green branding and eco-innovations

http://abr.sagepub.com/and Innovation

Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research

http://abr.sagepub.com/content/8/1/39The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/2319510X1200800106

2012 8: 39Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and InnovationA.N. Sarkar

Green Branding and Eco-innovations for Evolving a Sustainable Green Marketing Strategy

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Asia-Pacific Institute of Management

can be found at:Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and InnovationAdditional services and information for

http://abr.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://abr.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://abr.sagepub.com/content/8/1/39.refs.htmlCitations:

What is This?

- Mar 1, 2012Version of Record >>

by guest on May 24, 2014abr.sagepub.comDownloaded from by guest on May 24, 2014abr.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://abr.sagepub.com/

http://abr.sagepub.com/content/8/1/39

http://www.sagepublications.com

http://www.asiapacific.edu

http://abr.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://abr.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://abr.sagepub.com/content/8/1/39.refs.html

http://abr.sagepub.com/content/8/1/39.full.pdf

http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml



Green Branding and Eco-innovations for Evolving a Sustainable Green Marketing Strategy

A.N. Sarkar

AbstractGreen marketing is a new and evolving concept of marketing green and eco-products with well-defined eco-standards—consisting of wide-ranging eco-friendly products, satisfying eco-labelling and eco-footprinting standard norms. The article focuses on the significance of green branding and eco-labelling with stress on eco-innovations with a view to developing a sound and sustainable green market-ing strategy. The article examines how green consumerism can be linked to eco-market and to what extent this can be influenced by cross-cultural differences in consumer behaviour. The scope of involving green marketing with corporate ethics and corporate social responsibility (CSR) for inclusive growth of green markets has been explored. The article also examines how the green branding can leverage the eco-market through the mechanism of eco-labelling and eco-footprinting, complimented by green supply chain manage-ment practices. Finally, the article studies, at some length, the desirability of considering the aspects of sustainability factor and eco-innovations which can help promote green consumerism.

Keywords Green marketing, eco-market, green branding, eco-labelling, carbon footprinting, eco-innovations, green supply chain management, green consumerism

IntroductionGreen Marketing: The Concept and Significance

As a matter of common knowledge and understanding, ‘green marketing’ broadly refers to the promotion or adver-tising of products with eco-concerns. Generally, terms like bacteria-free, recyclable, refillable, ozone friendly, zero carbon, renewable and eco-friendly, etc., are some of the common expressions consumers most often associate with ‘green marketing’. In general, green marketing is a much broader concept; one that can be applied to consumer goods, industrial goods and even services. Thus, green marketing encompasses a broad range of activities, includ-ing product modification, changes to the production proc-ess, packaging changes, remodelling and stylising as well as modifying advertising. The terminology used in this area has varied, and it inter alia includes green marketing, environmental marketing and ecological marketing.

As for the genesis of green marketing as a concept, it is well worth looking at its evolutionary development over a time horizon. Environmental problems have got into

a sharper focus since 1962, when Rachel Carson’s (1962) book, Silent Spring, was published, and it drew people’s attention to the anthropocentric root and frightening extent of environmental problems arising out of industrial and economic activities (Kilbourne & Beckmann, 1998). From the 1970s, ecological green marketing had been flourish-ing largely in the developed countries. In this early period, attention was paid to specific environmental problems, and solutions were searched for them separately. This is precisely the reason why only few products, companies and industries were influenced by this new trend. Main aims of green marketing at that stage were to minimise the dependency syndrome on special product groups responsible for environmental pollution and to increase awareness of new product categories. From the second part of the 1980s, a gradual shift had been experienced in the role and necessity of ecological marketing. Great environmental catastrophes of the 1980s (such as the explosion in the nuclear reactor of Chernobyl, water pol-lution caused by oil tankers and discovery of the ozone hole) directed the attention even more to the interaction between economy and environment, and in the process,

Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation

8(1) 39–58© 2012 Asia-Pacific

Institute of Management SAGE Publications

Los Angeles, London,New Delhi, Singapore,

Washington DCDOI: 10.1177/2319510X1200800106

http://apjmri.sagepub.com

A.N. Sarkar, Officiating Director and Dean (Research), Asia-Pacific Institute of Management, 3&4 Institutional Area, Jasola (Opp. Sarita Vihar), New Delhi 110025. E-mail: [email protected]

Article

by guest on May 24, 2014abr.sagepub.comDownloaded from


40 A.N. Sarkar

Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation, 8, 1 (2012): 39–58

led to the evolution of sustainable eco-technology. By the late 1980s and the 1990s, the notion of ‘green’ products became somewhat trendier, and the practice of marketing products as such became more commonplace in niche markets. But it was not until the start of the twenty-first century—when concerns over global warming and conse-quential eco-degradation started gaining momentum—that ‘green’ moved towards mainstream and began influ-encing the practices of ‘green’ product manufacturers. This was synchronous with the promulgation of the ‘Kyoto Protocol’ that heralded the beginning of the ‘clean and green technology’ as well as ‘Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)’ concept to save the environment from the emerging ecological disaster.

According to a survey carried out by the Roper Organization (in 1990), about 82 per cent of the American consumers were ready to pay 5 per cent more premium price for products which were eco-friendly. On the basis of these results, not only the value-conscious firms can bene-fit from green marketing but also those who focus on the eco-friendly consumers. The most important concepts of the 1980s in essence were as follows: sustainability, clean technologies, environmental performance and green con-sumers. Beginning in the 1990s, the agenda of green mar-keting began to expand as new topics emerged that are related to individual’s motivation, such as perceived con-sumer effectiveness, cooperative behaviours and strategic alliances (Kilbourne & Beckmann, 1998), and these, put together, paved the way for ‘green marketing’.

According to the American Marketing Association (AMA, 2007, 2008, 2010), green marketing is the market-ing of products that are presumed to be environmentally safe. Thus, green marketing incorporates a broad range of activities, including product modification, changes to the production process, packaging changes as well as modify-ing advertising. Thus, green marketing now refers to holis-tic marketing concept wherein the production, marketing consumption and disposal of products and services take place in a manner that is less damaging to the environment, with growing awareness about the implications of global warming, non-biodegradable solid waste, harmful impact of pollutants, etc. In this sphere, both marketers and con-sumers are becoming increasingly sensitive to the need for a gradual shift toward green products and services. According to Pride and Ferrell (1993, 1995), green market-ing—also alternatively known as environmental marketing and sustainable marketing—refers to an organisation’s efforts at designing, promoting, pricing and distributing products that will not harm the environment. Elkington (1994) defined green consumer as one who avoids prod-ucts that are likely to endanger the health of the consumer or others; cause significant damage to the environment

during manufacture, use or disposal; consume a dispropor-tionate amount of energy; cause unnecessary waste; use materials derived from threatened species or environments; involve unnecessary use of, or cruelty to, animals; and adversely affect other countries. Polonsky (1994), how-ever, argued that a majority of people believe that green marketing refers solely to the promotion or advertising of products having environmental characteristics, with terms such as recyclable, refillable and ozone friendly being some of the things consumers most often associate with green marketing. While these terms are green marketing claims, in general, it is a much broader concept, one that can be applied to consumer goods, industrial goods and even services (Roberts & Bacon, 1997). Green marketing, thus, understandably incorporates a broad range of activi-ties that include modification or changes into the design, production process, packaging as well as advertising of the product (Polonsky, 1994). Elaborating it further, Polonsky stated that green or environmental marketing consists of all activities designed to generate and facilitate any exchanges intended to satisfy human needs or wants with minimal detrimental impact on the natural environment. This was supported by Peattie (1995), who defined green marketing as the holistic management process that is customised to identifying, anticipating and satisfying the requirements of various stakeholders in a profitable and sustainable manner.

Green or environmental marketing has also been viewed, in recent times, as a tool towards sustainable development and for strengthening brand image (Banytė & Gadeikienė, 2008). As rising environmental concerns are encouraging consumers to have greater awareness of their purchase decisions, firms are implementing measures geared to offering green substitutes for traditional prod-ucts. Consumers and companies alike are consequently more willing to pay premium prices for green alternatives (Laroche et al., 2001). This corroborates well with what Maxwell et al. (2000) mentioned: ‘all things being equal, consumers would prefer a green product over the one that is less friendly to the environment with a growing number of people willing to pay a premium price for the former—from organic foods to energy-efficient appliances’ (D’Souza et al., 2004).

Grant (2007) has suggested that primary objective of green marketing is to educate and make people willing to go green, because it has an influence on changing the life-style and behaviour of potential consumers. There are steady movements in public interest and concerns about the environmental issues. Companies like BASF and DuPont are leading the greening of heavy industry and have had the biggest impact on environment. Simula et al. (2009) stated that the word ‘green’ is widely used today for new



Green Branding and Eco-innovations 41


technologies and new products which have more sustainable impact on the environment. ‘Green’, ‘pro-environmental’, ‘sustainability’, ‘environmentally friendly’ and ‘ecology’ are the terms commonly being used to describe that the firms’ processes and products consume less energy, they are recyclable, lessen waste and pollution and conserve natural resources. Viewed from that perspective, green marketing tries to harmonise environmental concerns and individual interests. According to Peattie (2001), the evolu-tion of green marketing has three phases. First phase was termed as ‘ecological’ green marketing, and during this period, all marketing activities were planned to help envi-ronment problems and provide remedies for environmental problems. Second phase was ‘environmental’ green mar-keting, in which the focus shifted on ‘clean technology’ that involved designing of innovative new products which take care of pollution and waste issues. Third phase was ‘sustainable’ green marketing. It came into prominence in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

What Makes a Product Green?

Beyond the assumption that the term ‘green’ indicates environmentally friendly attributes, the term is quite vague and subject to multiple interpretations, depending on any number of factors, including local, national and international business practices; market structures; soci-etal norms; politics; and government regulations. In their book, The Green Consumer, John Elkington, Julia Hailes and John Makower (1993) discussed several characteris-tics that a product must have to be regarded as a ‘green’ product. They contended that a green product should not (ibid.):

1. endanger the health of people or animals;2. damage the environment at any stage of its life,

including manufacture, use and disposal;3. consume a disproportionate amount of energy and

other resources during manufacture, use or disposal;

4. cause unnecessary waste, either as a result of exces-sive packaging or a short useful life;

5. involve the unnecessary use of or cruelty to animals;

6. use materials derived from threatened species or environments.

