Sustainability and Sustainable Business
When it comes to defining the meaning of “sustainability”, there are many different perspectives from different people. One may say “sustainability” relates to “going green”, and another may conclude that it refers to reducing negative effects to the environment. These thoughts are not wrong at all, but I personally think “sustainability” in a broader concept since it can relate to many things such as business sustainability, social sustainability, or even human sustainability. For me, “sustainability” is simply about developing and sustaining something in an efficient and harmless way. For instance, I think of “sustainable business” as the way a specific business maximizes its profits and revenues through an efficient operation without causing any negative externalities. This essay will focus on the major ideas of sustainability and sustainable business, the relationship between profitability goals and sustainable business, and how marketing can be involved in this topic.
Among all the cases and materials we have studied in class, I find cases from author Griggs, Hardin, Laverty are really helpful in assisting me to understand sustainability and sustainable business better. I have learned and understand sustainability through Hardin’s case and the IPAT equation. In “The Tragedy of the Commons”, author Hardin points out how human take advantage of the “common resources” irresponsibly to maximizing their own personal interests affects negatively to the environment (Hardin, 1968). Since commons are considered as resources which we share and are not own by any individual such as air, water, seafood, and forest, many people use these resources as much as possible to satisfy their needs. How...
... middle of paper ...
... population in Sprouts and Grousers segments. Therefore, it can be seen as an advantage for companies to introduce their green products in this market.
However, companies would face difficulties in persuading customers to buy their products. Author Peattie (2001) indicates that most consumers who intend buying green products carry two main questions: “Is there actual environmental benefits?” and “Do I have to compromise?” (p.192). Since many companies are doing “green-washing” (overstating what they are really doing), many consumers feel reluctant to buy any green product for higher price. To resolve these problems, ethical companies should provide their customers more information about how the products are created and their beneficial features. Obtaining green certifications may be another firms can use to consolidate consumers’ confidence in buying their brands.
Wheelen, T. L., & Hunger, J. D. (2010). In Concepts in Strategic Management and Business Policy Achieving Sustainability, Twelfth Edition. Pearson Education.
Improving sustainability within the firms upgrades talented workers to be more proficient and profitable as a factor of their commitment to the organization. It is comprehended that organizations pay special mind to reasonable procedures as there can be an orderly way to deal with spotlight on business targets like decreasing expense of job,, expanding income, overall industry and benefit et cetera (Bob Willard 2012). Thus, firms can hope to produce better profits for their speculations for their partners and shareholders and enhance the organization’s advancement sustainability is
To help further explain these misleading claims, a well recognized company by the media is called Terrachoice. “The Terrachoice Environment Marketing Consulting practice converts knowledge of markets, science and marketing into winning, client-centered solutions to help sustainability leaders deliver results” (“The "six sins," 2007). Terrachoice has conducted a study of the “Environmental Claims in North American Consumer Markets” and found shocking results that made them want to give warning to potential consumers about the ‘six sins of greenwashing. The Terrachoice Company was designed to improve the communication between the purchasers and consumers, helping to enhance, strengthen, and prove market relationship.
Jeff Butcher and Rachel Hill pointed out the impacts of businesses on environments, by stating “The more of a product that is consumed or produced, the more of an externality that results” (Butcher, Jeff, & Hill, Rachel, 2006). Obviously, we can see that one product produced will bring benefit to consumer, sellers, and manufacturers. Meanwhile, one produced and consumed will cause negative externalities for environment. There is one fact we cannot deny that the more social life develops, the more externalities will be produced to the society. Daily living garbage, industrial wastes, carbon dioxide from factories are most outstanding examples to describe negative externalities to environment (Butcher, Jeff, & Hill, Rachel, 2006). In “The tragedy of the Commons”, Hardin showed us causes of negative externalities. He proved that people assume a...
Organisations, governments or company’s promotes green claims based on paying attention to their environmental footprint, by making their product or service environmentally friendly. It can have an increase on the consumers theatrically changing their way of thinking by making environmental decisions. Companies will aim to spend more money and time on sufficiently being green and making eco-friendly choices to lure the consumers to buy their environmentally friendly products and services. However, some promotion of green claims can actually operate in a way that is damaging the environment. Misleading advertisement and unsubstantiated claims about the environmental benefits of a product is very deceiving to consumers. This is called green washing, creating a benefit by appearing to be a green company.
