A short video (shot on iPhone) to accompany the written research paper below. Together, the video and research paper explore the concept of green marketing, and how consumers can make better informed, more environmentally-friendly purchases. "Eat, and Save the Earth" is a project completed for the 2016 Winter course of Food: A Lens for Environment and Sustainability, at UCLA.
Eat, and Save the Earth
March 2016
“Natural”, “USDA Organic”, “Non GMO” - What do these words mean? Do they mean anything? Or are they just labels that companies slap on a product to entice people to buy them? These are the questions modern consumers need to keep in mind when they purchase food. A recent, growing demand for “good for the earth” food items has resulted in industry green marketing, and even greenwashing. Green marketing is where a company promotes their products as environmentally-friendly, in order to target that specific consumer group. Meanwhile, greenwashing is its evil cousin: purposely portraying a green front while, in reality, the company is not making any effort to be more environmentally responsible (Francis 2007, 193). Understanding “eco-friendly” advertising will give buyers more critical knowledge when examining what foods (and labels) they want to spend money on. This paper will investigate how and why foods are environmentally marketed, and how such an image influences both production and consumption. The Lundberg Family Farm products, specifically their brown rice cakes, will provide a lens in which we can further investigate the ideas behind green marketing.
Lundberg Family Farms is a “family-owned and operated” company based in Richvale, California that produces and sells “wholesome, healthful” rice products (Lundberg Website 2016). They emphasize their commitment to “respecting and sustaining the earth” and “using eco-positive farming methods” (Lundberg Website 2016). This kind of advertising creates a very environmentally product image. From personal experience, I can say that Lundberg’s green marketing was successful. At the store, I was deciding between paying less for Quaker rice cakes that did not feature environmentally responsible claims, and paying more for Lundberg’s rice cakes that did. While the Quaker packaging did feature phrases like “natural” and “eating right for calorie counting”, Lundberg's packaging had more sustainability phrases, labels and seals. Ultimately, I chose Lundberg. To understand the method and success of green marketing, we must consider the reason behind its emergence.
Society’s “growing concern about the environmental impacts of agriculture and the food system” has been an integral part of facilitating an eco-friendly industry (Francis 2007, 193). As more and more people are interested in issues of sustainability, they are also more willing to pay for green products. As Francis writes in his article, Greening of Agriculture: Is It All a Greenwash of the Globalized Economy?, “companies are eager to exploit this concern by advertising products that are environmentally friendly” (Francis 2007, 193). This has led to a field of business directed specifically towards generating revenue from people who want to feel morally good about what they buy. This is the concept of “ecopreneurship”- where entrepreneurship intersects with environmentally and socially responsible behavior (Holt 2010, 238). The Lundberg Family Farm is an illustration of “ecopreneurship”: a company going organic during the 1960s, a time of increasing environmental awareness (Holt 2010, 243). One study, Where are they now? Tracking the longitudinal evolution of environmental businesses from the 1990s, measures how prosperous green businesses have been, from the founding to today. It declares Lundberg as one of several companies that is “still trading” and in “post survival stage”, meaning it has successfully grown into a medium-sized enterprise (Holt 2010, 245). This is yet another clear example of green advertising’s development, expansion, and influence.
A new, green market means a new business opportunity for corporations to cash in on. One article states that “because of [heightened] public awareness regarding the environment, companies have adapted…practicing green marketing and environmental marketing” (Tureac 2010, 529). The reason green advertising is increasingly prevalent is because it pays. Since companies know that people are looking to buy green items- and potentially pay more for them than conventional items- they are more than willing to adapt, supply the demand, and increase sales. One example is the global multi-billion dollar- and growing- organic food industry” (Hughner 2007, 1). Hughner’s study notes that although organic farming only constitutes a small percentage of United States farming, it is increasing by 12 percent annually” (Hughner 2007, 2). These numbers clearly demonstrate the success of green marketing. And the “organic” label is only one of many labels companies use to convince consumers that a product is good for the earth and good for their health. Again, looking at the Lundberg rice cakes in particular, there are about 13 various labels, logos, and phrases publicizing how eco-friendly the product is. Labels range from “Vegan” to “Non GMO” to “USDA Organic” to “100% Whole Grain”, while phrases include “caring for the land responsibly and sustainably”, “protecting the earth”, “environmental stewardship”, “cares about the environment”, and “renewable energy.” These rice cakes are a quintessential example of green marketing, as practically all of the packaging space is dedicated to advertising its “green-ness”!