Stephen and Kane (1996) noted in Business Horizons that a product can be recognised to be ‘green’ if it runs cleaner, works better or saves money and energy through efficiency. Practising green is inherently proactive; it means finding ways to reduce waste and otherwise be more

environmentally responsible. Many years later, the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) guidelines were established to set national green marketing standards (FTC, 2009, 2010), but it received several criticisms. The concept of sustaina-bility, intrinsically bound to ‘green’ concept, reflects the long-term holistic understanding of a product’s impact. Therefore, when reviewing a product for its degree of ‘greenness’, one must also consider the impact of its entire life cycle from the point of raw materials extraction to the manufacturing process, to consumer use and finally, to the end-of-life waste passage. This is called a life cycle assess-ment (LCA) and ensures that all the product’s impacts are taken into consideration. Life cycle analysis (LCA) and/or product line analysis (PLA) studies measure the cumula-tive environmental impact of products over their entire life cycle—from extraction of the resources used to create the product to all aspects of production (refining, manufactur-ing and transportation), to its use and ultimate disposal. The LCA can be measured in terms of reduction of impact on the environment, or for reasons of better safety and health considerations for builders and occupants. Green products also show an increasing return on investment through energy savings, increased productivity of building occupants and overall resale values in buildings (Intini & Kühtz, 2010) because of vastly expanding eco-market potentials and spiralling demand of green products with fast changing lifestyle.

Today, terms like ‘green’ and ‘greener’ have become buzzwords of choice to describe all things sustainable and environmentally friendly. While they are often used inter-changeably, each term actually means something different. In their critical essay, ‘Green Versus Sustainability: From Semantics to Enlightenment’, Yanarella et al. (1999) explained that ‘green’ refers to individual products and processes, whereas ‘sustainable’ relates to whole systems of which individual consumer products and other commer-cial materials are a part. According to the authors, ‘“Green” evokes small incremental improvements in social prac-tices, modern technology and human habitats, while sus-tainability implies a revolution in organising our personal and collective lives and inhabiting the planet’. The expres-sion ‘environmentally friendly’ refers to products or serv-ices that are not harmful to the outdoor environment or its inhabitants. However, for more than a decade, the US FTC (2010) has issued warnings about products or services mar-keted as environmentally friendly, environmentally safe, environmentally preferable or eco-safe, noting that prod-ucts, packaging and services have some environmental impact and that such marketing terms do not help consum-ers make informed choices (FTC, 1999, 2010). These stip-ulations will be relevant to all products claimed to be green and eco-friendly.



42 A.N. Sarkar


Objectives

Given the broad scenario about the currently evolving con-cepts of green marketing, green branding, eco-labelling and green innovations, the broad objectives of the article may be stated as follows:

1. To look at how green consumerism can be linked to eco-market, and in doing so, what should be the future marketing strategy and to what extent this can be influenced by cross-cultural differences in con-sumer behaviour.

2. To study how the green marketing concept can be enlarged in the broader context of green environ-mentalism and corporate social responsibility.

3. To examine how the green branding can leverage the eco-market through the mechanism of eco-labelling, carbon footprinting, standardisation and certification.

4. To study how the corporations can create environ-mentally friendly eco-market by making ‘green claims’ in terms of maintaining eco-footprinting standard norms.

5. To study how critical is the supply chain manage-ment in effective green marketing.

6. To study how the sustainability factor and eco-innovations can help promote green consumerism under a holistic green market framework.

Green Consumerism: A Vital Link to Eco-marketA green consumer is someone who is very concerned about the environment and therefore, only purchases products that are environmentally friendly or eco-friendly with little or no packaging, products made from natural ingredients and products that are made without causing pollution or detriment to the environmental quality (like emission haz-ards). The green consumer would be the type to drive a hybrid vehicle and buy products made with hemp or those made from recycled or waste materials.1 Green consumer-ism is essentially a movement to encourage people to buy food and other products, such as organic foods or lead-free petrol, which are regarded as environmentally friendly goods. One of the possible goals of green products is to encourage consumers to modify behaviour. For example, some studies suggest that consumers are willing to pay more for some green goods at premium prices (Ottman, 1992, 1993), although more recent results in the Morgan Polls (Ha, 2008; Mobium, 2007) suggest that, globally, the majority of consumers believe green goods are overpriced (Australia, 65 per cent; New Zealand, 66 per cent; the United Kingdom [UK], 74 per cent; and the US, 72 per

cent). In recent time, growing public awareness of environ-mental issues has brought with it a corresponding change in the buying decisions of a significant segment of American consumers. As the Encyclopedia of the Environment observed that ‘many consumers, and not just the most envi-ronmentally conscious ones, are seeking ways to lessen the environmental impacts of their personal buying decisions through the purchase and use of products and services perceived to be environmentally friendly’ (Stoeckle et al., 1994).

In the field of green marketing, different studies have classified consumers based on different demographic, psy-chographic, cultural and personality variables. The most useful classification in the Indian context was found to be based on three parameters: concern for the environment, awareness of environmental issues and environmentally friendly behaviour (Davis, 1993; Jain & Kaur, 2004). The key findings of these studies show that though Indians lack sufficient knowledge about environmental issues, there is a generally high concern for the environment and most sur-prisingly, Indian consumers score very high on environ-mentally friendly behaviour, especially with respect to conservation of resources and purchase decisions, espe-cially for buying greener products. The most important benefit that individuals seek from environmentally respon-sible behaviour is the desire to act in an environmentally responsible manner.

Many companies are competing to push their green products in the eco-market space, and their green brand-ing mechanisms are different. For instance, green market-ing encompasses special eco-centric focus and efforts such as Procter & Gamble’s developing disposable dia-pers that can be composted and detergents that are degra-dable, concentrated towards reducing packaging bulk in landfills. AT&T has substituted biodegradable cardboard for plastic foam packaging. Alberto–Culver markets ‘ozone friendly’ hairspray containing no chlorofluorocar-bons (CFCs). The Body Shop has over 700 boutiques worldwide selling its non-animal tested, mostly natural, product line with recycling/refilling policies. A Canadian survey of marketing executives from that country’s 500 largest firms found that 47 per cent had already altered their packaging to make their products more environmen-tally friendly. Biodynamic Agricultural Society of Australia and New Zealand has a focus on export-oriented ‘organic farming’ as a green marketing strategy.

Companies use green marketing not only to increase con-sumer’s positive response but also to cut costs to make prod-ucts economical to customers. For example, McDonald’s used recyclable materials for wrappers and reduced its environmental waste by 60 per cent; their ‘give a tree away’ day led the way for other fast food companies to follow





suit. All of McDonald’s napkins and tray liners in the res-taurants are made from recycled paper, as are the carry-out drink trays and even the stationery used at the headquar-ters. By making its drinking straw 20 per cent lighter, McDonald’s has saved one million pounds of waste per year. The effective use of green marketing has made the public aware that McDonald’s Corporation is an environ-mentally concerned company, and this has generated not only public’s consumer approval but additional revenues as well. American seafood producers and distributors of tuna fish certify their products as ‘dolphin-free tuna’ and take stringent measures to minimise dolphin deaths in the tuna fishing industry. The increased environmental concern over ‘dolphin-free tuna’ by the US has effectively convinced foreign firms to follow stringent US eco-conservation standards.

Sustainable Green Marketing StrategyFor environmental advertising to be successful, a firm must first have an environmental strategy put in place (Easterling et al., 1996). Advertising strategies have changed dramati-cally over time, from ‘image’ orientation to ‘product’ ori-entation in the 1990s (ibid.). ‘Process’ and ‘factual’ orien-tations are the least utilised orientations which some management workers suggest to be a business opportunity (ibid.). Two dimensions of the positioning strategies of newly created green brands are seen to have a significant impact on brand attitudes, namely, the ‘functional’ and ‘emotional’ dimensions, according to Hartmann et al. (2005). Their study indicates that there is an overall posi-tive influence of green brand positioning on brand attitude. While the emotional dimension proves to be more effective for the product (a car) used in the study, it cannot, however, be concluded decisively which dimensional aspect is more effective. Both language and images can be used to craft such messages by promoting particular interests and ide-ologies (Hansen & Machin, 2008). Rivera-Camino (2007) suggests that a firm’s ‘greening process’ is not linear, but an ‘uneven process’ which several green marketing strat-egists have used to target different stakeholders.

Clearly, green marketing should be an integral part of the overall corporate strategy for the firms specialising in green eco-products (Menon & Menon, 1997). Green mar-keting also ties closely with issues of industrial ecology and environmental sustainability, such as extended pro-ducers’ liability, life cycle analysis, material use and resource flows and eco-efficiency. Firms can ‘go green’ in three ways: value-addition processes (firm level), man-agement systems (firm level) and/or products (product level). Greening the value-addition processes could entail

redesigning them, eliminating some of them, modifying technology and/or inducting new technology—all with the objective of reducing the environmental impact aggre-gated for all stages. Ottman et al. (2006) suggested that all marketing activities must convince the consumers through identifying the basic product features by resorting to the following strategies:

1. Consumer value positioning: A firm should focus in designing a product which is differentiated from and performs better than the alternatives.

2. Calibration of consumer knowledge: In designing marketing communication, a firm should always present the product’s unique features, environmental benefits and solutions that match with the customer norms and values.

3. Credibility of product claim: By certification of claimed green products.

A firm should build confidence in the consumers’ minds by presenting or communicating benefits of the products that are specific and meaningful and satisfy the consumers. While consumer’s decisions are influenced by the media, as a stakeholder, the role of media cannot be ignored, and it is the only source through which consumers receive much of environment-related information (Ottman, 1993). Davis (1993) and Glaser (2009) explained that consumers want more particular and specific information about the product or service which they are about to buy in case they are claimed to be environmentally friendly. Vaccaro (2009) presented two main strategies for the companies in respond-ing to their external environment as ‘proactive strategies’ (first mover) and ‘reactive strategies’. The proactive strate-gies and reactive strategies move in a continuum and the response time may vary widely depending on the customer behaviour and the lifestyle.

Companies make their offerings competitive through price/quality or prestige/image strategies from their com-petitors, but eco-friendliness and social responsibility can make companies more profitable on a sustainable basis. ‘Early mover’ companies have enhanced their image as environment friendly. The municipality-owned electricity companies of Stockholm and Goteborg set an example as ‘early movers’. In 1999, Swedish state-owned railway company, SJ, bought ‘Bra Miljöval’ labelled electricity (Kaberger, 2003). Other studies conducted, such as by Karna et al. (2003), have suggested that companies can create competitive advantage if they use innovations related to environmental sustainability rather than simply comply with the government regulations. Fuller (1999) has pre-sented the strategy matrix of environmentally improved and reinvented green products, as illustrated in Figure 1.



