[The Vector — By Kathy Heshelow] Clean Energy News: New Approaches Needed to Mainstream Sustainable Living — Continued

… Continued from earlier post …

Price and costs seems to be holding back a majority from sustainable choices. “One trip to the grocery store and you would see that green products can have as much as a 100% price premium. It’s as if we are penalizing virtuous behaviors with a defector sustainability tax,” says Graceann Bennet, co-author of the report and Director of Strategic Planning.  This same thought process applies to many green products like solar panels and other sustainable products.

A related barrier is perception of money. Mainstream consumers look at the high prices on eco-friendly products, the “fancy” packaging and deduce “this is for the sophisticated elitist, not me.” The study revealed that a prevailing belief among the American masses is that they can’t take part in the green movement because they are not rich enough, cool enough or sophisticated enough.

The report offers an example of an average Chicago man who considers himself “middle green”, but rebels due to suspicion. “Why would I pay $3.00 more for cage-free eggs? I don’t believe that they are that different. I don’t believe organic food is that different, except it doesn’t taste as good and costs more. I think a lot of companies are trying to capitalize on people who are trying to be green.”

Gender

The barriers to adopting green behavior are higher with men than women, the report says. More than 82% of the respondents said going green is more feminine than masculine, and more men are in the “green rejecter” category. They hold back from the simplest act of the visible, like using green reusable grocery bags or carrying around reusable water bottles, for instance.  Some, both men and women, feel ostracized or fear attracting judgment of peers if they go out on a limb.  That is, unless they live in a place where a majority accept and adopt sustainable living, the study revealed that mainstream people don’t want to be seen as fringe “hippies” or “elitist snobs.” Are we still in high school, I ponder?

The report reveals that, sad as it may be, their feelings of ostracism do have a basis in fact. Asking Americans in surveys whom they thought green products were marketed to and for, more than half said “the rich” or “crunchy granola types”.

Speaking of gender, the report points out mother’s concerns. Many said they know that using plastic bottles of water is bad for the environment but just can’t use the reusable bottle for children due to germs.  Others cited wanting to kill household germs with a product like Clorox even though they would like to use a green cleaning product. They didn’t feel as safe with the green products with children in the house. The underlying issue is mass-market consumers don’t trust green products to perform. The report suggests that familiar trusted brands have an opportunity to bring trusted brands to the marketplace, and can lower barriers of consumers.

Carbon Footprint, Guilt and Ignorance

The vast majority of Americans – more than 82% — cannot calculate their carbon footprint or even begin to do so. But in addition, many consumers inferred that they want to retreat to the comfort of ignorance, thereby not feeling guilty. As seen in the chart above, some of the masses haven’t bought in to many of the issues and think there is hype over reality. Eco-suspicion is also an issue.

Suspicion

The report says that the advertising messages of gloom and doom, and “must act now” have fostered confusion and suspicion. Real facts vs. hype has become an issue. For those that believe they do need to do something, the report says they can’t figure out if what they are doing makes any impact. What is the cost/benefit of decisions? This can range from using disposable diapers to washable cloth ones, shopping at the local grocery store with imported foods or at your local farmer’s market. Many who were surveyed said they are suspicious of green products now, because everything says it is eco-friendly, green, natural, light or healthy. What does it really mean?  And back to measuring the carbon footprint, many said they can’t calculate it out and don’t understand how to do so. They like concrete ideas.

I would add insights from another study here. The Carsey Institute at the University of New Hampshire says that the polarization of beliefs over climate change gets in the way of green behaviors and action. Republicans most often believe that natural causes are at fault while Democrats most often believe human activity is the cause. Most people gather information about climate change not from scientists but from news media, political activists, friends and other non-science sources. They tend to choose news sources that match their own beliefs, thereby strengthening their own beliefs.

“Although there remains active discussion among scientists on many details about the pace and effects of climate change, no leading science organization disagrees that human activities are now changing the Earth’s climate. The strong scientific agreement contrasts with partisan disagreement seen in our surveys,” said Lawrence Hamilton, senior fellow at UNH Carsey Institute.

Taking an example from a master on concrete ideas in marketing

So how can beliefs change? 70% of Americans said they would rather cure cancer than save the environment. The cancer community has marketed well, so the Ogilvy report says, and today’s corporations and leaders should take a page from the cancer playbook:

1)     Make it personal and make it relevant, not abstract. Many said they felt environmental and green issues were too abstract and too remote for immediate action.

2)     Make it plausible. Cancer researchers say “we’ve cured other diseases, why not cancer?” while there has been no such analogy for adopting green.

3)     Make it positive. The message about curing cancer has been positive, while the message about the environment has been total gloom and doom.

“Research shows that many of the environmental messages are not just failing to close the Green Gap, but are actually cementing it by making green behavior too difficult and costly from a practical, financial and social standpoint,” says Graceann Bennett, co author.  “Companies in the U.S. must figure out how to close the gap or there will never be a thriving case for green business or adoption of widespread green behaviors,” she says.