Ethical consumerism (alternatively called ethical consumption, ethical purchasing, moral purchasing, ethical sourcing, ethical shopping or green consumerism) is a type of consumer activism that is based on the concept of dollar voting. It is practiced through ‘positive buying’ in that ethical products are favoured, or ‘moral boycott’, that is negative purchasing and company-based purchasing.
The term “ethical consumer”, now used generically, was first popularised by the UK magazine Ethical Consumer, first published in 1989. Ethical Consumer magazine’s key innovation was to produce ‘ratings tables’, inspired by the criteria-based approach of the then emerging ethical investment movement. Ethical Consumer’s ratings tables awarded companies negative marks (and from 2005 overall scores) across a range of ethical and environmental categories such as ‘animal rights’, ‘human rights’ and ‘pollution and toxics’, empowering consumers to make ethically informed consumption choices and providing campaigners with reliable information on corporate behaviour. Such criteria-based ethical and environmental ratings have subsequently become commonplace both in providing consumer information and in business-to-business corporate social responsibility and sustainability ratings such as those provided by Innovest, Calvert Foundation, Domini, IRRC, TIAA–CREF and KLD Analytics. Today, Bloomberg and Reuters provide “environmental, social and governance” ratings direct to the financial data screens of hundreds of thousands of stock market traders. The not-for-profit Ethical Consumer Research Association continues to publish Ethical Consumer and its associated website, which provides free access to ethical ratings tables.
Basis
Global morality
In Unequal Freedoms: The Global Market As An Ethical System (1998), John McMurtry argues that no purchasing decision exists that does not itself imply some moral choice, and that there is no purchasing that is not ultimately moral in nature. This mirrors older arguments, especially by the Anabaptists, e.g. Mennonites, Amish, that one must accept all personal moral and spiritual liability of all harms done at any distance in space or time to anyone by one’s own choices. It is often suggested that Judeo-Christian scriptures further direct followers towards practising good stewardship of the Earth, under an obligation to a God who is believed to have created the planet for us to share with other creatures. A similar argument presented from a secular humanist point of view is that it is simply better for human beings to acknowledge that the planet supports life only because of a delicate balance of many different factors.
Spending as morality
Some trust criteria, e.g. creditworthiness or implied warranty, are considered to be part of any purchasing or sourcing decision. However, these terms refer to broader systems of guidance that would, ideally, cause any purchasing decision to disqualify offered products or services based on non-price criteria that affect the moral rather than the functional liabilities of the entire production process. Paul Hawken, a proponent of Natural Capitalism, refers to “comprehensive outcomes” of production services as opposed to the “culminative outcomes” of using the product of such services. Often, moral criteria are part of a much broader shift away from commodity markets towards a deeper service economy where all activities, from growing to harvesting to processing to delivery, are considered part of the value chain and for which consumers are “responsible”.
Andrew Wilson, Director of the UK’s Ashridge Centre for Business and Society, argues that “Shopping is more important than voting”, and that the disposition of money is the most basic role we play in any system of economics. Some theorists believe that it is the clearest way that we express our actual moral choices, i.e., if we say we care about something but continue to buy from parties that have a high probability of risk of harm or destruction of that thing, we don’t really care about it, we are practicing a form of simple hypocrisy.
In an effort by churches to advocate moral and ethical consumerism, many have become involved in the Fair Trade movement:
Ten Thousand Villages is affiliated with the Mennonite Central Committee
SERRV International is partnered with Catholic Relief Services and Lutheran World Relief
Village Markets of Africa sells Fair Trade gifts from the Lutheran Church in Kenya
Catholic Relief Services has their own Fair Trade mission in CRS Fair Trade
Points to keep in mind about responsible consumption
The following recommendations or measures, and many more, are considered as priorities for critical, conscious and responsible consumption in today’s world, both on a personal and professional or business level. They are between them:
Consider the environmental impact from the point of view of the life cycle of the product to be purchased, assessing the production, transport, distribution, consumption and waste processes that the product leaves behind.
Determine the ecological footprint produced by a certain lifestyle and consumerism.
Determine which companies, products and services respect the environment and human rights to prefer them over others that do not meet the aforementioned requirements.
Raise the type of trade you want to favor.
Ensure the quality of the purchased.
