Green Consumerism: Overview

Introduction

Green consumerism is an approach to making purchasing decisions about products based on their environmental impact. Further, green consumerism is intended as a response to what some see as the detrimental effects of economic and environmental globalization such as unfair labor practices, overuse of natural resources, species loss, and environmental pollution. Concern over working conditions in foreign countries and dissatisfaction with disposable products also are strongly tied to the growing interest in green consumerism in the United States.

Green products are marketed to consumers with a positive attitude toward environmentalism. For example, a hybrid car is appealing to green consumers because the car uses less gas; the manufacturing of an organic cotton towel involves no pesticides, herbicides, or toxic dyes; and some organic coffee production helps farm laborers in developing countries avoid exploitation, while also preserving trees.

Some environmentalists praise these products, while others argue that the majority of green products fall under the category of “light green” and are of questionable environmental value. Some companies have been accused of labeling products as green when they do not technically qualify for the designation, a practice referred to as “greenwashing.” For instance, a timber producer might clear the old-growth timber from a virgin rain forest, replace the cleared trees with a single type of tree (possibly “eco-friendly” bamboo), and promote the forest project to consumers as sustainable forest management or development.

More extreme environmentalists claim there is no such thing as green consumerism, as the production and consumption of all products impact the environment. The more one buys, the larger the ecological footprint created. A group called the Global Footprint Network has claimed to measure the amount of ecological disturbance produced by consumer behavior. In their view, the amount that the planet can sustain has already been exceeded.

Federal regulation of the green designation has also been debated. Setting standards that would have to be met before a product could earn a green designation would reduce greenwashing practices and lessen public confusion. Regulatory standards could address the manufacturing origin of the product and its components, as well as issues such as child labor, animal testing, or a company’s history of environmental pollution.

Understanding the Discussion

Conspicuous consumption: A phrase coined by economist Thorstein Veblen to describe the display of objects as status symbols.

Consumerism: Shopping as a way of life, and the social structures that support it.

Design for disassembly: The process of designing products that can be taken apart at the end of its useful life and reused in the manufacturing of different products.

Ecological footprint: A measure of negative impact a person or activity has on the environment.

Globalization: A process of economic and cultural integration around the world caused by changes in technology, commerce, and politics.

Green: A designation for environmentally friendly products or services.

Green companies: Companies characterized by innovation in technology and business practices and stakeholder involvement.

Greenwash: To label a product or service as environmentally friendly when it is not.

Life-cycle analysis: The process of analyzing and evaluating the environmental impact of each stage in a product's development, production, and use to minimize environmental impact.

Petroleum: A fossil fuel that is refined to produce fuel and a wide range of plastics. The process of petroleum extraction, refinement, and use as fuel is linked to environmental pollution and natural resource depletion.

Planned obsolescence: A business strategy that designs products to have a limited lifespan, requiring the consumer to repeatedly purchase upgrades or replace the item sooner than would otherwise be necessary.

History

The practice of contemporary consumerism developed gradually over the course of many centuries. As explorers began to open global trade routes, more luxuries became available. As trade increased during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, merchants began to set up shops where they could receive and sell foreign goods. Both rich and poor could view the items for sale, which fueled the emphasis on materialism among all social classes.

The Industrial Revolution flooded the marketplace with mass-produced goods and initiated the shift from an agricultural society to a consumer society. While factories produced more textiles, advances in the home sewing machine allowed people to stitch faster and to accumulate more clothing. The wide availability of woodworking tools allowed people to build more furniture. More goods led to bigger houses, while bigger houses provided room for more goods.

The first department store in the United States, Marble Dry Goods, opened in New York City in 1846 and was popular among consumers who appreciated the ability to take care of multiple retail transactions under one roof. Catalog companies replaced the peddler in rural America, offering small town residents and farmers a compendium of consumer goods.

The accumulation of material goods began to play a greater role in lifestyles and in defining the social classes. In 1899, economist Thorstein Veblen coined the phrase “conspicuous consumption” in his book The Theory of the Leisure Class. The term continues to be used today to refer to items that ostentatiously display wealth, such as diamond-studded cell phones or designer baby clothes.

During the twentieth century, material goods continued to define people and their lives; only the types of goods changed. As women began to work more outside the home, the market for more timesaving appliances and packaged foods grew.

Two salaries meant more disposable income, and the United States became the number one consuming nation in the world. As the population continued to grow, so did manufacturing, which placed increased demands on natural resources.

The first explicitly or intentionally produced green products began to appear during the early 1960s as the environmental movement took hold. Many of these first products, such as recycled garbage bags and biodegradable cleaners, were relatively expensive and had a reputation for unreliability.

By the 1980s, however, green products had improved and the general public was becoming more supportive and environmentally conscientious. When CDs were first introduced, public outcry forced companies to discontinue the use of superfluous cardboard packaging.

Greeting cards, wrapping paper, and other paper products made from recycled paper soon entered the mainstream. A market opened up for wooden products produced from sustainably harvested forests and reclaimed wood. Organic foods and beauty products containing natural ingredients and produced without animal testing gained in popularity. The slogan “reduce, reuse, and recycle” had become part of the general public’s consciousness, although consumerism continued to skyrocket.

The electronics industry created a distinct set of environmental challenges. Items such as cell phones, personal computers, video game players, and the batteries they used placed increasing demands on energy resources. Their manufacture involved many toxic chemicals. Moreover, planned obsolescence ensured that most electronic items would be thrown out regularly, creating an ever-increasing stream of waste. Some electronics manufacturers began “greening” their products by lowering energy needs, removing toxic chemicals, and implementing recycling programs.

Other popular environmental efforts by businesses include design for disassembly and life cycle analysis. Green consumers are increasingly knowledgeable about the production practices of companies and seek out those who implement voluntary efforts, such as design for disassembly and life cycle analysis, to support the environment.