44 A.N. Sarkar


1. The strategies presented in Column 1, ‘Market Penetration/ Product Improvement Strategy’ and ‘Market Development Strategy’, are based on mak-ing some changes in the product attributes and man-ufacturing process.

2. The strategies presented in Column 2, ‘Product Development Strategy’ and ‘Diversification Strategy’, require high management commitment and product is reinvented according to the ecosystems’ impact (Fuller, 1999).

Similarly, Simula et al. (2009) proposed that in order to develop the product, companies should understand cus-tomer attitudes and norms towards greenness, by using pre-marketing campaigns. Simula et al. (2009) have pre-sented a quadratic model of actual verses perceived green-ness of the product (see Figure 2).

Herein sustainability superiority and actual greenness, based on standardised certification procedure, have a greater chance for market attractiveness to cater to envi-ronment-friendly green consumerism. Positioning a brand as a ‘green brand’, in this case, entails an active communi-cation and differentiation of the brand from its competitors

Figure 1. Strategy Matrix of Environmentally Improved and Reinvented Products

Column 2Column 1

EnvironmentallyReinvented Products

EnvironmentallyImproved Products

CurrentMarkets

NewMarkets

MarketPenetration/ProductImprovement Strategy

Product DevelopmentStrategy

Market DevelopmentStrategy

Diversification Strategy

Source: Fuller (1999).

Figure 2. Simula’s Actual versus Perceived Greenness Model

Green washedproduct

Sustainabilitysuperiority

MissedOpportunity

An honest Non-green product

Actual GreennessHighLow

High

Low

PerceivedGreenness

Source: Simula et al. (2009).

through its environmentally sound attributes. Ecologically, sustainable products will not be commercially successful if green brand attributes are not effectively communicated (Pickett et al., 1995). Coddington (1993) and Meffert and Kirchgeorg (1993) suggest that green positioning is an essential factor in the success of green branding strategies.

Cross-cultural Difference: The Epicentre of Green Marketing Strategy

Green marketing actually began in the early 1980s in Europe when European companies began selling ‘green products’—new types of disposable diapers, detergents, batteries, aerosols and other products—that do not damage the environment. This manufacturing of new types of prod-ucts grew quickly and soon caught on in the US and other parts of the world. For the British, damage to the environ-ment ranks with a world war as the most important threat to mankind. Air pollution in Athens has long been the subject of deep popular discontent and partly explains why the Greek government has aligned itself with hardline northern European Union (EU) countries in leading the fight to impose stricter new limits on auto emissions. The growing political power of green parties in Scandinavia, the Benelux and especially Germany has combined with public concern over such issues as the death of the forest (Waldsterben) from acid rain to force mainstream political parties to endorse tough environmental legislation. In Italy, public outcry over the waste exported to developing countries prompted the country to adopt a tough new hazardous waste bill.

In Italy, Fiat leads the world in ‘green’ cars. Since the 1970s, Fiat has been recycling 80 per cent of its factory waste, and it was one of the first European car manufactur-ers to produce cars which ran on lead-free fuel. Fiat has also established a huge recycling scheme called Fiat Auto Recycling.2 Under this scheme, second-hand cars are col-lected with the aim of recycling 100 per cent of the cars. Fiat is also the world leader in diesel car and electric vehi-cle technology. The electric car that was developed by Fiat is the first ‘truly green’ standard production car, a world’s first one which will likely be the start of a new generation of cars which are designed to support the environment. BMW and Mercedes Benz are examining clean technology for cars.

Germany has passed the strictest green marketing laws. The German ‘Blue Angel’ eco-label (first introduced in 1978) is used as a symbol of environmental friendliness in Germany, and by 1993, over 4,000 products in 58 catego-ries carried the label. This Blue Angel logo originated because of the growing consumer demand in Germany for ‘environmentally friendly products’. Eighty per cent of





German households are aware of the eco-label and it receives widespread support from manufacturers. On 1 December 1991, the German Packaging Order (called the ‘Topfer Law’ after its environment minister) became law. The guiding objective of the order is waste avoidance; waste which cannot be avoided shall be recycled (Micklitz, 1999). Hoover was the first manufacturer to be awarded an EU eco-label and claims that as a result, its sales in Germany have trebled and sales in the premium sector of the UK’s washing machine market have doubled (EU Cross-border Monitor, 1995). Other nations are also sponsoring eco-la-belling programmes. Canada has issued Environmental Choice, guidelines for products ranging from paints to reusable cloth diapers. Japan has its own eco-mark pro-gramme; its symbol consists of two arms embracing the world (Codington, 1993).

In many Latin American countries, including Mexico, packaging requirements are less stringent and less sophis-ticated. As such, it is difficult to meet the standards of Europe. Although they may cry foul, proposing these are hidden protectionist requirements, General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) makes it clear that countries do have the right to impose stringent rules for ‘environmental reasons’. Mexicans are more concerned with economic pri-orities (basic necessities of life) rather than societal or environmental concerns. An economically developed country like the US or western Europe has the luxury of putting environmental and societal issues at the top of their agendas. This is not so for undeveloped or developing countries like Mexico. Colombia is one Latin American country that is developing an eco-labelling programme. The objectives of the Colombian eco-label are to promote environmental conservation in several sectors, addressing a variety of aspects, including polluting emissions and energy and natural resource use, as well as to provide the domestic industry with the means and incentives to increase its competitiveness through the implementation of envi-ronmental management strategies. This programme also assisted Colombian export firms in penetrating foreign markets, especially those such as the EU, with considerable ‘green consumerism’ interest (Gaviria, 1995).

Japan is ambiguous about the environment. Japanese government budget allocation to the environment has increased from $617 million in 1988 to $3.5 billion in 1991 and doubled again through 1995. Japanese consumers are becoming more bargain conscious, frugal and environmen-tally aware. Recycling of second-hand goods is flourish-ing. Consumers are leaning towards healthier, ecologically sounder products. Suntory—a Japanese beer company—sells a brand called The Earth, with cans and bottles embla-zoned with the slogan ‘Suntory is thinking about the Earth’. The can has stay-on rather than pull-off tabs. Japan’s

Economic Bureau found that consumers named Kao as the most environmentally conscious company in the country. Kao reduced its overall energy use by 40 per cent in the last 17 years. Japan’s Health Ministry devoted its 1990 White Paper to the environment, but the Japanese Environmental Agency has far less enforcement power than US’ Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Some 28,000 locally tailored environmental agreements in force between Japanese industry and local communities act as a non-tariff barrier (‘Back to basics’, 1993).

In countries bordering on the Mediterranean, the eco-logical awareness of the average household is much less strongly developed than in countries further to the north, such as Germany, Holland or Norway (Simon, 1992). For example, in Italy, environmental issues are not nearly as important as in Germany. In Denmark, soft drinks may be sold only in glass bottles with refundable deposits. In the Netherlands, old or broken appliances must be returned to the manufacturer for recycling (Oatis, 1996). Green con-sumerism first appeared in the Netherlands with a boycott of aerosols containing CFCs, and spread to Germany, thanks to consumer magazines which rated brands’ green qualities through their own laboratories. In Denmark, a power plant, an enzyme plant, a refinery and a wallboard factory, all use one another’s by-products as source materi-als. The Netherlands has effluent charges. Deposits are mandatory for bottles in Germany and cans in Norway.

Green Marketing vis-à-vis Corporate Social Responsibility

Society expects businesses to act in a more responsible manner towards the social community as well as provide goods and services efficiently. By this, the social responsi-bilities of any corporate house have become an important aspect of the modern era, in which conscious efforts are being made by an organisation to maximise its positive impact and minimise its negative impact on society as a whole and on various groups and individuals within soci-ety (Davis & Fredric, 1984; Dutta, 2009). The European Commission defined corporate social responsibility (CSR) as ‘a concept whereby companies integrate social and envi-ronmental concerns in their business operations and in their interaction with their stakeholders on a voluntary basis’ (Juscius & Snieska, 2008). Companies should work for betterment of society as a whole, and more greening of the world. Sirsly and Lametrz (2008) suggested that CSR is not always meant to be generating the monetary and eco-nomic value for the firms, but it helps to promote firm’s unique efforts towards society. When a third party endorsed its corporate efforts, the reputation of a firm is reinforced in the ‘eyes of both market and non market stakeholders’



46 A.N. Sarkar


(Sirsly & Lametrz, 2008). Karna et al. (2003), however, stated that environmental issues were considered solely the responsibility of the government. Proactive marketing strategies and government support can help build long-term environmental sustainability.

Globally, there has been a growing concern on issues pertaining to accountability linked to environmental qual-ity and its safeguard, well within the purview of green mar-keting. A heightened awareness has been created in the minds of the consumers that their purchasing behaviour can actually wreak a serious dent to the ecological balance of the planet (Rahbar, 2008). Coupled with this realisation, the shifting demands and preferences of consumers are exerting pressure on the companies to transform their busi-ness activities to cater to the environmental needs in a more responsible way (Olson, 2009). Being socially responsible by offering environmentally sustainable products and serv-ices, therefore, becomes the prime concern to those compa-nies that are striving to attain a competitive advantage in the business world (Wahid et al., 2011). Hence, ideally, green marketing concept as well as the green marketing strategies should be built around the key focus of CSR. Some recent corporate examples of compliance of CSR in the context of green marketing by some Indian business firms are illustrated next.3

1. Broadcaster New Delhi Television Ltd, or NDTV, in partnership with car maker Toyota Kirloskar Motor Pvt. Ltd, launched Greenathon on 7 February 2011—a 24-hour live television event to create awareness about environmental issues.

2. Reva Electric Car Co. is developing a market for electric cars and thereby a sustainable business—firms are gearing up to bring about a change in the way their businesses and products are perceived.

3. Panasonic Corp. is working out a go-to-schools interactive campaign to spread awareness among students on global warming and other environmen-tal issues, to begin with.

4. Nokia India Pvt. Ltd has launched a campaign to recycle electronic waste. Consumers are encouraged to dump old mobile phones and accessories, irre-spective of brand, at any of the 1,300 green recy-cling bins at Nokia priority dealers and Nokia care centres.

5. Henkel India Ltd launched ‘eco-learn’—a learning initiative—to inculcate environmental concern and sustainability.

6. Hindustan Unilever Ltd’s (HUL) Surf Excel Quick Wash talked about how housewives could save two buckets of water while using premium detergent powder to wash clothes.

7. Reckitt Benckiser Group Plc. has launched a global campaign, ‘Our Home Our Planet’, to help consum-ers save money and minimise their carbon footprint as part of its Carbon 20 programme.