Determine what harm it would do to you or your business if what you bought is not legal according to your country.
Standards and labels
A number of standards, labels and marks have been introduced for ethical consumers, such as the following:
B corporation
Co-op Marque
Dolphin safe
EKOenergy for electricity agreements
Equal Exchange
Ethical Consumer Best Buy label
Fairtrade
Free-range poultry
FSC-certified sustainably sourced wood
Grass fed beef
Green America Seal of Approval
Halal (religious standard)
Kosher (religious standard)
Local food
MSC-certified sustainably sourced seafood
No Pork No Lard (semi-religious standard)
Organic food
Organic Trade Association
Product Red
Rainforest Alliance certified
Recycled/recyclable
Respects Your Freedom
Shade-grown coffee
Social Accountability 8000
Union-made
Vegan
Along with disclosure of ingredients, some mandatory labelling of origins of clothing or food is required in all developed nations. This practice has been extended in some developing nations, e.g., where every item carries the name, phone number and fax number of the factory where it was made so a buyer can inspect its conditions. And, more importantly, to prove that the item was not made by “prison labor”, use of which to produce export goods is banned in most developed nations. Such labels have also been used for boycotts, as when the merchandise mark Made in Germany was introduced in 1887.
These labels serve as tokens of some reliable validation process, some instructional capital, much as does a brand name or a nation’s flag. They also signal some social capital, or trust, in some community of auditors that must follow those instructions to validate those labels.
Some companies in the United States, though currently not required to reduce their carbon footprint, are doing so voluntarily by changing their energy use practices, as well as by directly funding (through carbon offsets), businesses that are already sustainable—or are developing or improving green technologies for the future.
In 2009, Atlanta’s Virginia-Highland neighborhood became the first Carbon-Neutral Zone in the United States. Seventeen merchants in Virginia-Highland allowed their carbon footprint to be audited. Now, they are partnered with the Valley Wood Carbon Sequestration Project—thousands of acres of forest in rural Georgia—through the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX). The businesses involved in the partnership display the Verus Carbon Neutral seal in each store front and posted a sign prominently declaring the area’s Carbon Neutral status. (CCX ceased trading carbon credits at the end of 2010 due to inactivity in the U.S. carbon markets, although carbon exchanges were intended to still be facilitated.)
Over time, some theorists suggest, the amount of social capital or trust invested in nation-states (or “flags”) will continue to decrease, and that placed in corporations (or “brands”) will increase. This can only be offset by retrenched national sovereignty to reinforce shared national standards in tax, trade, and tariff laws, and by placing the trust in civil society in such “moral labels”. These arguments have been a major focus of the anti-globalization movement, which includes many broader arguments against the amoral nature of markets as such. However, the economic school of Public Choice Theory pioneered by James M. Buchanan has offered counter-arguments based on economic demonstration to this theory of ‘amoral markets’ versus ‘moral governments’.
Areas of concern
Ethical Consumer Research Association, the alternative consumer organisation, collects and categorises information of more than 30,000 companies according to their performance in five main areas, composing the Ethiscore:
Environment: Environmental Reporting, Nuclear Power, Climate Change, Pollution & Toxics, Habitats & Resources
People: Human Rights, Workers’ Rights, Supply Chain Policy, Irresponsible Marketing, Armaments
Animals: Animal Testing, Factory Farming, Other Animal Rights
Politics: Political Activity, Boycott Call, Genetic Engineering, Anti-Social Finance, Company Ethos
Product Sustainability: Organic, Fairtrade, Positive Environmental Features, Other Sustainability.
Role of companies
In the future it is expected that large companies incorporate this method for the production of their products. As a current example we can mention the use by some companies of glass containers. The consumer who chooses these containers is promoting a lower generation of garbage (glass containers are reusable) and less pollution, since glass is degraded almost ten times faster than plastic.
To promote responsible consumption is to understand that natural resources are not renewable and that future generations must have the necessary conditions to be able to live. The consumer chooses in the market the story that will be told in the future.
We could schematically distinguish three fundamental aspects or ways of consuming that constitute what is called responsible consumption:
The ethical consumption required to introduce evaluative when consuming or opt for a product aspects. Special emphasis is placed on austerity, that is, it is about discerning between real needs and those created by advertising that encourages consumption as a way to achieve happiness and well-being ( consumerism ). This critical view leads to a reduction in the amount of products consumed and therefore decreases the volume of garbage and pollution that occurs in production and consumption.