With the growth of green marketing comes the possibility of greenwashing- when a company purposefully and falsely advertises a product as environmentally friendly. Cases of greenwashing often result from a company’s desire to make money by exploiting people’s efforts to be socially and environmentally responsible. It's Not Easy Being Green...Or Is It? perfectly sums it up, stating that “a corporation’s desire for an enhanced reputation, combined with lenient environmental advertising regulation, has created the perfect environment for corporations to use *and misuse* environmental claims” (Baum 2012, 423). Greenwashing is just a marketing ploy to mislead consumers and generate revenue. Sometimes, however, it is difficult to tell the difference between the green advertising and greenwashing. In order to decipher between the two, one must examine whether a producer’s external “support for environmental policies aligns with [their internal] sustainable… practices” (Selfa 2008, 262). What does this mean though, and how can it be usefully examined by consumers? It means that a company must actively practice the environmentally friendly activities that they are publicizing. Currently, the most effective way to ensure this is through regulations and clearly outlined certifications. Unless a specific company holds itself accountable to certain regulations, one must take into consideration the issue of loose green marketing regulations. For example, there is minimal to no control over companies using words like “natural”, “simple”, and “light”, because they are vague and subjective. According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website, the “FDA has not developed a definition for use of the term natural or its derivatives” (FDA Website 2016). However, there are regulations that products must comply with to be able to boast authorized, standardized labels such as “Non GMO Project Verified” and “USDA Organic”. For instance, the Agricultural Marketing Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) oversees the National Organic Program (NOP), which regulates the “USDA Organic” label to ingredients that have been produced under specific conditions that meet their definition of “organic”. In essence, the most reliable way to trust a green label is if a product carries a seal from a third-party certifier (Duber-Smith 2013, 1). This way, a company’s product must comply with an external, predetermined policy in order for it to be labelled with an legitimate certification. The third-party serves as a check of balance between corporate marketing and consumer trust.
Lastly, we will look deeper into Lundberg’s practices, to determine just how genuine the eco-friendly claims they boast are. As mentioned earlier, some companies do self-regulate, holding themselves to a higher set of environmental and social production standards. Lindberg Family Farms is one of these companies. The best way for a consumer to know which companies are and are not actively trying to hold themselves accountable is to do additional research as opposed to simply trusting a company’s product labels. For example, Lundberg Family Farms releases an annual “Sustainability Report” that is reviewed by the Sustainable Food Trade Association. It includes extensive accounts of land use, distribution and sourcing, energy use, air emissions, water use and quality, solid waste reduction, packaging and marketing materials, labor and more. Some environmental efforts from the report include that Lundberg farms “are grown with no prohibited fertilizers, pesticides, or growth regulators applied to the organic fields or crops for a minimum of 36 months” (Lundberg Report 2014, 5), purchase “Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) to offset 100% of purchased electricity” used outside of onsite solar powered generation (Lundberg Report 2014, 15), and regard “continuous improvement in the area of product packaging [as] crucial to reducing the waste generated” (Lundberg Report 2014, 29). Analyzing the extent of these comprehensive and big-picture environmental efforts, we can conclude that Lundberg is quite authentic in its own green standards and product advertising.
Although in virtually all cases there is no absolute “good” or “bad” for the environment, a more critical consumer is essential in making corporations more accountable for their environmental claims and actions. A consumer’s power is based in their purchasing power -what they are willing to spend their money on. If consumers buy honestly and environmentally produced food, that is what companies will have to produce to stay competitive in the market. This is precisely why green marketing is so important and necessary -despite the dangers of greenwashing: it provides a means for consumers to know more about what they are buying and how they are affecting the earth through their actions. For this reason, it just may be possible to eat, and save the world.
-----------------
Works Cited
Baum, L. (2012). It's Not Easy Being Green...Or Is It? A Content Analysis of Environmental Claims in Magazine Advertisements from the United States and United Kingdom. 6(4), 423-440. Accessed February 15, 2016. doi:10.1080/17524032.2012.724022
Duber-Smith, Darrin C. "Labelling for Legitimacy: Certifications for Natural and Organic Personal Care." GCI, November 18, 2013. Accessed February 21, 2016. http://www.gcimagazine.com/business/manufacturing/packaging/Labeling-for- Legitimacy-Certifications-for-Natural-and-Organic-Personal-Care-232390341.html
Francis, C., Elmore, R., Ikerd, J., & Duffy, M. (2007). Greening of Agriculture: Is It All a Greenwash of the Globalized Economy? Journal of Crop Improvement, 19(1-2), 193-220.Accessed February 15, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J411v19n01_10
Holt, D. (2010). Where are they now? Tracking the longitudinal evolution of environmental businesses from the 1990s. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(4), 238-250. Accessed February 15, 2016. doi:10.1002/bse.697
Hughner, R., McDonagh, P., Prothero, A., Shultz II, C., & Stanton, J. (2007). Who are organic food consumers? A compilation and review of why people purchase organic food. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 6, 1-17. Accessed February 15, 2016. doi:10.1002/cb
Lundberg Family Farms Website: About. (2016). Accessed February 23, 2016. http://www.lundberg.com/about/
Lundberg Family Farms: SFTA Sustainability Report. (2014). Accessed February 15, 2016. http://www.lundberg.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/LFF-FY14-SFTA-Report-Final- Public.pdf
Selfa, T., Jussaume, R., & Winter, M. (2008). Envisioning agricultural sustainability from field to plate: Comparing producer and consumer attitudes and practices toward ‘environmentally friendly’ food and farming in Washington State, USA. Journal of Rural Studies, 262-276. Accessed February 15, 2016. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.09.001
Tureac, C., Turtureanu, A., Bordean, I., & Grigore, A. (2010). Ecological Food Products - General Considerations on Green Marketing. Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management, 2, 529-529. Accessed February 15, 2016. doi:search.proquest.com/espm/ docview/1328519278/9FCA96025E9C4C7FPQ/3?accountid=14512#center
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2016) FDA Basics: How is the term “organic” regulated?. Accessed February 21, 2016. http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/Transparency/Basics/ucm214871.htm
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2016) FDA Basics: What is the meaning of ‘natural’ on the label of food?. Accessed February 21, 2016. http://www.fda.gov/aboutfda/transparency/basics/ucm214868.htm