CSR has recently become increasingly topical: Its inte-gration into different areas of activities, including market-ing, is becoming a necessity and a priority task for many companies. More often, the consumers need to buy ‘eco-friendly, safe and clean’ products that can be identified. This underlines implied necessity of green marketing appli-cation in the implementation of CSR. Since there is a lack of studies in the field of green marketing, the identification of its priorities in the context of green consumer’s decision making to purchase eco-friendly products is becoming increasingly relevant. Scientific studies (Bakanauskas & Liesionis, 2002; Ottman & Reilly, 1998; Ramanauskiene, 2008) show that properties of eco-friendly products have a big influence on consumers’ decision-making processes regarding the buying behaviour of eco-products, even at premium prices.

Green Branding to Leverage the Eco-market OpportunitiesThe ‘going green’ movement continues to build momen-tum, and companies are quickly realising that they better become eco-friendly now or risk losing business. Plenty of new companies are starting out as a ‘green’ brand and older companies want to re-brand their products to be more eco-friendly. Since both new and existing customers surf the Web, one can accomplish ‘green’ branding through a vari-ety of ways. Implications of green branding are widely known and the emerging green consumer purchase behav-iour suggests this scenario4:

1. Demand for green (or greener) products will increase over time as attitudes and social norms evolve.

2. Demand will increase as new product choices become available and information that enables con-sumers to make informed purchase decisions (for example, green labels) is introduced.

3. Consumers will start to shift spending to greener brands within a category.

4. Consumers will increasingly prefer to purchase from companies with a brand that is perceived as green, regardless of whether or not the product that they ultimately purchase is one of the company’s ‘green’ products.

As consumer behaviour towards green consumerism is inflicted by the opportunistic global climate change





challenge, companies have rapidly learned that being green—and being seen to be green—makes good business sense. To add value to the ‘green’ products, ‘certification marks’, labels and logos are increasingly being used by brand owners to signal their green credentials and so as to be able to boost their market share. A properly controlled eco-label offers consumers a guarantee that a product or service has been independently verified to meet given envi-ronmental standards (Bowman, 2009). In the US alone, consumer spending on products and services that are per-ceived to be environment-friendly will double to US$500 billion, according to the 2007 Green Brands Survey con-ducted by Landor Associates, Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates, and Cohn & Wolfe (ImagePower® Green Brands Survey, 2007). Consumers not only want to buy green but are also prepared to pay a premium price for it. Nearly 70 per cent of some 2,000 people surveyed in the US, the UK, Germany, the Netherlands, Australia and Japan said they would pay a premium price for green energy alternatives, such as wind, bio-energy and solar power. According to last year’s poll by IBM Global Energy and Utilities industry, Australians were the most willing to pay more for renewable energy, but Americans said they would pay the highest premium—20 per cent or more. Consumer brands have been quick to respond to shoppers’ desire to buy green. Wal-Mart announced last year that it would provide carbon ratings for all its electronics items. Procter & Gamble, the consumer goods giant behind such brands as Gillette and Olay, has committed to selling $30 billion worth of greener products over the next five years. Rival Unilever—makers of Dove and Lipton—has pledged to reduce waste and water consumption in its supply chain. In Brazil, Unilever and Wal-Mart have built ‘sustainable houses’ within stores which are made from recycled prod-ucts, showing how to make everyday living more eco-friendly. Darnall (2008) examined the question of how an environmentally proactive hotel can gain competitive dis-tinction by way of ‘green’ branding. It demonstrates that not all green branding options are created equal.

Marketing of eco-products is not quite as simple as it seems. It is generally observed that the ecologically sus-tainable products will not be commercially viable to pene-trate the market if green brand attributes are not effectively communicated. Meffert and Kirchgeorg (1993) suggest that green positioning is an essential factor in the success of green branding strategies. Green brand positioning strat-egies may be classified as ‘functional’ or ‘emotional’. A car brand, for example, may be considered environmentally sound if the models in question cause significantly lower emissions than competitors. Several Toyota car brands recently launched in the US are branded as ‘green cars’ because of ‘zero emission’ claims.

Emotional elements should be considered prime among the visible choices of green branding and positioning of eco-products. As a corporate strategy, green positioning can be based on at least three conceptually different types of emotional brand benefits: (a) a feeling of well-being (‘warm glow’) associated with acting in an altruistic way; (b) auto-expression benefits through the socially visible consumption of green brands; and (c) nature-related bene-fits stemming from sensations and feelings normally expe-rienced through contact with nature. These are the results of a sensation of ‘emotional affinity towards nature’, for example, ‘loving nature’ or ‘feeling one with nature’. Most people experience feelings of well-being or even happiness when they are in contact with natural environment. Past communication campaigns for GM-Opel, British Petroleum (BP) and the Spanish power utility, Iberdrola, have embed-ded the brand in pleasant imagery of natural environments, aiming to evoke vicarious nature experiences as emotional brand benefits. All these, in sum, mean, ‘Green consumer-ism masks its market-driven origins under a thick layer of morality packaging’.5 Green positioning by leveraging through emotional appeal to the customer can be best illus-trated through an advertisement brought out by Mercedes Benz.

Research from the Carbon Trust Standard in March 2009 states that 62 per cent of consumers (from a sample of 2,000 UK consumers) are influenced by environmental considerations in their purchasing decisions and this has increased from a year ago (Carbon Trust Standard, 2009). Some brands of Philips and Unilever have started to inte-grate sustainability criteria throughout their product lines, introducing both ‘green’ products as well as improving standards on product lines, in order to be more environ-mentally efficient. The challenge for companies today is to find a balance between informing consumers of responsi-ble business practices, while innovating for a new low-carbon economy by offering choice for consumers giving due cognisance to implicit corporate social responsibility.

Carbon Footprinting and Eco-labelling

The term ‘carbon footprint’ is commonly used to describe the total amount of carbon-dioxide (CO2) and other green-house gas (GHG) emissions for which an individual or organisation is responsible. Footprints can also be calcu-lated for events or products. Certification marks, labels and logos are increasingly being used by brand owners to sig-nal their green credentials and thereby boost their market share. A properly controlled eco-label offers consumers a guarantee that a product or service has been independently verified to meet given environmental standards. In Australia, for example, the Greenhouse Friendly™ label is



48 A.N. Sarkar


a registered certification mark, administered by the gov-ernment’s Department of Climate Change. Some compa-nies are developing their own eco-standards and product labelling. Multinational companies (MNCs) like BASF and Philips have launched their green logo and tick symbol in 2011 to identify products with ‘significantly better energy efficiency than the nearest competitor products’. Eco-labelling could be of two kinds: performance based and process based. An eco-labelling scheme based on prod-uct performance, such as labels claiming biodegradability of packaging, sustainability in production processes or non-pollutant aspects of product usage, will require certain trust on the part of the consumer. A systems approach to the eco-labelling of food and other products requires the involvement of multiple stakeholders as one party’s actions affect others’ environmental performance. The specific cri-teria used in eco-labels also vary. In some cases, these might relate to specific types of claims being made relating to the composition of products and packaging—biodegrad-able or recyclable; process issues—dolphin-free or made with X per cent recycled content; use issues—saves X energy; and certifications based internationally, nationally or by industry—ISO 14001, Nordic Swan, EUREPGAP, Integrated Pest Management or Forestry Stewardship Council. In this way, labels are not merely messages but also claims about particular environmental properties or features of a product to help promote green ideas.

Eco-labelling is a voluntary approach to environmental performance certification that is practised around the world. An ‘eco-label’ identifies a product that meets speci-fied performance criteria or standards. In contrast to ‘green’ symbols or claim statements made by manufacturers and service providers, an eco-label is awarded by a third-party organisation for products or services that are determined to meet specific environmental criteria. When specifying or purchasing a product that carries an Energy Star® label, for example, the purchaser knows that the product meets an energy efficiency standard set by EPA. Different types of organisations, including government, non-profit and for-profit organisations, have developed eco-label programmes. The breadth of, and issues addressed by, eco-label pro-grammes vary. For example, Energy Star® is focused on energy use during equipment operation, while other eco-labels address ‘life cycle’ environmental concerns and still others cover ergonomic and worker health and safety issues.

Worldwide, there are numerous eco-labelling pro-grammes, developed by businesses, government agencies and non-governmental organisations. Each eco-label has its own criteria that products need to meet in order to be certified. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has identified and developed standards for three

broad types of eco-labelling fitting under the three types of designation: (a) Type I (ISO 14 024); (b) Type II (ISO 14 021); and (c) Type III (ISO/TR 14 025). The use of respon-sible labelling or certification methods has become univer-sal in green marketing. Whether based on international systems (ISO), sectoral standards (Forest Stewardship Council) or internal programmes created by companies themselves, they can greatly enhance corporate credibility if they are overseen by independent bodies. Nonetheless, a distinction needs to be drawn between official eco-labels developed and assigned by independent bodies or institu-tions and companies’ own eco-labelling. Scientific Certification Systems offer a wide range of green product certifications, including single-attribute claims, multiple-attribute claims and comprehensive cradle-to-grave LCA-based claims.

Comprehensive labels are generally based on LCAs and attempt to evaluate the overall environmental impact of a product or service against a set of comprehensive pre-established criteria. Many eco-labels and certification pro-grammes certify products based on life cycle parameters, such as energy use, recycled content, and air and water emissions from manufacturing, disposal and use. Others focus on a single attribute, such as chemical emissions from products that directly impact indoor environmental quality (IEQ). While credible eco-labels and product certi-fications certainly help prevent the use of misleading envi-ronmental claims (known as green washing), they do not eliminate it. In fact, according to the 2010 TerraChoice report, more than 32 per cent of green products carry a fake green label—up from 26.8 per cent in 2009. Product manu-facturers and consumers, therefore, still need to be cautious and vigilant (TerraChoice, 2010). In view of this scenario, ‘organic’ claims are now regulated in over 60 countries by a certification system based on official standards.

Like the carbon footprinting, the ecological footprinting (EF) is among a number of emerging, progressive sustain-ability indicators that attempt to arrive at a value represent-ing the impact of human activities and demand on the Earth’s ecosystems. The EF compares human demand with the planet Earth’s ecological capacity to regenerate, and represents the amount of biologically productive land and sea areas, measured in global hectares (gha), needed to regenerate the resources a human population consumes and to absorb and render harmless the corresponding waste (Wackernagel, 2000). Ecological footprint is a tool for meas-uring and analysing human natural resource consumption and waste output within the context of nature’s renewable and regenerative capacity (or bio-capacity). The ecological footprint is defined as ‘the area of productive land and water ecosystems required for producing the resources that the population consumes and assimilate the wastes that the





population produces, wherever on Earth the land and water is located’ (Wackernagel & Rees, 1996). Ecological foot-print is an ‘ecological camera’ that takes a snapshot of our current demands on nature. Ecological footprint could be useful in making socio-political decisions regarding opti-mal scale. Optimal scale is an ecological and socio-political target for sustainability. The footprint accounting process could be used to describe a rough, if cautious, target of optimal scale. Efforts are underway to standardise and refine the methodology underlying the footprint, and to incorporate areas or issues not currently captured.