The ecological consumption implies a basic production circuit from the reduction, reuse and recycling of different social products. Organic products are also analyzed, with an emphasis on the generation of ecological agriculture and livestock, the option for artisan production, and all those forms of production that do not damage environmental conditions.
The social or solidary consumption is the one that takes into account the social relations and labor conditions in which a product or a service has been elaborated. It could include fair trade , which proposes to bring the producer closer to the final consumer to eliminate the mediations that raise prices. It is about paying just for the work done, both to the producers of the peripheral areas and those in our local area, and to promote social alternatives of production and integration, promoting an equitable and sustainable development.
Advertising
The media have a decisive influence on the habits and tastes of people. To have responsible consumption, it is necessary to be aware of the purpose of the advertisements.
Buy is vote
Every time something is purchased, a vote is being taken in favor of the products purchased, the processes used in their manufacture, the generation of certain types of waste. If the producer has links with other organizations that behave unethically or harmful to the community in general, their actions are also being supported. When you stop consuming a good or service you are taking away support from the organization that produces them or that profits from them. With each purchase a right to vote is being exercised. For example, if you do not agree with the way in which the media shows the world or a specific situation, by following the medium your actions are being supported, and when you stop following it, you are voting against your actions. . If other people do the same, and also make their discontent feel,
Tips
Environmental health
The organization Ecologists in Action has published a series of tips for responsible consumption. These recommendations are:
Be an environmentalist and avoid pollution.
Before buying something, think carefully if you really need to buy it or if you are being guided by advertising .
When deciding to buy something, find out very well what raw material is manufactured, how its manufacturing process impacts the environment and if it generates any damage or social injustice .
It also considers the impact on the environment and the social environment (especially the one close to you) that has the use of what you intend to buy.
When buying something, consider also the impact caused by the waste and garbage it generates.
Avoid disposable products, if they are not strictly necessary.
Reject the plastic bags that give in supermarkets and shops. As much as possible, when making a purchase, bring your own bags of cloth, paper, cardboard, or even the plastic bags previously used until they are unusable.
Buy the content and not the container. Many times you pay more for everything that involves the manufacture and disposal of wrappers, which are thrown directly into the trash, than the content.
Recycle before you buy, many of the things you can throw away can be reused in other ways and forms (use your imagination).
Avoid cheap meals and highly packaged products. Lunch boxes and glass jars are a greener way to store food in plastic and aluminum.
Give priority to products with returnable or reusable containers.
If you use disposable items, which are compostable, biodegradable or, in any case, recyclable. For example, plates, glasses, cutlery, bags, disposable pens of compostable materials, such as bioplastics , instead of plastics.
Turn off everything when you do not need it.
Do not turn on the heating when you do not need it.
Financial sector
Find alternative banks that have ethical and responsible negotiations.
Computer revolution
Try not only to buy but also to use free software whenever possible. That is, it uses: operating systems , applications , programs, firmware , drivers , web applications and multimedia codecs , open source and free of proprietary licenses , since they deprive users, researchers and developers, from around the world , of the four fundamental freedoms associated to the software that the Free Software Foundation marks :
Freedom # 1: the freedom to use the program for any purpose.
Freedom # 2: the freedom to study the program and adapt it to your needs.
Freedom # 3: The freedom to distribute the program the way you received it.
Freedom # 4: the freedom to modify the program and share its modifications.
The deprivation of these freedoms is developing a spiral of technological dependence of people, companies, schools, organizations and even countries, in general, whose progress is subject to other countries and companies with a lot of power and with different interests and, frequently, contrary to those of the majority of users. This is much more important the more humanity is based on technology in general and information technology in particular.
Keep in mind that not only the purchase, but the simple use of a system, service or program, favors the proliferation of users and buyers of said system, service or program, and, therefore, the financing of the company that develops it. like his philosophy, which brings a kind of world or another hand in hand. You, as well as each one of us, are a participant and responsible.
