Green marketing 739
hype, and to a loss of consumer confidence in
their green message. Ben & Jerry’s ice-cream
was an icon among green brands, but came
under pressure when the company was
accused of a relatively poor social performance
on issues such as the treatment of suppliers and
workplace health and safety. Developing a
more holistic green strategy requires an appre-
ciation of the product itself, what goes into it,
and what goes into, and out of, the environ-
ment as a result of its production and use. This
process is analogous to Porter’s ‘value chain’
approach, as shown in Figure 28.2.
An important new frontier for business
academics and practitioners will be to try to
develop measures of social and environmental
performance to allow comparisons of eco-
performance among companies, products and
technologies (see, for example, Epstein and
Roy, 2001).
Going green – the philosophical challenge
In its underlying quest to satisfy consumers,
and in the marketing activities involved, green
marketing resembles conventional marketing.
Many of the key differences between the two
relate to the values and philosophies which
underpin the marketing strategy and the
ways in which particular elements of marketing
are conceptualized (Peattie, 1999). Green mar-
keting seeks to balance the techno-economic
market perspective with a broader socio-envi-
ronmental approach. This will require a re-
evaluation of some fundamental marketing
assumptions and concepts (Kilbourne et al.,
1997). Some important areas to re-evaluate
include:
Marketing’s legitimacy. Marketing’s role in driving
forward economic growth by stimulating
demand and its role in satisfying customer
wants have always legitimized marketing, to the
extent that the benefits of ever increasing
consumer choice and economic growth have
gone unquestioned. The green challenge has
changed this. Mulhern (1992) proposes the
need to focus on customer welfare rather than
purely on customer wants. Issues such as
passive smoking and car safety (which usually
equates to driver safety) have highlighted the
failure of marketing to address the needs and
welfare of non-consumers. Durning (1992)
points out that only one-fifth of the world’s
population have sufficient disposable wealth to
make consumption choices and belong to the
‘consumer class’. He also questions the
morality of that richest fifth continuing to
enjoy a standard of living that the planet
cannot sustain, and which the remaining
four-fifths can aspire to (encouraged by the
images from marketing communications) but
are unlikely to attain. The need for
sustainability also requires us to question the
validity of striving to satisfy all current
consumer wants, if they are at the expense of
future generations of consumers.
Consumers.Henri Fayol once quipped about
sending out for workers, but human beings
turning up instead. Similarly, green marketers
need to reconsider their approach to
consumers. The word ‘consumer’ epitomizes a
view of customers, not as people, but as a
means of consumption. Marketing theory tends
to deal with a very limited number of
customer wants or needs at a time. However,
peoples’ needs and wants are many, varied and
often potentially incompatible. One may yearn
to live in an area free from the pollution,
congestion and danger posed by cars, and yet
be unwilling to give up the benefits of personal
mobility that car ownership provides. Just as a
product is more accurately analysed as a
‘bundle of benefits’, a customer should be
considered as possessing a ‘bundle of wants
and needs’. In the face of conflicting desires to
consume and conserve, customers may
increasingly seek satisfaction through
non-purchase decisions (such as repairs). By
contributing to reduced environmental
degradation, green consumer behaviour