GREEN CONSUMERISM AS A CRITIQUE OF THE HUMAN ROLE IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT

GREEN CONSUMERISM AS A CRITIQUE OF THE HUMAN ROLE IN THE

ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT

Vanessa Alya

Arizona State University

Course

Professor Dahlya

February, 2024

Week 1

Introduction

Humans and nature coexist as a complex unit that fills the earth. To fulfill their needs,

humans need nature to provide the necessary resources. Because of this, humans must

maintain the balance of nature using their diverse thoughts and characters so that life

continues. Arne Naess (1912) in the theory of deep ecology places humans as the center of

the interaction network of the existence of living things through three principles of ecosystem

balance. First, the natural attitude of humans to care for and maintain nature. Second,

awareness as a living being, in fighting for the right for all resources to live and develop.

Third, creative thinking as a creature with an intact biological unity, thus creating

actualization potential development that has a positive impact on nature (Ohoiwutun 2020).

By understanding that every living thing depends on the existence of humans in this nature,

the role of humans in maintaining the balance of the ecosystem has a dilemma. On the one

hand, the right perspective on nature will give birth to respect for biodiversity. However, on

the other hand, the same perspective will place nature as an economic resource by utilizing

biodiversity. As a result, human interference with nature can put it in a period of crisis.

People's awareness of their role in addressing environmental issues is manifested in their

consumption patterns of everyday products. In considering buying a product, they start to

look at the ecological impacts caused by the production and consumption process of the item,

such as carbon footprint, the amount of water used, and energy efficiency. This

environmentally friendly consumption pattern is called green consumerism. Green

consumerism refers to a preference for the production, promotion and consumption of goods

and services on the basis of pro-environmental claims. The most visible approach to

promoting green consumerism is ecolabelling or eco-labeling schemes for products and

services (Akenji, 2014). This label indicates that the producer pays attention to environmental

aspects in the production process of an item. For example, the Forest Stewardship Council

label signifies that the wood used to produce goods comes from responsibly and sustainably

managed forests.

The increasing popularity of electric cars, efficient electronic devices energy, reusable

shopping bags, and biodegradable packaged goods are examples of green consumerism.

While these products are often more expensive, consumers are willing to pay more for

environmentally friendly products. According to the 2021 Global Sustainability Study survey

with 10,281 respondents from 17 countries, 34% of consumers are willing to pay more for

green products. The results of research by Tsen et al. (2006) show that consumers'

willingness to pay more is related to consumers' understanding of the severity of

environmental problems. Reed et al. (2012) argue that the adoption of an identity also affects

one's attitude and behavior as a consumer. Therefore, it can be said that green consumers do

not fully engage in environmentally friendly behavior for the sake of environmental

sustainability itself, but also to form a self-identification as someone who cares about the

environment.

Departing from the facts above, this paper will provide an understanding of how biased

the role of humans in preserving the environment today. Using descriptive qualitative

research methods by focusing on literature reviews and research data from journals and

documentary videos related to invisible hand practices and the ecogreen industry.

Discussion

Nature Protection Movement as an Effort to Save the Earth

Collective nature protection awareness began in the 1960s and 1970s after the realization

of the impact of pollution on human health. This movement included forest conservation,

protection of water bodies from waste, and transition of energy sources. The nature protection

movement combines social, political and economic movements, with the aim of raising

public awareness of nature conservation and protection. Not only through widespread

campaigns, this movement also occurs through the actions of intergovernmental

organizations and non-governmental organizations. The United Nations, through Brundtland

Commission (1987), came up with the concept of sustainable development. Development

sustainable is development that can meet needs current today without sacrificing ability

future generations to meet their own needs. This concept gave birth to the concept of

sustainable production, which is the creation of goods and services using processes and

systems that are non-polluting; energy and natural resource efficient; economically viable;

safe and healthy for employees, communities and consumers; and socially and creatively

satisfying for everyone who works (Lowell Center for Sustainable Production, 1998). The

emerging theme of sustainable development reinforces the idea that the success of the

environmental movement depends on people. Movements that have emerged recently, such

as the No Straw Movement (campaign to stop use of straws campaign) emphasizes individual

participation as the key to saving the environment. The movement started with a viral video

of a sea turtle with a straw stuck in its nose, which led to a large-scale emotional reaction.

