One step forward, two steps back

Back in May I wrote an entry about greenwashing. In this entry, I questioned the Sierra Club's criteria for their endorsements, specifically talking about the Chevy Tahoe.

"How is the Sierra Club determining which products to endorse and should we trust them?" – D2E Blog, May 14, 2008

When we saw that the Sierra Club also endorsed Green Works by Clorox, but not any other great cleaning products (like D2E exhibitors Shaklee and Seaside Naturals, or Method or Mrs Meyers) I started to loose faith in their brand. It started to become clear that the Sierra Club was not using their brand as a stamp of approval based on open criteria, but more as a marketing tool.

Don't get me wrong, I am a capitalist 100%. I like to see nonprofits and for profits working together for a common goal. I see all three parts of sustainability as equally important; environment, social and economic. But we have to be transparent about our dealings and the goal is to create a new and improved environment for commerce. At least that is how we see it here at D2E. We see our weekend of exhibitors as the future of business. These people are doing business the way it has to be done in order for us to evolve. (See D2E Criteria here and D2E 2008 footprint here.)

So I was pleased to finally learn some details about the Sierra Club endorsements. Anya Kamenetz lays it out for us in the September issue of Fast Company. I recommend you read the whole article since Kamenetz does a good job reporting. She confirmed my suspicions about the Sierra Club, and she confirmed my belief that consumers are smarter than many marketers think. Apparently the Sierra Club has been taking an undisclosed amount of money from Clorox in exchange for the endorsement, and it made no demands for Clorox to offer recycled packaging or change the environmental profile of any other Clorox products.

"The take-home message for the Sierra Club and other nonprofits may be that they need to draw a careful distinction between two types of nonprofit/for-profit relationships: cause-related marketing and endorsements. .... In endorsement relationships, on the other hand, a group such as the Forest Stewardship Council or the Sustainable Fishery Advocates puts its seal of approval on a product that claims some mission-related benefits. No money should be involved, or that seal isn't going to be worth much." – Fast Company, September 2008

My take on this whole issue is that we are moving one step forward and two steps back. I am happy to see nonprofits working with for profits. But obviously they need to be careful about how they do this. I am also happy that a large company like Clorox is working to create products that are better for the environment and better for people. These large companies can touch more people, thereby expanding the natural market and educating more consumers. There is a moral to learn from the Sierra Club's story, and hopefully it will help us move that one step closer to becoming a sustainable economy.

By the way, in the same issue of Fast Company there is an interview with Jeff Swartz, CEO of Timberland. We are big Swartz fans here. This is a business person that is walking the walk.