Green Marketing Claims and Communication Norms

A ‘green’ or ‘environmental’ claim is any type of claim where explicit or implicit reference is made to the environ-mental or ecological aspects relating to the production, packaging, distribution, use/consumption or disposal of products. Environmental claims can be made in any medium, including packaging, labelling, package inserts, promotional and point-of-sales materials, product litera-ture, radio and television, as well as via digital or electronic media such as e-mail, telephone and the Internet. A green claim can be a statement or representation about the envi-ronmental benefits of a particular product or service. It can relate to a single attribute of the product. Such claims can focus on a product’s chemical content, whether or not the product can be recycled, emissions or impacts on specific media (air, water, land), the type of raw material used in the product and other attributes that affect the environment. A green claim can also communicate information about the environmental impact of a company’s manufacturing practices, as well as the company’s mission and values regarding its impact on the environment. Such claims may refer to a ‘carbon-neutral’ production process, or a com-pany’s efforts to make its administrative functioning more environmentally ‘sustainable’. Green claims can include pictures, colours and logos as well. As with all types of advertising, green or sustainable claims in advertising must be evaluated in their entirety to assess how the reasonable consumer will interpret the advertising message. Advertisers must be especially cognisant of the potential that linking a single, truthful environmental claim (for example, that a package is ‘recyclable’) to a broad claim that the product is ‘safe’ for the environment, ‘sustainable’ or the like, will mislead consumers about aspects or attributes of the prod-uct that may not be so favourable.

The Green Claims Working Group of the International Consumer Protection and Enforcement Network (ICPEN Working Group Green Claim Report, April 2008) has written a reference document to assist agencies who are

considering the development of an environmental market-ing or ‘green’ claims guide. This reference document draws together the common topics and areas found across current green claims guides known to the Working Group. This reference document outlines what could be considered for inclusion in an environmental marketing guide. However, it does not provide an exhaustive list of what may apply to a guide or for all situations. Further, the list is not necessar-ily endorsed by all members but is provided as a sample of examples for consideration.

As the world’s foremost business organisation, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) promotes high standards of business ethics through the development and dissemination of codes and guidance on responsible mar-keting and advertising communications. The ICC recog-nises that there indeed is a difference between claims that express an inspirational aspect of a company’s commit-ment to the three pillars of sustainable development, or to improving the environment, and claims about a particular product or service. As a general matter, the code already requires that all marketing communication be legal, decent, honest and truthful. As applied to green claims, this over-arching concept means that environmental claims should be based on sound, appropriate scientific information rele-vant to actual use, operation or disposal of the advertised product, not unsupported assumptions. Additionally, all marketing communication should be prepared with a due sense of social and professional responsibility, and should conform to the principles of fair competition, as generally accepted in business. The code also provides that market-ing communication should not condone or encourage actions contrary to accepted standards of environmentally responsible behaviour.

One of ICC’s landmark achievements is the Consolidated ICC Code of Advertising and Marketing Communication Practice (Code) issued in 2006. The Code provides practi-cal guidance to the business sector, including advertisers and advertising agencies, as well as to self-regulatory advertising organisations and national governments. The Code defines ‘advertisement’ or ‘advertising’ as any form of marketing communication carried by the media, usually in return for payment or other valuable consideration. It includes a broad admonition that advertisers avoid or appropriately qualify general claims of environmental ben-efit, a position that has been the underpinning of advertis-ing guidance for years. In the UK, the Direct Marketing Association has recently issued a new code of practice that is intended to encourage green marketing. The code states that any environmental claim must be supported with ‘a high level of substantiation’ and be based ‘on the full cycle of the advertised product, unless the marketing communi-cation states otherwise’. The code also promotes the need



50 A.N. Sarkar


for recycled materials, environmental management and an environmental policy.

One notable recent development in advertising is the proliferation of ‘green’ claims and growing interest in con-cepts of ‘environmental sustainability’ and ‘sustainable development’, with commensurate growth in general claims that products or services are ‘eco-friendly’, ‘green’, ‘sustainable’, ‘carbon neutral’ and the like. Use of the term ‘sustainable’ itself in marketing communications and oth-erwise may create questions about whether the reference is to environmental ‘sustainability’ or to the broader concept of sustainability linked to the World Commission on Environment and Development’s 1987 report, Our Common Future (United Nation’s UECD Report, 1987), that defined ‘sustainable development’ as ‘development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’. ‘Sustainability’ encompasses considerations of economic activity, social values, action by public and private institutions and envi-ronmental impacts, but many ‘sustainability’ claims seen in the marketplace focus on the environmental aspects of the product or service.

Eco-innovations for Green Branding with Sustainability Focus

‘Environmental sustainability’ is not simply a matter of compliance or risk management. Business is increasingly recognising the many competitive advantages and business opportunities to be gained from eco-sustainability and green marketing. Worldwide evidence indicates that peo-ple are concerned about the environment and are chang-ing their behaviour accordingly. As a result, there is a growing market for sustainable and socially responsible products and services. The debate over sustainability has ever-increasing business implications. Companies of all sizes are facing the material impact of regulatory require-ments, media scrutiny, stakeholder concerns and customer expectations. Businesses have a two-pronged equation to solve when considering how to profitably bring sustaina-bility into the fold. One entails their internal culture, proc-esses, materials and related supply-side issues. The other is how to outwardly communicate, or brand and market their product. Though, in many ways, the fundamentals of a green campaign are traditional, recent studies of develop-ments in consumer expectations regarding quality, value and trust help cast a light on how ‘green’ can advance a brand (Laws, 2010).

Some communication or advertising campaigns have the objective of developing or even transforming an organ-isation’s brand image. Brand image is at the heart of any organisation’s communication operations and activities,

but for businesses, it is often critical. Communication campaigns that highlight an organisation’s commitment to sustainability may therefore be designed to embody and convey an image change. Undertaken as part of a corpo-rate communication approach, they always have a more or less strategic impact on brand image. Accordingly, it is interesting to consider specific campaigns of this type and the issues they involve for companies or organisa-tions. The arguments used to support a change in brand image can likewise be varied: new activities or new types of commitment, integration of environmental/social meas-ures in production processes, development of a range of green products, etc. Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability (LOHAS) is one such green brand concept to explore new emerging eco-market. It has a strong focus on environmen-tal sustainability.

LOHAS is a new American concept which links life-styles with health, hygiene and sustainability aspects of the eco-market. It describes an integrated, rapidly growing market for goods and services that appeals to consumers whose sense of environmental and social responsibility influences their purchase decisions. The Natural Marketing Institute (NMI) estimates the US LOHAS consumer mar-ket of products and services to be US$209 billion—sold across all consumer segments (Cohen, 2007). LOHAS is a demographic defining a particular market segment related to sustainable living and ‘green’ ecological initiatives, and is generally composed of a relatively upscale and well-educated population segment. The author Paul H. Ray, who coined the term ‘cultural creatives’, in his book by the same name, explains that ‘What you are seeing is a demand for products of equal quality that are also virtuous’ (Cortese, 2003; Everage, 2002). Researchers have reported a range of sizes of the LOHAS market segment. For example, Worldwatch Institute reported that the LOHAS market seg-ment in the year 2006 was estimated at $300 billion, approximately 30 per cent of the US consumer market, and a study by the NMI showed that in 2007, 40 million Americans were included within the LOHAS demograph-ics, as illustrated in Figure 3.

The consumers attracted to this market represent a siz-able group in this country. Approximately 19 per cent of the adults in the US, or 41 million people, are currently considered LOHAS consumers. This is based on surveys of the US adult population estimated at 215 million. Research shows that one in four adult Americans is a part of this group (nearly 41 million people). These consumers are the future of business and also the future of progressive social, environmental and economic change in this country. But their power as a consumer market remains virtually untapped. The industry that serves these consumers has been identified in a research report by the NMI and given





the moniker of LOHAS—a market conservatively esti-mated at $209 billion in the US, and growing. ‘Cultural creatives’ are the basis of the LOHAS market. The Japanese government recently launched ‘Cool Biz’, a campaign that encouraged offices to allow their workers to remove the tie and adopt light-coloured business suits. This made a great contribution to the environment as offices adjusted their thermostats up to 28 degrees Celsius, subject to the govern-ment’s instruction.

Eco-innovation to Promote Green Consumerism

The environmental agenda has emerged gradually as an important policy issue over the last 45 years. During this period, the environmental agenda and its impact on the economy has changed considerably. The last 10 to 15 years have seen a marked shift from a pure regulatory approach towards the slow rise of greening as a corporate issue. The greening of markets is now becoming apparent, particularly within the last couple of years, as a consequence of the topi-cal climate debate (Andersen, 2004; Ecotec, 2002; European Commission, 2006; Frondel, Horback & Rennings, 2004; Hitchens, Birnie, McGowan, Triebswetter & Cottica, 1998, Hitchens, Trainor, Clausen, Thankappan & De Marchi, 2002; Malaman, 1996; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2008a, 2008b, 2009; Rand Europe, 2000a, 2000b). As the environmental agenda has changed, so has the notion of eco-innovation. It has been referred to hitherto as ‘environmental technolo-gies’ or ‘clean technologies’. With a still more preventive and integrated policy approach to environmental issues, the focus has changed from end-of-pipe/clean-up technologies to cleaner production processes, cleaner products to the broader eco-innovation or, quite popular lately, clean-tech

business. In the Environmental Technology Action Plan (ETAP) of the EU Commission, a key policy initiative for the promotion of eco-innovation, environmental technolo-gies are defined as follows:

[A]ll technologies whose use is less environmentally harm-ful than relevant alternatives. They include technologies to manage pollution (e.g. air pollution control, waste manage-ment); less polluting and less resource-intensive products and services (e.g. fuel cells) and ways to manage resources more efficiently (e.g. water supply, energy-saving technologies). Other more environmentally-sound techniques are process-integrated technologies in all sectors and soil remediation techniques. (European Commission, 2004, p. 2)

People have now recognised that industrialisation has damaged the environment and also influenced their stand-ard of living negatively. This awareness has made them value real nature highly, to be interested in non-polluted green food and also, to be linked with the natural environ-ment through green forest and fresh air (Kilbourne & Beckmann, 1998). For firms, a new perspective on con-sumer acceptance and perception to green products repre-sents a great room of opportunities since green marketing is not purely altruistic; it can also generate profits (Grant, 2008). The firm’s challenge is to satisfy the consumers’ ‘green’ demand through proper design, production, sales and recycling of products. By bringing in innovativeness and promotion of eco-friendly products, firms can differ-entiate and position themselves from the competitors and establish competitive advantage (Reinhardt, 1998). This enhances corporate image and brand value from the con-sumers’ perspective (Anderson, 2004, 2008). In brief, green marketing seems to be a source of reputation, competitive-ness and financial advantage (Worcester, 1993).