Eventually, there were various anti-plastic straw campaigns that were also joined by

multinational companies, such as McDonald's and Starbucks(Arkesteyn, 2020).

The rise of Green Consumerism

As public awareness and government pressure increases, industries are undertaking

"green marketing" efforts. Green marketing is a combination of activities, including product

modifications, changes to the production process, packaging changes, and advertising

modifications to promote environmentally friendly products (Mishra and Sharma, 2014).

Green marketing seeks to tempt green consumers in an effort to expand the market and

increase profits. Production practices that Green consumerism is no longer seen as an

obligation, but rather as a strategic and profitable business tactic. As such, green

consumerism is a subset of green capitalism that seeks to reduce environmental impacts by

utilizing market forces and the profit motive (Scales, 2014). By capitalizing on these, green

capitalism encourages innovation, competition, and efficiency on a "greener" path. Fred

Magdoff and Environment and Capitalism (2011) highlight the myth of market efficiency.

The market is thought to ensure that what people need will be produced, even though the

market itself is dominated by giant corporations.

Despite the increasing trend of establishing a "green" image in order to achieve profits,

many companies still perceive that there are several major barriers to sustainable production

(Bey et al., 2013). These barriers include a lack of information on sustainable production, no

allocable costs for production system transformation, the need for expert knowledge, and

difficulties in finding alternative materials. Therefore, in order to continue to attract

consumers who care about the environment, companies often practice greenwashing.

Greenwashing is the dissemination of false or incomplete information by an organization to

present a public image as an environmentally responsible organization (Furlow, 2010).

In a survey by TerraChoice (2010) on greenwashing, 95% of 5,269 products that made

environmentally friendly claims were found to be practicing greenwashing. The most

dominant form of greenwashing is vagueness, which is a claim that lacks specificity so that

its true meaning tends to be misunderstood by consumers. For example, the statement "this

product is made from natural ingredients". The description of the naturalness of the product's

ingredients is not specific. It could be that a product contains ingredients such as arsenic and

mercury. Both ingredients are "natural" in the sense that they are formed in nature, but they

have harmful properties so their presence cannot be considered "green" or healthy. Another

form of greenwashing is the hidden tradeoff, which is claiming that a product is "green"

based on an overly narrow set of attributes without regard to other important environmental

concerns (Baum, 2012). Therefore, it can be concluded that the trend of green consumerism

is strongly tied to industry tricks.

A Critique of Green Consumerism

Karl Marx's concept of commodity fetishism refers to how capitalism hides social and

material inputs in production and distribution (Carrier, 2010). Green consumerism tries to

counter this by labeling the production process of a product. However, according to Scales

(2014), green consumerism is actually reinforcing a new model of fetishism. In an attempt to

provide information about the "greenness" of a product, green consumerism simplifies what

"green" is. Environmental impacts are simplified and abstract concepts such as "green" are

reduced to labels, symbols and metrics. This can direct consumers' focus to one issue and

forget about others.

Scales (2014) also argues that a major problem with the basic assumptions of green

consumerism is the overestimation of the power of individuals as consumers. Consumers are

convinced that their choices in the consumption process are what can save the environment.

In the process, it hides the fact that individual power to change consumption patterns is

limited by global market forces. When referring to the invisible hand concept coined by

Adam Smith (1776), it is true that consumption patterns can change production patterns. The

concept explains that individual interests can set the direction of the market so that it is in

accordance with the interests of the wider community. This means that if consumers

consistently choose environmentally friendly products over regular products, companies must

follow the market and the environment can be saved. However, we need to look at the context

of the world we live in today. Giant corporations have abundant capital and political power.

