ACTION PLAN FOR ESTABLISHING A GLOBAL ECO-LABEL:

INTERNATIONAL STRATEGY

Media Strategy

GPA should seek out European and Japanese counterparts to create their own marketing campaign for the global label—campaigns that reflect their own regional concerns and cultural characteristics. Like the U.S. media campaign, these overseas campaigns should emphasize visual recognition of the global eco-label.

Lobbying Strategy

GEN should be asked to coordinate with its member eco-labeling programs around the world. The goal will be to assess countries’ political stance toward and popular support for eco-labeling and to identify national stakeholders. The following countries should be targeted: 

• Brazil

• Israel

• New Zealand

• Croatia

• Hungary

• India

• Thailand

• Korea

• Taiwan

• Zimbabwe 

In discussions with developing country government officials, emphasis should be placed on explaining how the global program, in coordination with GEN, will provide developing countries with the appropriate economic and technical resources for effective implementation of their own eco-labels. The mechanisms for ensuring that the global eco-label is not used as a protectionist barrier will need to be explained fully, as well as how the global label will actually help open markets to green products.

Education Campaign

The workshop described in the domestic strategy will also evaluate international issues such as: 

• the environmental problems of developing countries;

• the disjunct between environmental problems and national priorities;

• barriers to the establishment of environmentally sound priorities; and

• the difference between mutual recognition agreements and international standards. 

In addition, GPA should conduct an education campaign in targeted developing countries.  GPA should initially focus on countries such as Mexico, China, Nigeria, Venezuela and Turkey.  At a later date, GPA should consider adding Brazil, South Korea, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Thailand, and Eastern European countries such as Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania and Hungary. GPA should hire consultants to assess the appropriate manner in which to approach each country (accounting for cultural and political characteristics that may aid or impede GPA’s effort).    

Research  

GEN will be asked to research the following issues:           

• Obstacles to technical transfers. This study should look at the barriers to technical transfers, as well as developing country access to environmentally sound technology, information dissemination of technical information, and access to information regarding market trends abroad.

• The effectiveness of local standards for local environmental problems.  This study should attempt to prove that environmental standards must reflect local environmental priorities and values if they are to have the greatest environmental effectiveness. The study should investigate the legitimacy of the notion that developing countries will be able to export eco-labeled products under lower environmental standards.   

• Comparative Advantage in Environmentally Friendly Markets. This study should identify LDC and developing country green products that have strong export potential.

GEN should also be asked to put together a handbook that details the resources needed to establish a voluntary eco-labeling scheme, the procedures for developing a scheme, the criteria for global program certification and an outline of GEN assistance programs.

APPENDIX 1

STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS

The National Schemes. The global eco-label might hurt independent and national eco-labeling programs because these programs would have to allow the global scheme to determine mutual recognition for exporters in their domestic market and would have to change their visual seals. However, independent and national programs would retain the right to certify producers and create product criteria within the guidelines of the global scheme, and the benefits of the global program are expected to significantly outweigh its costs.  The global program will increase the environmental effectiveness of eco-labels, reinvigorate the market for green products, and will provide additional marketing exposure for existing programs (albeit under the guise of the global seal).

Producers. The global eco-labeling scheme is expected to decrease the costs of exporting green products and expand market opportunities for developing country green producers. The scheme will create an incentive for producers to use environmentally sound PPMs.

Developing Country Governments. Developing country governments are concerned that integration of the trade-related environmental agenda into the WTO will result in costly mandates for international environmental regulations and, ultimately, increased barriers to trade. Although, in the past, international environmental regulations have not reflected the local environmental problems of developing countries, the global eco-label program uses the concept of mutual recognition and equivalence to ensure that producers from developing countries can obtain an internationally recognized eco-label based on local environmental standards. This would reduce administrative and adaptive costs for producers in developing countries, and GEN will be asked to offer technical assistance that will further enable developing country programs to operate successfully.   

Environmental Organizations. Some environmental organizations may be critical of the global eco-label because it will rely on mutual recognition rather than absolute standards for its certification criteria. Environmental organizations will likely fear that this may mean lower standards. GPA must convince its skeptics that a network of location specific standards will be more environmentally effective than one global standard. It will also need to emphasize that the global scheme will help increase developing country awareness of environmental issues and improve the environmental effectiveness of voluntary eco-labeling schemes.  

The World Trade Organization. The global scheme would provide a working example of a WTO compliant, voluntary eco-labeling scheme. The global eco-labeling scheme would incorporate transparency mechanisms such as full disclosure of product criteria and certified schemes on its website.  Transparency would provide consumers, producers and international organizations such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) with the opportunity to evaluate how the scheme works. The concept of mutual recognition will streamline administrative procedures, and reduce adaptive costs.