One of the key challenges is to relate innovation per-formance to eco-efficiency gains and to macro-level resource efficiency indicators, which could serve as a ref-erence framework for setting long-term innovation policy targets. Policy-makers thinking about eco-innovation should reflect on how to use material flow measurements in the context of innovation policy in order to embed eco-innovation in an overall resource productivity perspective. According to the US EPA, in 2007, the 2008 Prius was the most fuel-efficient car sold in the US, and beginning in 2009, the latest model became the most fuel-efficient auto-matic car. In the UK, the Department for Transport reported that the latest Prius is the second-least CO2-emitting vehi-cle on sale in the UK with 89 g/km. One can observe that innovation in response to environmental regulation can offset initial investment in research and development by helping firms to use inputs better and to create better prod-ucts (Porter & van der Linde, 1995). To create, exploit and

Figure 3. The Distribution of the Different Types of LOHAS

NMI’s 2007 US LOHAS CONSUMER SEGMENTATIONMODEL

(% general population in NMI-defined consumer segments)

19%

19%

19%

17%

26%

LOHASNATURALITIESDRIFTERSCONVENTIONALSUNCONCERNED

Source: Cohen (2007).



52 A.N. Sarkar


deliver value to the final customers, firms must develop, design and implement the marketing programmes in an integrated perspective where all within the organisation should be involved.

The holistic marketing framework highlights such proc-ess, where interactions between customers, suppliers, dis-tributors, company, employees, etc., and others activities based on mutual benefits, can offer possibilities in creat-ing, maintaining and renewing customer value. To describe the holistic marketing framework and its entire value chain, Figure 4 depicts the three paces of the value chain: the exploration, creation and delivery value procedure. One can observe that the process is linked one to other to show a redistribution of benefits among different components and players in this value chain. The value exploration is related to cognitive, competency and resource spaces, where companies define their strategy by identifying and understanding the needs of its buyer targets as well as tak-ing into account the competences of themselves and of their collaborators. The value creation is concerned with identifying new customer benefits by getting feedback from them to improve services and products. The deliver-ing value is related to the management process, which is related to internal resource from the company’s business domain and the management relationship process oriented to company’s customers and to company’s partners.

Green marketing strategies and tactics also might require changes in the marketing mix (product, price, place and promotion) and marketers must be conscious about such trends. Firms acquiring, for instance, an ISO 14000 certifi-cate must produce goods with maximum recycled content, designed to have minimal environmental impact.

While most researchers and policy-makers are well acquainted with the concept of innovation, eco-innovation is a new concept for which a standardised definition does not exist yet. OECD illustrates that eco-innovation differs from generic innovation on two significant characteristics:

It is innovation that reflects the concept’s explicit emphasis on a reduction of environmental impact, whether such an effect is intended or not. Nonetheless, it is not limited to innovation in products, processes, marketing methods and organizational methods, but also includes innovation in social and institu-tional structures. (OECD, 2009)

The UK environmental policy clearly sets out the urgent challenges in meeting the increasing demands of the economy while moving towards a low emission and sustainable environment (Department of Trade and Industry [DTI], 2003). ‘The vast majority of, if not all, economic activity in Britain will have to reduce its carbon impact. This is going to transform whole economy’ (Bureau of Industry and Security [BIS], 2009). On the way to an environmentally sustainable economic growth, integrating environmental and innovation insights and understanding where the UK stands in terms of its exist-ing capabilities and potential for creating eco-friendly technologies is crucial. Recently, increasing attention has been given to the role of regulation in increasing invest-ments in eco-innovations (Brunnermeier & Cohen, 2003). Regulation is not an undesirable cost-increasing factor but a stimulator of firms’ innovativeness that, in turn, would lead to a first-mover advantage in markets for eco-innovations (Porter & van der Linde, 1995). Yet, an issue

Figure 4. A Holistic Marketing Framework

ValueCreation

ValueDelivery

ValueExploration

CustomerFocus

CustomerBenefits

CustomerRelationshipManagement

CognitiveSpace

CoreCompetencies

BusinessDomain

InternalResourceManagement

CompetencySpace

CollaborativeNetwork

BusinessPartner

BusinessPartnerManagement

ResourceSpace

Source: Kotler, Jain and Maesincee (2002, p. 29).





that is overlooked in these studies is related to the hetero-geneity in firms’ innovation capabilities and their respec-tive strategies for eco-innovation.

New companies wishing to use greener technologies may find it cost prohibitive to do so, especially in the energy and transport sectors where brown technologies and carbon-intensive energy sources dominate. International support must foster and incentivise technology transfer and knowledge sharing across developed and developing coun-tries. Continuing to promote larger global or regional net-works of knowledge-sharing platforms, such as United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and United Nations Environment Programme’s (UNEP) National Cleaner Production Centres, could further pro-mote cleaner consumption and production. Recently, the EU’s Baltic Sea Region Programme (2007–2013) created a project, ‘Sustainable Production through Innovation in Small and Medium-sized Enterprises’, that aims to enhance sustainable production processes in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) by providing a knowledge-sharing platform, tools and funding needed to test and demonstrate eco-innovations (Gray & Talberth, 2011).

Green growth is gaining momentum across OECD and non-OECD economies, as a way to pursue economic growth and development while preventing environmental degrada-tion, biodiversity loss and unsustainable natural resource use. Green growth implies decoupling economic and envi-ronmental performances, as well as making investment in the environment as a driver of economic growth (OECD, 2010). This will involve greening traditional sectors and favouring the transition of all economic actors, both pro-ducers and consumers, towards sustainable practices.

Green Supply Chain Management

In 1996, the Manufacture Research Consortium (MRC) of Michigan State University first put forward the definition of green supply chain management (GSCM). The defini-tion comprehensively considers the environmental influ-ence so as to optimise resource utilisation in the supply chain in manufacture industry. At present, we have no gen-erally accepted definition of green supply chain. The book, The People’s Republic of China National Standard Physical Distribution Terms,6 does not include the definition. Taking into consideration other scholars’ opinions, we define it as follows: GSCM can also be called environmentally conscious supply chain management. GSCM is a kind of modern management model in the whole supply chain management which considers the environmental influence and efficiency. It should keep in touch with suppliers, man-ufacturers, sellers and consumers. The detail contents include the following: green designing, green production, green package, green marketing and green recycling. The main flow is as given in Figure 5.

There are four steps to implement a green supply chain. The following model is a decision-making framework and it is based upon the best practices of several companies that have successfully initiated and implemented environmen-tal accounting practices. Ideally, companies will customise this approach to best suit their own organisational needs and culture. The four steps are as follows: (a) identify costs; (b) determine opportunities; (c) calculate benefits; and (d) decide, implement and monitor (Figure 6).

Sarkis (1999, 2003) provides a comprehensive view of the state of research in this evolving topic, tracing the work of researchers who have investigated the issues involved

Figure 5. The Flow of Green Supply Chain Management

Recycling D

esignU

nloading Design

Model D

esign

GreenDesigning

GreenProduction

Green Techniques

Green Suppliers

Green M

aterials

GreenPackage

Green Environm

entG

reen IdeasR

ecycling Package Materials

GreenMarketing

Green Infom

ationG

reen ProductsG

reen Selling

GreenRecycling

Recovery Processing

Recycling

Waste D

isposal

Source: Huang Fengwen and Wu Yuhua (2003).



54 A.N. Sarkar


and the reasons for incorporating these practices, and also the way they have been practised in different organisations. According to him, the supply chain system should include purchasing and in-bound logistics, production, distribution and reverse logistics. He also shows how firms focus on total quality management (TQM), with its emphasis on improving product quality, zero defects, customer satisfac-tion, training and employee empowerment, etc., and inte-grate it with environmental management resulting in total quality environmental management (TQEM). This integra-tion to TQEM enables organisations to move towards the source reduction of pollution philosophies and improves environmental performance, marketing advantage and cor-porate image so that the company moves on to the world-class status. Different researchers have defined GSCM from different perspectives, driving forces and purposes. Sarkis (1999) refers to the supply chain as a system which includes purchasing, production, distribution and reverse logistics. A recent definition (Handfield & Nichols, 1999) goes as follows: The supply chain encompasses all activi-ties associated with the flow and transformation of goods from raw materials (extraction) through the end user, as well as associated information flows. Many authors are exploring environmental initiatives within each of the major phases of the supply chain.

Benefits and Implementation of GSCM

Some studies have mentioned benefits of adopting GSCM, such as Stevels (2002). He demonstrated the benefits of GSCM in different roles of supply chain, including envi-ronment and society, in terms of different categories: mate-rial, immaterial and emotion. For material, GSCM helps lower environmental load for environment, lower cost prices for supplier, lower cost for producer, lower cost of ownership for customer and less consumption of resources

Figure 6. Four Basic Steps to Implement a Green Supply Chain

Decide, Implementand Monitor

Determine Opportunities

Calculate Benefits

Indentify Costs

Source: Nones, Morques and Evgenio (2004).

for society. GSCM helps motivation of stakeholder for environment, better image for supplier and producer, feel good and quality of life for customer, and makes industry move on the right track for society. He also provided exam-ples of companies that have successfully adopted GSCM. Duber-Smith (2005) identified 10 reasons that a company should adopt the green: target marketing, sustainability of resources, lowered costs/increased efficiency, product dif-ferentiation and competitive advantage, competitive and supply chain pressures, adapting to regulation and reduc-ing risk, brand reputation, return on investment, employee morale and the ethical imperative. In manufacturing proc-ess, the company can apply green by several methods to reduce the energy and resource consumption. Several papers have provided green practices, such as Duber-Smith (2005). He suggested some practices, including reducing energy consumption, recycle and reuse, using biodegrada-ble and non-toxic materials, minimise harmful emissions and minimise or eliminate waste. A Chinese sugar manu-facturer, Guitang Group, could reduce the wastes and improve their financial performance by using waste from the upstream as raw materials for downstream production (Zhu & Cote, 2004).

