By Jennifer Kaplan •
April 15, 2009
EcoAlign, the group that brought you the research that found that consumers pay attention to the ENERGY STAR label, just released their third report of the Project Energy Code series, Cracking the Green Code. This report, like other EcoAlign research is a provocative and thought-provoking exploration of the “causes and consequences of effective communications in the energy and environmental space.”
The report starts by saying that marketers “are cracking their proverbial heads open trying to figure out new ways to make green behaviors more enticing to the masses.” While I’m not so sure marketers are trying to make behaviors more enticing (aren’t we trying to make our products and services more enticing to consumers who behave in a relatively predictable way….), I do find consumer reports of “greenness” and the paradoxically non-green behaviors they exhibit perplexing; hence, the “green gap.” But, in this report EcoAlign suggests that green messaging can be effective for about 75% of the US Population.
In this study, EcoAlign (many of whose clients are utilities) classified utility consumers in four groups and then analyzed three (the forth group was not sufficiently represented in the research group.) Although the report focuses on utility consumers, it seems reasonable to assume the analysis can be extended to all consumers:
- The Individualistic Consumer (estimated 30% of U.S. population). These are consumers who are self-centered and primarily concerned with the financial bottom-line. It is suggested that no-nonsense fiscally responsible products and services that provide a sense of control over energy and energy-related financial expenditures (and all green consumer behavior?) is likely to get their attention if properly messaged.
A “green economy” can be built in China in less than 20 years, argues a new McKinsey report. The new study, “China’s Green Revolution“, offers the most comprehensive quantitative analysis to date of China’s abatement cost curve.
Previous studies of a similar ilk, like the Stern Review, have incorporated social benefits to partially offset the cost of scaling up energy efficient and clean technologies. In contrast, the latest McKinsey report considers only technology-related costs and attaches a figure to the cost of green initiatives in China.
So what is the final damage? While costs are negative for upgrades in some industries, like buildings, due to the savings generated from energy efficiency improvements, a total 1.5-2 trillion yuan (USD 220-295 billion) would have to be spent every year until 2030 in order to reach McKinsey’s alternative scenario.
By Kelli Peterson •
January 15, 2009
Changing consumer behavior can be a slow painful process. Not only does it require educational efforts but often widespread systemic conformity is required. However innovation has radically altered some of our most fundamental behaviors. Globally, we now access cash from a machine and we carry and use mobile phones for a significant percentage of our calling. Its this type of basic change that will be required to have significant impact on socially and environmentally responsible consumption [...]
By mcmilker •
May 14, 2008
The Wall Street Journal published some interesting research on consumer purchasing behavior as regards ethically produced products. The study conducted by a doctoral student at Western Ontario University, studied the price consumers were willing to pay under various circumstances.
The researchers studied coffee and asked consumers to determine how much they would pay for ethically produced coffee; how much they would pay for coffee produced by an unethical company and then tested at what level a product is considered ethically produced.
There were a variety of different permutations in the study but the results were a bit surprising!