APPENDIX 2

AMERICAN DEMAND FOR GREEN PRODUCTS

According to the Hartman Group, the “New Green Mainstream” comprises 23 percent of the American population.[1]  Seventy-eight percent of this group is female. The consumer group is further broken down into the following groups:  

• True Naturals. This group is dedicated to purchasing environmentally friendly goods.  It represents seven percent of the total consumer base and is 73 percent female.

• Affluent Healers. Members of this group are cynical about environmental product claims but manage large discretionary incomes and will make purchases if they perceive value for themselves and/or their families.  This group represents 12 percent of the population, and it is 77 percent female.

• Young Recyclers. This group is concerned about the environment, but does not have the discretionary income to pay a premium price for green products.  It represents 10 10 percent of the population and is 73 percent female.  

The Hartman Group also found that 45 percent of women and 36 percent of men have tried a new brand because they perceived it to cause less harm to the environment than another brand. 57 percent of women and 41 percent of men reported that they were more likely to switch brands if they felt that a product damages the environment.  

As indicated in the chart below, women are also significantly more likely to buy products made from recycled products, sold in concentrated form, sold in refillable packages, or packaged in non-aerosol spray bottles.

Product B= Products sold in refillable packages

Product C= Products with concentrated formulas

Product D= Products packaged in non-aerosol spray bottles

Although the number of consumers that consistently make purchasing decisions based on environmental factors remains small, most analysts believe the market potential for green products is large.[2]

Trends in American Demand  

1990-1993 

With studies showing that nearly 75 percent of consumers were willing to pay a premium price for environmentally sound products, producers of green products expected phenomenal returns after the 1990 Earth Day Summit. The reality was quite different. As of 1993 only 35 percent of consumers were acting on their intentions to buy green products. 

Factors such as poor product quality, high prices and skepticism toward environmental claims decreased consumer demand for green products.  And consumers were more concerned with quality and price than environmental impacts during the recession of the early 1990s.[3]  The green market for environmental products was not small, but it failed to meet the expectations of producers.

1993-1996

Producers remained disappointed until the mid-1990s as consumers turned away from high priced, low quality green products. Consumers were looking for high quality, low environmental impact products at low prices, but green products were stereotyped as high priced inferior products.[4] 

One likely reason for consumers’ lackluster demand for green products during the mid-90s was their confusion and skepticism about marketing claims.[5]  There were too many eco-labels on the market, and customers often cynically assumed that companies were only trying to exploit their concerns rather than actually provide environmentally superior products. 

The consumer backlash against eco-friendly products mellowed around 1995, when demand for green products increased to 40 percent and consumers became willing to pay large premiums for green goods.[6] This is likely due to the health of the economy, the innovation of high quality green products, and the emerging purchasing power of Generation Y consumers.

1996-1999

Recent years have seen a resurgence of concern for the environment.[7] Analysts believe this is a result of an emerging new group of consumers, Generation Y, which includes young adults who were born between 1979 and 1994 and grew up learning about environmental problems. At least one study has documented that half of Generation Y is significantly more aware of and concerned about environmental issues than the baby boomer and Generation X generations. Generation Y children are also asking their parents to do something to help the environment.[8]

APPENDIX 3

SAMPLE BRIEFING NOTE FOR PRESS CONFERENCE  

The global program should be announced at a press conference held in conjunction with its educational conference. This briefing note is intended for the official that will represent the global eco-labeling program at the press conference. The press should be given a document that includes sample quotes and comments pertinent to the global eco-labeling scheme.  The press should also be given names and brief bios of experts in attendance. Several experts should be available for questions. 

Objectives

This press conference aims to inform the press and the public about the proceedings of the educational workshop. It should support the overall objective of the workshop by increasing the credibility of the global scheme. The press conference should also be viewed as a tool for building public awareness of environmental issues and the importance of “buying green.”

Talking Points

• Several studies show that over 90 percent of all environmental damage is caused by production process methods.

• Experts have found that environmental damage, specifically air and water pollution, have a long-term detrimental effect on health.  Such problems are most prevalent in developing countries that do not have adequate infrastructure in place to properly dispose of garbage and industrial waste such as toxic chemicals.

• Each region and country has different environmental problems that reflect the regional environment.  Some regions of the world have higher/lower tolerance for specific types of pollution or environmental damage; therefore harmonized international standards do not always provide the most efficient environmental solutions.

• Mutual recognition often provides a convenient and effective manner in which to guard the environmental impact of production process methods.  Rather than regulating specific acts that may or may not address a global environmental issue, the global eco-label program is designed to recognize when two different standards maintain the same level of protection for the environment.

top