Apart from design and manufacturing, other depart-ments in an organisation can also be involved with the green. Purchasing could become an important agent for change regarding environmental initiatives in the supply chain (Preuss, 2001). Walton et al. (1998) conducted a qualitative study to explore the primary areas for change to increase purchasing impact on environment. For the largest retailer in the US, Wal-Mart has an interesting story of adopting GSCM to their organisation. In October 2005, Wal-Mart Chief Executive Officer (CEO) committed the company to three goals: to be supplied 100 per cent by renewable energy, to create zero waste and to sell products that sustain Wal-Mart’s resources and the environment, and Wal-Mart was launching a business sustainability strategy to dramatically reduce the company’s impact on the global environment and become the most competitive and innova-tive company in the world (Plambeck, 2007).

ConclusionGreen marketing is an emerging concept, which is also fast evolving. ‘Going green’ is a buzz word that is also catching up fast with time and becoming increasingly trendy with the corporate world at large—more prominently, however, with the company products that are being branded as eco-prod-ucts or eco-friendly products to reach out to those customers who are eco-savvy. But customers’ preferences toward green and/or eco-products are also coming under close scrutiny, as they are seeking validation of such products that are claimed





to be eco-products though they are being labelled and mar-keted as eco-products with premium prices. In other worlds, customers are not prepared to buy or pay premium prices unless the claimed eco-products are properly eco-labelled with registered certification from authorised agencies—a prerequisite for green branding.

Green branding and green marketing opportunities are, and indeed going to have to be, more intimately linked with the overall national and international environmental policy of reduction of GHG emissions, with measurable standards, together with provisions of energy savings to directly respond to environmental sustainability questions in future. Going by the recent trend, therefore, green bio-products (such as fruits, vegetables, fish, organic products and proc-essed foods), automobiles, thermal power plants, green buildings (for example, hospitals, hotels, airports, holiday resorts, etc.), polluting industries (for example, cement, steel, pulp and paper, sugar, leather and tannery, fertilizers, etc.) are going to be some of the prominent industries that need to undergo rigorous screening process for carbon foot-printing and eco-labelling. This would also need more and more planned eco-innovations strategy with sustainability focus across different domain areas and verticals. The arti-cle has brought out very clearly as to how green consumer-ism can be linked to eco-market, and to what extent this can be influenced by cross-cultural differences in consumer behaviour. The scope of involving green marketing with corporate ethics and CSR for inclusive growth of green markets has been explored. However, for effective promo-tion and popularisation of quality green products in the mar-ket, the governmental regulations prescribing standards for registration of certified green products, before they are marketed for mass consumption, would also need highest attention and intervention by the government for their validation.

Green marketing and advertising, including web mar-keting, accompanied by sound, integrated as well as highly networked GSCM systems, is going to open up a new fron-tier of hyper-competitiveness among the market players, globally. But, then, in this endeavour, what is going to have to be most crucial is the validation of the claims for the green/eco-products and the close scrutiny of communica-tion messages to the eco-friendly customers agreeable to pay premium prices, compatible with their modern lifestyles.

Notes1. See ‘What is a Green Consumer?’, http://wiki.answers.

com/Q/What_is_a_%27green%27_consumer (accessed on 27 January 2012).

2. See ‘PROGETTO F.A.R.E Fiat Auto Recycling’ (http: //www.ninofalasca.it/fare.htm).

3. See ‘Changing Perceptions: Marketing Tactics Take on a Green hue’ (http://www.livemint.com/2009/03/02213546/Changing-perceptions-Marketin.html).

4. ‘Environmentally-Friendly Promotional Products Can Aid Your Organization With “Green” Branding’, http://www.igreen-home.com/environmentally-friendly-promotional-products-can-aid-your-organization-with-green-branding/ (accessed 4 February 2011 by The iGreen-Home Team).

5. Sandilands, Catriona. ‘On Green Consumerism: Environmental Privatization and Family Values’ (i.library.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php/cws/article/download/.../9498).

6. National Standard of the People’s Republic of China, GB15037-2005, Replacing GB/T 15037-1994 (http://www.puntofocal.gov.ar/1_reunion08/chn197_t.pdf).

ReferencesAmerican Marketing Association (AMA) (2007). About AMA.

Retrieved 1 December 2007, from http://web.archive.org/web/20071031062407/http://www.marketingpower.com/content24499.php

——— (2008). About AMA. Retrieved 3 October 2008, from http://www.marketingpower.com/AboutAMA/Pages/default.aspx

——— (2010). About AMA. History of the American Marketing Association. Retrieved 10 October 2010, from http://www.marketingpower.com/AboutAMA/Pages/History.aspx

Andersen, M. (2004, 3–4 December). An innovation system approach to eco-innovation: Aligning policy rationales. Paper presented at the conference on ‘The Greening of Policies: Interlinkages and Policy Integration’, Berlin.

Andersen, M.M. (2008). Review: System transition processes for realising sustainable consumption and production. In A. Tucker (Ed.), SCORE book.

Back to basics in 1992 (1993). Focus Japan, 20(4), 3.Bakanauskas, A. & Liesionis, V. (2002). Kastu—Vertes kai-

nos nustatymo modelis zaliojo marketingo komplekse. Organizacijø vadyba: Sisteminiai tyrimai, 21–32.

Banytė, J. & Gadeikienė, A. (2008). Corporate social responsi-bility as marketing means in Lithuanian business practice. Economics and Management, 13, 227–238.

Bowman, Jo (2009, March). Green branding: Cashing in on the eco-market. WIPO Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2009/02/article_0011.html

Brunnermeier, S.B. & Cohen, M.A. (2003). Determinants of environmental innovation in US manufacturing industries. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 45(2), 278–293.

Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS). (2009). Annual Report to the Congress for Fiscal Year 2009. Washington, DC: Bureau of Industry and Security, US Department of Commerce.

Carbon Trust Standard. (2009). Retrieved from http://www.click-green.org.uk/news/national-news/122367-uk%5Cs-climate-change-body-awarded-the-carbon-trust-standard.html

Carson, Rachel (1962). Silent spring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.



56 A.N. Sarkar


Coddington, W. (1993). Environmental marketing: Positive strategies for reaching the Green consumer. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Cohen, Maurie J. (2007). Consumer credit, household financial management, and sustainable consumption. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(1), 57–65; doi: 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2005.00485.x. Retrieved from http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2005.00485.x?prevSearch=keywordsfield%3A%28%22LOHAS%22%29

Cortese, A. (2003, 20 July). They care about the world (and they shop, too). The New York Times Business Section. Retrieved from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E01E3D8103CF933A15754C0A9659C8B63

Darnall, Nicole (2008, 5 July). Creating a Green brand for com-petitive distinction. Asian Business & Management, 7(4), 445–466.

Davis, Keith & Fredric, W.C. (1984). Business and society: Management, public policy and ethics (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Davis, J.J. (1993). Strategies for environmental advertising. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 10(2), 19–36.

Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) (2003, February). Our energy future—Creating a low carbon economy. DTI Energy White Paper presented to Parliament, Government of UK, by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry by Command of Her Majesty, London, UK.

D’Souza, C., Taghian, M., Lamb, P. & Peretiatko, R. (2004). Green decisions: Demographics and consumer understanding of environmental labels. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(4), 371–376.

Duber-Smith, D.C. (2005). The green imperative. Soap, Perfumery, and Cosmetics, 78(8), 24–26.

Dutta, B. (2009, January). Sustainable green marketing—The new imperative. Marketing Mastermind, pp. 23–26.

Easterling, D., Kenworthy, A. & Nemzoff, R. (1996). The green-ing of advertising: A twenty-five year look at environmental advertising. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 4(1), 20–33.

Ecotec (2002). Analysis of the EU Eco industries, their employ-ment and export potential. Report for DG Environment of the European Commission, ECOTEC Research & Consulting Limited. Retrieved 24 June 2005, from http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/enveco/industry_employment/main_report.pdf

Elkington, J. (1994). Towards the sustainable corporation: Win business strategies for sustainable development. California Management Review, 36(2), 90–100.

Elkington, John, Hailes, Julia & Makower, Joel (1993). The green consumer. New York: Penguin.

European Commission (2004). Stimulating technologies for sustainable development: An Environmental Technologies Action Plan for the European Union. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, Brussels.

European Commission—DG Environment (2006, September). Eco-industry, its size, employment, perspectives and barriers

to growth in an enlarged EU. Report prepared by Ernst and Young.

EU Crossborder Monitor (1995, 7 June). Company & industry. EU Crossborder Monitor 3/22, 3.

Everage, Laura (2002, 1 October). Understanding the LOHAS lifestyle. Gourmet Retailer Magazine. Retrieved 1 October 2002, from http://www.gourmetretailer.com/gourmetretailer/magazine/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1738479

Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (1999). Facts for consumers: Sorting out ‘green’ advertising.

——— (2010). Federal Trade Commission proposes revised ‘Green Guides’. Retrieved 10 June 2010, from http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2010/10/greenguide.shtm

Frondel, M., Horbach, J. & Rennings, K. (2004). End-of-pipe or cleaner production? An empirical comparison of environ-mental innovation decisions across OECD countries. ZEW Discussion Paper No. 04-82.

Fuller, D. (1999). Sustainable marketing: Managerial–ecological issues. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Gaviria, Diana. (1995). Introducing the eco-labelling concept. International Trade Forum, 3, 8–11.

Glaser, P.S. (2009, July 23). Green power marketing claims: A free ride on conventional power? Electricity Journal, 12(6), 32–40. Retrieved from Wiley InerScience Database, Malardalen University Library.

Grant, J. (2007). The green marketing manifesto. England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Book reserved from Malardalen University Library through Inter Library loan.

——— (2008). Viewpoint Green Marketing. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Strategic Direction, 24(6), 25–27.

Gray, Erin & Talberth, John (2011, 29 August). Encouraging green industry innovation. Retrieved 29 August 2011, from http://insights.wri.org/news/2011/08/encouraging-green-industry-innovation

Ha, T. (2008). The Australian green consumer guide. Sydney, Australia: University of NSW Press Ltd.

Handfield, R.B. & Nichols, E.L. (1999). Introduction to supply chain management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Hansen, A., & Machin, D. (2008). Visually branding the environ-ment: Climate change as a marketing opportunity. Discourse Studies, 10(6), 777–794.