Instead of being market-driven, they have the power to drive the market through massive

marketing campaigns. The messages they deliver shape consumer desires so that those

desires can be answered by the companies themselves. In the process, companies shift the

responsibility of saving the environment into the hands of consumers. Akenji (2014) calls this

phenomenon consumer scapegoating. Scapegoating is an effective strategy to encourage

consumers to buy "green" products. This strategy is especially effective with consumers who

feel a moral obligation to humanity to protect the environment (Leonidou, 2010).

The Problem of Improving Green Consumption Patterns

Marketing that emphasizes the environmentally friendly side of a product often makes

consumers forget the amount of labor and resources required in the production and

distribution of a global commodity. The fact that the production of "green" goods also

depletes natural resources and potentially harms the environment is not highlighted. This is

an example of one form of greenwashing: hidden tradeoffs. For example, paper that is

certified "green" because it comes from sustainably harvested forests is not necessarily truly

environmentally friendly. There are other important environmental issues in the papermaking

process, such as greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the production process and water

pollution due to the use of chlorine in the production process bleaching. Similar problems

exist in the alternative energy industry. The production of "green" technologies such as

electric cars and solar panels requires mass mining that causes a range of environmental

problems. There is evidence that mining lithium used in electric car batteries risks causing

water pollution, drought and land subsidence, and poisoning flora and fauna (Kaunda, 2020).

The widespread use of reusable bags as a replacement for plastic bags by restaurants has also

created new problems. As consumers continue to buy reusable bags instead of bringing them

from home, there is a buildup of waste. In fact, according to research on product life cycles

by Ahamed et al. (2021), switching from plastic bags to paper or cloth bags has a worse

environmental impact if used less than 50 times. This means that a product that appears to be

environmentally friendly in one aspect may be damaging in another.

Green consumerism, as an attempt to save the environment, fails to highlight the root

causes of the damage. Deforestation, pollution, drought, global warming, and other

environmental problems are caused by human consumptive behavior and the expansion of

profit-seeking companies. The "green" label on a product justifies the increased consumption

of that product, which in turn encourages the production of similar products. Government

policies also promote increased consumption, such as tax incentives and subsidies to

encourage electric car ownership (Lieven, 2015). In Indonesia, there are plans for similar

policies. Industry Minister Agus Gumiwang said that the government will subsidize up to 80

million rupiah for the purchase of an electric car and 8 million rupiah for an electric

motorcycle. This can happen because the government and industry operate using a market

economy system that requires increased consumption to maintain economic growth (Akenji,

2014).

Although green consumerism and those who perpetuate it claim that "green" consumption

is the key to saving the environment, it is not the real solution. Instead, people need to reduce

their consumption to lower the pressure on natural resources used as raw materials and to

reduce the waste generated from production and consumption. Of course, society does not

live in a vacuum. People's behavior is greatly influenced by the presence or absence of

regulations on related matters. Therefore, there needs to be awareness and commitment from

the government to make appropriate policies. For example, instead of encouraging the use of

private vehicles by providing incentives, the government should focus more on building

pedestrian-friendly infrastructure and improving the quality of traffic and quantity of public

transportation. The government can also combat greenwashing by setting standards and

supervising companies that claim that their products are environmentally friendly. Thus, it

can be concluded that the question to be answered is no longer about what products should be

used to save the earth, but rather the proper resolution of the environment. The question to be

answered is how to change the system that facilitates consumptive behavior and relentless

expansion.

Conclusion

Industrialization will continue to find ways to facilitate its capital accumulation. So, in

this context, the struggle to preserve the environment can no longer be just defensive like a

movement of concern when the environment is destroyed. However, the movement must be

offensive, such as correcting all forms of market behavior that are in the name of

conservation but have an impact on greater natural damage. Realizing this, consumers are

required to be more critical in responding to environmentally friendly claims marketed by

companies. Consumers need to understand that buying a "green" product does not mean that

it solely has a positive impact on the environment. There is a better way to lead the earth to a

brighter future, namely by reducing consumption and becoming more aware of the resources

deployed in the production of each item used.