Ultimately, green companies, which are characterized by innovation in technology and business practices and stakeholder involvement, promote the practice of green consumerism.

Green Consumerism Today

The American dream of owning a large house continues to drive consumerism and places increased demands on energy, water resources, and land. In 1970, the average house was 1,500 square feet, and less than one-third were air-conditioned. In the early twenty-first century, the average new house is over 2,400 square feet and almost 90 percent include air-conditioning. About one-fourth of all new houses are 3,000 square feet or larger. In contrast, the average household has decreased from 3.14 occupants in 1970 to 2.59 in 2006.

Although Americans continue to buy bigger homes, they are showing more interest in green housing. In 2005, the National Association of Home Builders implemented the voluntary Model Green Home Building Guidelines. Energy-efficient insulation and windows, recycled building products, and eco-friendly site planning are among the green suggestions.

More and more goods are being made from recycled products, including sneakers and purses from recycled rubber, tile and dishes from recycled glass, and plastic lumber from recycled grocery bags. However, recycling is not always an energy-efficient process. In some instances, recycling requirements and practices may place an additional burden on the environment from transportation, retailers, and consumers themselves as they shop.

Not all recycled products can be recycled again. An estimated 80 percent of electronic products that have been recycled in the United States end up in China. When disposed of there, the recycled electronics often pollute the ground and water supplies with toxic chemicals.

Green products provide more choices for the consumer and raise awareness of environmental issues. The market for such products has continued to grow, as increasing numbers of consumers take an interest in environmentalism. Others are opting to take advantage of the greenest shopping experiences available at second-hand stores.

Green consumer products can range from “light green” to “dark green.” The greenest products meet several criteria: their energy usage is minimal, their manufacturing processes are environmentally sustainable, and the products are made from renewable resources or recycled materials. Planned obsolescence is not part of their design, and their manufacture and use should produce no net increase in carbon dioxide emissions, believed to contribute to global warming. Manufacturers of such products often claim to adhere to socially responsible business practices.

Meanwhile, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) continues to implement changes in labeling. In March 2010, it issued warning letters to several food manufacturers for misusing terms such as “all natural” and “free range” in their labeling. In an announcement, the FDA stated it would no longer allow “unqualified general environmental benefit claims” on products.

Those who believe that consumerism is responsible for environmental destruction believe the solution is not more “light green” products, but a “deep green” shift in lifestyles. Deep-green consumerism promotes the ideal of shopping less, buying used products, and recycling as much as possible.

These essays and any opinions, information or representations contained therein are the creation of the particular author and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of EBSCO Information Services.

Bibliography

Adler, Margot. “Behind the Ever-Expanding American Dream House.” NPR, 4 July 2006, www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5525283. Accessed 24 May 2024.

Belli, Brita. “Green Living Deluxe.” E - The Environmental Magazine, Nov. 2008, pp. 26–27. Points of View Reference Center. Accessed 24 May 2024.

Belli, Brita. “Tools for Green Living.” E: The Environmental Magazine, vol. 23, no. 3, 2012, pp. 48–49. Points of View Reference Center. Accessed 24 May 2024.

Christopher, Maura. “How Much Is Enough?” Current Health, vol. 34, no. 4, 2007, pp. 4–5.

Connolly, John, and Andrea Prothero. “Green Consumption.” Journal of Consumer Culture, vol. 8, no. 1, Mar. 2008, pp. 117–145. Academic Search Complete. Accessed 24 May 2024.

“Consumer Reports. Greener Choices: Products for a Better Planet.” Consumers Union of the United States, 2015, www.greenerchoices.org/home.cfm. Accessed 24 May 2024.

De Graaf, John, David Wann, and Thomas H. Naylor. Affluenza: The All-Consuming Epidemic. Vol. 2. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2015.

Electronic Recyclers International. “ERI Founder Teams with Basel Action Network to Describe Dire Need for Ethical, Responsible E-Waste Recycling at Emerging Green 2015.” Business Wire, 24 Sept. 2015, pp. 9–10. Points of View Reference Center. Accessed 24 May 2024.

“4 in 5 Consumers Think Eco-Friendly Products Cost More ‘Green’.” PR Newswire US, 7 Apr. 2015, Points of View Reference Center. Accessed 24 May 2024.

Francis, Charles, et al. “Greening of Agriculture: Is It All a Greenwash of the Globalized Economy?” Journal of Crop Improvement, vol. 19, no. 1-2, 2007, pp. 193–220.

Gore, Al. An Inconvenient Truth: The Crisis of Global Warming. New York: Penguin Books for Young Readers, 2007.

Grossman, Elizabeth. “Green—It Seems.” Earth Island Journal, vol. 28, no. 4, 2014, pp. 23–26.

Kappel, Jo Anne. “Food Labels Decoded: What Does ‘Natural’ Mean?” FYI Living, 4 Feb. 2011, www.fyiliving.com/diet/nutrition/what-does-natural-mean-on-a-food-label. Accessed 24 May 2024.

Lyons, Julie Sevrens. “Americans’ Discarded Computers Poison Waterways in Asia.” San Jose Mercury News, 3 Mar. 2002. Accessed 24 May 2024.

Nichols, Robin. “Green Businesses Catering to Conscientious Consumers.” Record, 26 Feb. 2012. Points of View Reference Center. Accessed 24 May 2024.

Tokar, Brian. “The Myths of ‘Green Capitalism.'” New Politics, vol. 14, no. 4, 2014, pp. 18–23.

Williams, Alex. “Buying into the Green Movement.” The New York Times, 1 July 2007, www.nytimes.com/2007/07/01/fashion/01green.html. Accessed 24 May 2024.