Sustainable development is often considered in terms of three main inter-linked dimensions: environmental, social, and economic. Nowadays, the quest for profit can never be the only objective of business. Combining multiple goals together three-dimensionally is a efficient way to business success (Follett. M, 2013). According to Puma’s target, it has made targets to become the most sustainable Sport Lifestyle company in the word (Puma annual report, 2012, p110). It has been pursuing its goals and shown its initiatives on sustainability in terms of social, environmental, economic during its business since 1993. Increasingly awareness on sustainability during customers is driving many companies to put sustainability on the center
As the consciousness to be environmental friendly increase, the consumers are being aware of buying products that are beneficial or less harmful to our natural surroundings. Companies are also trying to become more beneficial to society and to our environment. However, the problem of greenwashing has appeared. Many companies falsely claim themselves as environmentally conscious and that using their products will give environment positive impacts. Being “green” has simply become a way of marketing.
Sustainability is a concept with a diverse array of meanings and definitions – a widely used glamorous, ambiguous, ambivalent and vague concept that is used by different stakeholder groups in various ways. Presumably to avoid noodling over a terminology or to avoid the confrontation with a definition, most widely the concept is broken down a planning process (c.f. e.g. Döring & Muraca, 2010). That is why most common sustainability is understood as sustainable development.1
The problem that was investigated consisted of a question that Milton Friedman posed in one of his articles, which was featured in The New York Times Magazine in 1970. The question was, “What does it mean to say that “business” has responsibilities” (Friedman, 2007, p. 173)? Friedman (1970) elaborated on how businesses cannot have assigned responsibilities. Furthermore, he described how groups or individuals should be the only ones that can hold responsibilities, not businesses. He stated that associating responsibilities with the word business is too ambiguous. I will examine three discussion questions and three compare and contrast questions which Jennings (2009) posed in a case study that is related to Friedman’s (1970) article “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits”.
Important companies like Shell, DuPont, BP have been reorganised to generate profits from this green market of goods and services. In this sense, it may sound altruistic, "the sustainability", the logic of profitability and competition is what will determine the ability of companies of the future to meet the changing needs of consumers. This premise of "sustainability" as a necessary quality to be competitive, falls short, according to Bryan Walsh of Time magazine. In a 2007 article, the expert shows how "sustainable" is helping to drive out competition, given the approach taken by companies to become more efficient, flexible and cutting waste, which helps them provide better products and reduce costs. Companies that refuse to accept that they will face a strict and demanding environment.
Business sustainability consists of three components, these are: social, economic and environmental. The business has to consider these three components as the business must make a maximized profit (economic) but must not in any way damage the environment in the long term (environmental). The business must also take care of social issue and people and communities as they are support the business.
Sustainability is about the short and long term; it lies on a fundamental principle of relationships. Businesses and economic interests have to realize that the environment is the bottom line when it comes to a future that works. Sustainability in the fashion industry is the prediction of our abilities to survive as a human culture, and to maintain and improve our way of life. Corporations are aware that turning sustainable is evident. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
In the past few decades, people have developed a heightened sense of awareness in regard to their carbon footprint. Consumers have sought to help solve major environmental problems through their everyday purchases by opting for sustainably-sourced, organic, and minimally processed goods. This trend, called “green consumerism,” has been growing rapidly and is touted as the best method to combat wanton ecological degradation. But is it truly effective? Michael Maniates, a professor in environmental studies, doesn’t think so. In his paper Individualization: Plant a Tree, Buy a Bike, Save the World?, Maniates details the shortcomings of green consumerism and why using it as a primary method to shape positive environmental progress is not a good idea; instead, a multifaceted approach including individual action, community organization, and institutional change is needed for considerable and adequate environmental progress.. His argument is validated in part by businesses such as Whole Foods, reputed to be environmentally friendly and health-conscious, misleading customers on the “green” merits
As consumers are becoming more aware of environmental issues they are also becoming more informed as to how the items they purchase can make a difference. We are bombarded from all sides with product information and advertising concerning the health and environmental benefits of all types of goods and services. The question must be asked of whether or not these claims and seals of approval are always honest or if they are just a marketing tool.
The more experience you have putting these tips into practice, the more they will become instinct. And by making informed decisions and ensuring that the product’s claims are accurate, you can feel good about the choices you make and their positive impact on the environment. If more greenwashing means that marketers are increasingly responding to the demand for sustainable products, this could be a positive trend. If left unchecked, greenwashing creates significant risks. Consumers will give up on marketers and manufacturers, and give up on the hope that their spending might be put to good use. Recent developments suggest companies should be prepared for the new wave of measures. Greenwashing has become a buzz word for consumers and the media. Unfortunately, the rules are not always clear when it comes to responsible environmental marketing.