15, 2018, from http://freakonomics.com/2011/07/07/hey-baby-is-that-a-prius-youre-driving-full-transcript/
Link to Youtube Video about Greenwashing with Fiji Water: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOpa8kd6fBI
I agree with this post because it points out the problem with “green washing” and how the push towards buying green or sustainable products is met with the false sense of security that people are significantly helping the environment. It was pointed out that “green washing” is a marketing opportunity that promotes eco-friendly products such as hybrid cars, water bottles, and the million other products labeled with a leaf. These eco-labels are desirable because it allows consumers to feel good about the purchases they are making (like Priuses) without acknowledging or participating in larger scale changes to the environment. Upon reflection of my own consumer choices, I realized that I have fallen prey to this very issue. I have made some environmentally conscious choices when buying things such as water bottles and items that are recyclable, however, my action stops there. It is true, that this green movement is pro- environment but it creates a problem that Michael Maniates points out, which is that individualism is distracting people from solving a collective action problem which could make institutional changes.
Hey Anna,
In your article you end with a call to action, to write letters, make calls and donate our time in the fight to end climate change. I agree that this is an important step in environmental improvement within our communities, but I think that it may be easier said than done. Climate change effects everyone, but disproportionately effects some more than others. Due to this disproportional effect those that own most of the resources such as the United States feel less inclined to really improve their environmental foot print. Local environmental steps only do so much in a country where massive amounts of consumption are a part of daily life. While those with few to no resources in the global south are largely affected by climate change, but do not have the money nor the power to effect change in their own areas. A prime example of this is in global south land grabs. Land grabs happen when global south countries offer their land to till and overproduce goods for the global north for money in return. Land grabs give little to no option for the global south countries to locally go green. My question is how do we encourage the local change that you call for in your article. Does it begin with lowering consumption in the global north or helping the global south build their economies?
Hey Anna,
In your article you end with a call to action, to write letters, make calls and donate our time in the fight to end climate change. I agree that this is an important step in environmental improvement within our communities, but I think that it may be easier said than done. Climate change effects everyone, but disproportionately effects some more than others. Due to this disproportional effect those that own most of the resources such as the United States feel less inclined to really improve their environmental foot print. Local environmental steps only do so much in a country where massive amounts of consumption are a part of daily life. While those with few to no resources in the global south are largely affected by climate change, but do not have the money nor the power to effect change in their own areas. A prime example of this is in global south land grabs. Land grabs happen when global south countries offer their land to till and overproduce goods for the global north for money in return. Land grabs give little to no option for the global south countries to locally go green. My question is how do we encourage the local change that you call for in your article. Does it begin with lowering consumption in the global north or helping the global south build their economies?