THE VINE APRIL 16, 2008
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
With Earth Day just around the bend, Natalie Zmuda has a great column in AdvertisingAge charting the strange evolution of the holiday. Back when Earth Day first kicked off in the 1970s, many enviros were focused on persuading people to decrease their personal consumption. But three decades later, Earth Day has mainly become an opportunity for companies to market themselves as eco-friendly while foisting "green" products of dubious hues on the public for mass consumption. So we get Earth Day promotions like Fairmont Hotel teaming up with Toyota to offer "Lexus Hybrid Living Suites," featuring organic sheets and—oh yes—"local biodynamic wines" in the minibar. Or Macy's "Turn Over a New Leaf" shopping extravaganza: You load up on goods; they kick over a few bucks to some forest somewhere.
Sure, it's just another example of corporations appropriating countercultural trends for their own uses. And, yes, many of these companies are just engaged in unabashed greenwashing. But it's also interesting to note that mainstream environmentalism has evolved along somewhat similar thematic lines. The other day, John Quiggin wrote a smart essay arguing that, contrary to the claims of both conservatives and "Deep Greens"—i.e., those enviros who argue that capitalism itself is ecologically unsustainable—it's perfectly possible to decarbonize the global economy while maintaining a rapid growth in living standards (albeit with a few tweaks: rein in an exurb here, junkyard an SUV there...). The idea that environmentalism can co-exist with robust GDP growth and consumerism is a fairly common tenet among major green groups nowadays, and one that seemed to be a lot more controversial 30 years ago.
--Bradford Plumer
4 comments
Well, when consumer spending accounts for at least 70% of the US economy, then it's pretty hard not to co-exist with a green agenda.
I think the danger here, is that the consumer gets exhausted and cynical with green products and solutions, and you then see a level of cynicism for Green that mirrors cynicism towards politicians.
Case in point - I purchased a Green dishwasher tablet, but when I got home the big green selling point was that it had less packaging and therefore needed less space in the truck to transport...and so on. The piss was being taken.
(Deep Green - I like that, it's a lot cooler than freedom hating commie freak. I'm a Deep Green from now on.)
- The Ignorant Populist
April 16, 2008 at 5:07pm
THe way to sell it politically is not to consumers-- no one votes as a consumer-- but to potential employees ad investors. Especially potential employees and their children who live in the rust belt.
Show this skeptic a carefully thought out, realistic plan for creating, within 6-8 years, a new industry that
a) is >$50B in annual turnover in the US alone, and
b) sustains at least half a million high-paying middle-class jobs in the US,
... and I'm on board. I'd bet most of the voting population in MI OH IL MO PA WV KY VA TN would be on board, too.
PS I'm assuming that at the core of such a plan would be a massive retooling of secondary and post-secondary education, perhaps vocational schooling available beginning at age 16, to focus on trades related to green energy technologies and devices, their production and implementation and servicing.
- teplukhin2you
April 17, 2008 at 3:22am
This morning as I was riding the company-sponsored shuttle bus from the train station to my office, I got to thinking about the bus driver.
This guy has arguably the greenest job of anyone I know. He is single-handedly helping take dozens of cars off the road every day. He is key.
And yet, he is a bus driver. How many parents want their kids to grow up to be bus drivers? For how many people is it the pinnacle of a career? They should, and it should be, but they don't yet, and it isn't yet.
A change of heart, a fundamental change of heart, of values, is necessary. Without it, nothing is possible. With it, everything is.
- williamyard
April 17, 2008 at 12:12pm
One thing that benefits the environment is that our GNP is getting physically smaller. Call it the miniaturization of the economy
Myself, I have always been an avid consumer of music. Back in the 1970s, I had literally hundreds of albums - and it took up most of my admittedly small bedroom
In the 1980s, I segued into CDs. Smaller than a 33, but still a fairly large amount of space
Now I have an IPOD. Have not purchased a CD in two years. And this IPOD fits into my front pocket. The attendant packages of CDs and Records has dissappeared.
Ditto newspapers. I get most of of my journalism on line. I consume less paper
Not everything is trending this way - homes & cars are obvious examples. But I think with gas prices rising, along iwth home heating oil, we have seen the hight water mark for SUVs, McMansion Purchases and (God Willing) exurbs
- tembrach
April 17, 2008 at 4:37pm