Monday

Eco-Regs Blamed for Sketchy Green Marketing Claims


Right back atcha: As government watchdog groups push back on companies' green marketing claims, an Aussie law firm blames vague and confusing eco-advertising on...vague and confusing environmental regulations, the Australian reports.

While the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) warned it would crack down on firms making unsubstantiated green claims, Amanda Bodger of Mallesons Stephen Jacques says that the ACCC's poorly defined laws make it hard for marketers to know what they can and can’t say.

According to Bodger, the ACCC plans to charge high-profile companies with greenwashing over the next few months in an attempt to build awareness of the consequences of making false or misleading claims.

The problem, Bodger says, is that companies may not know they're misleading consumers.

"It is certainly a gray area," says Bodger. "The ACCC had said protecting the environment was not its mandate, but it has increased its focus on the area in the past eight months."

Bodger claims confusion between advertisers and regulators may only get worse with an increasing number of representative bodies, such as the Australian Association of National Advertisers, introducing self-regulatory guidelines. Moreover, governing bodies such as America’s FTC could contribute to the uncertainty when undergoing overhauls of their own rules.

Marketers all over the world are being forced to sharpen their messages. Complaints to Britain’s Advertising Standards Authority skyrocketed last year as a result of consumers’ high levels of awareness of environmental messages [coupled with] their confusion about what terms mean.

An American study released earlier this year exposed the growing gap between what companies say about their green products and what consumers actually hear - potentially leading to further marketing complaints.

Until a consensus can be reached on guidelines for green marketing, companies "must explain what they mean," says Bodger. "The claims must be accurate, the claims must be substantiated and claims about the future must be made on reasonable grounds."

via | SUSTAINABLE LIFE MEDIA

cradle-to-cradle ::.

CRADLE-TO-CRADLE
A phrase invented by Walter R. Stahel in the 1970s and popularized by William McDonough and Michael Braungart in their 2002 book of the same name. This framework seeks to create production techniques that are not just efficient but are essentially waste free. In cradle-to-cradle production all material inputs and outputs are seen either as technical or biological nutrients. Technical nutrients can be recycled or reused with no loss of quality and biological nutrients composted or consumed. By contrast cradle to grave refers to a company taking responsibility for the disposal of goods it has produced, but not necessarily putting products’ constituent components back into service.


.:: ideas ::. connect@3pointzero.org