| Green washing or greenwashing? | | Print | |
You might see quite a lot of Tamzin Outhwaite in the
next few days. A bit of bare female flesh is irresistible to columnists, and a
photo of Tamzin in a flimsy negligee (with a lush green background, naturally) is
being used to promote ‘Future Friendly’. This morning, I attended the launch of Future Friendly,
billed as a 'high profile new retail initiative between four of
Britain's leading agenda setting environmental organisations… and major
consumer brands.'
I was eager to hear what would be unveiled – perhaps a new
label guaranteeing green, sweatshop-free products on the high street, which certainly wouldn't go amiss. With reputable
co-presenters (Sir Trevor McDonald and sustainability expert Joanna Yarrow) and highly respected environmental organisations (Energy Saving Trust, Waste Watch,
Waterwise and Global Cool) on board, I was braced for truly groundbreaking news.
First they announced the
Future Friendly Awards, which will give £10,000 to four ‘heroes’ to help fund
their sustainability projects. So far so good. But the ‘visionary’ initiative was a new green logo with what seemed to me to be dubious distinction. All the brands awarded the logo thus far (Ariel,
Fairy Liquid, Flash and Lenor) are from Procter & Gamble, who are behind the whole project. The green-coloured Future Friendly logo will lead
consumers to believe that the products have been
awarded this label on green merit. But have they?
 There was confusion about who judges the products and how (odd as products bearing the logo will appear on shop shelves next week) so after the presentation I
asked the Procter & Gamble spokesman about
the criteria for judging and awarding the logo. “There is no objective
criteria,” he said. If it's just meaningless marketing, then surely any company could design cute green logos to slap on its products.
These P&G products have not been re-formulated with fewer chemicals, nor are their plastic containers now recycled. The charities involved support this initiative because of P&G's work to raise eco awareness, most notably Ariel’s 'Turn to 30'
campaign. But the green benefit is not inherent in the product, but is dependent on the
consumer’s behaviour and use of the product.
When asked about the eco benefits of Lenor fabric softener, the P&G
spokesman said it’s concentrated, so the bottles are smaller. I asked if people should just stop buying fabric softener altogether (I’ve taken to adding a few
drops of lavender oil to the rinse drawer for a fresh scent), but he insisted
consumers will only move so far and we mustn’t push them too hard. And the eco
benefits of Flash All Purpose Cleaner? Well, you don’t need hot water to clean
your kitchen, only the chemicals contained within the plastic bottle. Speaking
of hot water, I hope P&G finds itself in a bit tomorrow and has to defend
these labels – and to justify them, perhaps even by improving the eco cred of
the products in question. If one of the planet's largest manufacturers doesn't use recycled plastic, where will the demand come from? We need to 'close the loop' by using recycled plastic or it will all end up in landfill – here or in China, which makes recycling pointless.
 |
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