Research
GfK NOP, the market research group, has made a five-country study of consumer beliefs about the ethics of large companies. The report was described in a Financial Times article published on February 20, 2007 entitled “Ethical consumption makes mark on branding”, and was followed up by an online debate/discussion hosted by FT.com. The countries surveyed were Germany, the United States, Britain, France and Spain. More than half of respondents in Germany and the US believed there is a serious deterioration in standards of corporate practice. Almost half of those surveyed in Britain, France and Spain held similar beliefs.
About a third of respondents told researchers they would pay higher prices for ethical brands though perception of various companies’ ethical or unethical status varied considerably from country to country.
The most ethically perceived brands were The Co-op (in the UK), Coca-Cola (in the US), Danone (in France), Adidas (in Germany) and Nestlé (in Spain). Coca-Cola, Danone, Adidas and Nestlé did not appear anywhere in the UK’s list of 15 most ethical companies. Nike appeared in the lists of the other four countries but not in the UK’s list.
In the UK, The Co-operative Bank has produced an Ethical Consumerism Report (formerly the Ethical Purchasing Index) since 2001. The report measures the market size and growth of a basket of ‘ethical’ products and services, and valued UK ethical consumerism at GBP36.0 billion (~USD54.4 billion) in 2008, and GBP47.2 billion (USD72.5 billion) in 2012.
A number of organisations provide research-based evaluations of the behavior of companies around the world, assessing them along ethical dimensions such as human rights, the environment, animal welfare and politics. Green America is a not-for-profit membership organization founded in 1982 that provides the Green American Seal of Approval and produces a “Responsible Shopper” guide to “alert consumers and investors to problems with companies that they may shop with or invest in.” The Ethical Consumer Research Association is a not-for-profit workers’ co-operative founded in the UK in 1988 to “provide information on the companies behind the brand names and to promote the ethical use of consumer power” which provides an online searchable database under the name Corporate Critic or Ethiscore. The Ethiscore is a weightable numerical rating designed as a quick guide to the ethical status of companies, or brands in a particular area, and is linked to a more detailed ethical assessment. “alonovo” is an online shopping portal that provides similar weightable ethical ratings termed the “Corporate Social Behavior Index”.
Related concepts
Conscientious consumption
The consumer rationalizes unnecessary and even unwanted consumption by saying that “it’s for a good cause”. As a result, the consumer buys pink ribbons during National Breast Cancer Awareness Month, green products to support the environment, candy and popcorn from school children, greeting cards and gift wrap from charities, and many other, often unwanted objects. The consumer avoids considering whether the price offered is fair, whether a small cash donation would be more effective with far less work, or even whether selling the item is consistent with the ostensible mission, such as when sports teams sell candy.
Some of these efforts are based on concept brands: the consumer is buying an association with women’s health or environmental concerns as much as she or he is buying a tangible product.
Alternative giving
In response to an increasing demand for ethical consumerism surrounding gift giving occasions, charities have promoted an alternative gift market, in which charitable contributions are made on behalf of the gift “recipient”. The “recipient” receives a card explaining the selected gift, while the actual gift item (frequently agricultural supplies or domestic animals) is sent to a family in a poor community.
Criticism
Critics argue that the ability to effect structural change is limited in ethical consumerism. Some cite the preponderance of niche markets as the actual effect of ethical consumerism, while others argue that information is limited regarding the outcomes of a given purchase, preventing consumers from making informed ethical choices. Critics have also argued that the uneven distribution of wealth prevents consumerism, ethical or otherwise, from fulfilling its democratic potential.
One study suggests that “Buying Green” serves as a license for unethical behavior – in their 2009 paper, “Do Green Products Make Us Better People?”, Nina Mazar, Chen-Bo Zhong state the following:
In line with the halo associated with green consumerism, people act more altruistically after mere exposure to green than conventional products. However, people act less altruistically and are more likely to cheat and steal after purchasing green products as opposed to conventional products. Together, the studies show that consumption is more tightly connected to our social and ethical behaviors in directions and domains other than previously thought.
In a 2010 The Guardian article, British environmental writer and activist George Monbiot argued that green consumers who do not articulate their values are part of “a catastrophic mistake” on the grounds that such consumerism “strengthens extrinsic values” (those that “concern status and self-advancement”), thereby “making future campaigns less likely to succeed”.
Source from Wikipedia