Hartmann, P., Ibáñez, V.A. & Sainz, J.F.F. (2005). Green brand-ing effects on attitude: Functional versus emotional position-ing strategies. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 23(1), 9–29.

Hitchens, D., Birnie, J.E., McGowan, A., Triebswetter, U. & Cottica, A. (1998). Investigating the relationship between company competitiveness and environmental regulation in European food processing: Results of a matched firm com-parison. Environment and Planning, A30, 1585–1602.

Hitchens, D., Trainor, M., Clausen, J., Thankappan, S. & De Marchi, B. (2002). Small and medium-sized companies in Europe. Environmental performance, competitiveness and management: International EU case studies. Berlin: Springer.

Huang Fengwen & Wu Yuhua (2003). The research of Green supply chain management and its development. Tianjin University Journals [J], (Science Version).





ImagePower® Green Brands Survey (2007, 1 May). Survey con-ducted by WPP’s Landor Associates, Penn, Schoen & Berland (PSB) Associates, and Cohn & Wolfe (C&W), New York.

International Consumer Protection and Enforcement Network (ICPEN) (2008). Working group green claim report: Reference Document for the Development of Environmental Marketing Claim. Retrieved from https://icpen.org/files/icpenDownloads/Reference_Document__Environmental_Marketing_Claim_Guides_1.pdf

Intini, F. & Kühtz, S. (2010). Recycling in buildings: An LCA case study of a thermal insulation panel made of polyester fiber, recycled from post-consumer PET bottles. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 16, 306–315.

Jain, S.K. & Kaur, G. (2004). Green marketing: An Indian per-spective. Decision, 31(2), 168–209.

Juscius, V. & Snieska, V. (2008). Influence of corporate social responsibility on competitive abilities of corporations. Inzinerine Ekonomika (Engineering Economics), 3(58), 34–44.

Kaberger, T. (2003). Environmental labeling of electricity deliv-ery contracts in Sweden. Energy Policy, 31(7), 633–640.

Karna, J., Hansen. E. & Juslin, H. (2003). Social responsibility in environmental marketing planning. European Journal of Marketing, 37(5–6), 848–871.

Kilbourne, William E. & Beckmann, Suzanne C. (1998). Review and critical assessment of research on marketing and the envi-ronment. Journal of Marketing Management, 14, 513–532.

Kotler, P., Jain, D.C. & Maesincee, S. (2002). Formulating a market renewal strategy. In Marketing moves, Part 1 (p. 29). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Laroche, M., Bergeron, J. & Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001). Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(6), 503–521.

Laws, Annice (2010). Building a green brand increased market share with sustainability. Retrieved 17 March 2010, from http://greennurture.com/eco-article-dtl.aspx?id=48

Malaman, R. (1996). Technological innovation for sustainable development: Generation and diffusion of industrial cleaner technologies. Denmark: Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.

Maxwell, J.W., Lyon, T.P. & Hackett, C. (2000). Self-regulation and social welfare: The political economy of corporate environmentalism. Journal of Law and Economics, 43(2), 583–618.

Meffert, H. & Kirchgeorg, M. (1993). Marktorientiertes umwelt-management. Stuttgart: Schaeffer-Poeschel.

Menon, A. & Menon, A. (1997). Enviropreneurial marketing strategy: The emergence of corporate environmentalism as market strategy. Journal of Marketing, 61(1), 51–67.

Micklitz, Reich (1999). Social justice in European private law. In Yearbook of European Law (pp. 167–204).

Mobium. (2007, August). Living LOHAS: Lifestyles of health and sustainability in Australia. Consumer Trends Report, Mobium Group.

Nones, B.T., Morques, S. & Evgenio, R. (2004, January). A theo-retical approach for Green supply chain management. Natal, Brazil: Federal University, Industrial Engineering Program.

Oatis, Porter (1996, 19 June). Green product design. Business Week, p. 109.

Olson, E.G. (2009). Business as environmental steward: The growth of greening. Journal of Business Strategy, 30(5), 4–13.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2008a). Environmental policy, technological inno-vation and patents (ISBN:978-92-64-04681-8). Paris: OECD.

——— (2008b, July). Business, eco-innovation and globalisa-tion (OECD Policy Brief).

——— (2009). Sustainable manufacturing and eco-innovation: Framework, practices and measurement—Synthesis report. Paris: OECD.

——— (2010, 17–18 November). Bologna + 10’ high-level meet-ing on lessons from their global crisis and the way forward to job creation and growth. OECD Working Party on SMES and Entrepreneurship (WPSMEE), Paris.

Olson, E.G. (2009). Business as environmental steward: The growth of greening. Journal of Business Strategy, 30(5), 4–13.

Ottman, J. (1992). Greener marketing. Lincolnwood, IL: NTC.——— (1993). Green marketing: Challenges & opportunities

for the new marketing age. Lincolnwood, IL: NTC Business Books.

Ottman, J.A. & Reilly, W.R. (1998). Green marketing. Opportunity for innovation (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Ottman, J.A., Stafford, E.R. & Hartman, C.L. (2006). Avoiding green marketing myopia: Ways to improve consumer appeal for envi-ronmentally preferable products. Environment, 48(5), 22–36.

Peattie, K. (1995). Environmental marketing management—Meeting the green challenge. London: Pitman Publishing.

——— (2001). Golden goose or wild goose? The hunt for the green consumer. Business Strategy and the Environment, 10(4), 187–199 (doi: 10.1002/bse.292, retrieved from Wiley InterScience, Malardalen University Library).

Pickett, G.M., Kangun, N. & Grove, S.J. (1995). An examina-tion of the conserving consumer: Implications for public policy formation in promoting conservation behavior. In M.J. Polonsky & A.T. Mintu–Wimsatt (Eds), Environmental mar-keting: Strategies, practice, theory, and research (pp. 77–99). New York: The Haworth Press.

Plambeck, E.L. (2007). The greening of Wal-Mart’s supply chain. Supply Chain Management Review, 11(5), 18–25.

Polonsky, Michael Jay (1994). An introduction to green market-ing. Electronic Green Journal, 1(2), 1–10 (UCLA Library, UC Los Angeles, USA).

Porter, M.E. & van der Linde, C. (1995). Toward a new concep-tion of the environment competitiveness relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 97–118.

Preuss, L. (2001). In dirty chains? Purchasing and greener manu-facturing. Journal of Business Ethics, 34, 345–359.

Pride, W.M. & Ferrell, O.C. (1993). Marketing (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

——— (1995). Marketing (concepts and strategies). London: Houghton Mifflin.

Rahbar, E. (2008). To buy green and non-green products: What are the factors influencing customer purchase behavior. MBA thesis, University Sains Malaysia.



58 A.N. Sarkar


Ramanauskiene, J. (2008). Marketingas: Organizacijø mar-ketingo strategijos ir modeliai. Kaunas: VSÁ Spalvu kraite.

Rand Europe (2000a). Stimulating industrial innovation for sus-tainability: An international Analysis. Report for the Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, Leiden.

——— (2000b). Stimulating industrial innovation for sustainabil-ity: An international Analysis. Nine country reports, Leiden.

Reinhardt, F.L. (1998). Environmental product differentiation: Implications for corporate strategy. California Management Review, 40, 43–73.

Rivera-Camino, J. (2007). Re-evaluating green marketing strategy: A stakeholder perspective. European Journal of Marketing, 41(11–12), 1328–1358.

Roberts, J.A. & Bacon, D.R. (1997). Exploring the subtle rela-tionships between environmental concern and ecologically conscious consumer behavior. Journal of Business Research, 40, 79–89.

Roper Organization (1990). The environment: Public attitudes and individual behavior. New York: Rand–McNally.

Sarkis, J. (1999). How green is the supply chain? Practice and research. Worcester, MA: Clark University.

——— (2003). A strategic decision framework for green supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 11(4), 397–409.

Simon, F.L. (1992). Marketing green products in the triad. Columbia Journal of World Business, 27(Fall–Winter), 269–285.

Simula, H., Lehtimark, T. & Salo, J. (2009). Managing green-ness. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 11(4), 331–346.

Sirsly, C.T. & Lametrz, K. (2008). When does a corporate social responsibility initiative provide a first-mover advantage? Business and Society, 47(3), 343–369. Retrieved from SAGE Journals Online, Malardalen University Library.

Stephen, J. & Kane, Jane M. (1996). Green issues. Business Horizons, 39(1), 65–70.

Stevels, A. (2002). Green supply chain management much more than questionnaires and ISO 14.001. IEEE—International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, pp. 96–100.

Stoeckle, Andrew et al. (1994). Green consumerism and market-ing. In Ruth A. Eblen & William R. Eblen (Eds), Encyclopedia of the environment. Houghton Mifflin.

TerraChoice (2010). Sins of greenwashing: Home and family edition. TerraChoice Group, Inc. The Environment through Green Engineering. Environment UNESCO Educations–UN Decade for Education for Sustainable Development, The eco-logical footprint. Retrieved 13 April 2011, from http://www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/Ann1132753060

United Nations (UN) (1987, 2 August). Our common future. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, published as Annex to General Assembly Document A/42/427, Development and International Co-operation: Environment. Retrieved 14 November 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_resources_management

Vaccaro, L.V. (2009). B2B green marketing and innovation theory for competitive advantage. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 11(4), 315–330. Retrieved from Emerald Database, Malardalen University Library.

Wackernagel, Mathis (2000). Sharing nature’s interest: Ecological footprints as an indicator of sustainability. London: Earthscan.

Wackernagel, Mathis & Rees, W. (1996). Our ecological foot-print. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.

Wahid, N.A., Rahbar, E. & Shyan, T.S. (2011). Factors influencing the green purchase behavior of Penang environmental volunteers. Journal of International Business Management, 5(1), 38–49.

Walton, S.V., Handfield, R.B. & Melnyk, S.A. (1998). The green supply chain: Integrating suppliers into environmental man-agement processes. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 34(2), 2–11.

Worcester, R. (1993). Public and elite attitudes to environmen-tal issues. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 5(4), 315–334.

Yanarella, E.J., Levine, R.S. & Lancaster, R.W. (1999). Green versus sustainability: From semantics to enlightenment. Logistics Information Management, 12(4), 332–342.

Zhu, Q. & Cote, R.P. (2004). Integrating green supply chain into an embryonic eco-industrial development: A case study of the Guitang Group. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12(8–10), 1025–1035.



green branding and eco-innovations

Documents

keywords green marketing

significance of green

green supply chain management

mechanism of ecolabelling

sarkarabstractgreen

sarkargreen branding

article studies

carbon footprinting