So . . . the G8/G20 week of hell in Toronto begins today, and with it comes lots of protests and rallies. This has resulted in the return to a topic covered a little while ago, that of causes. Today I'm going to look at it from a different angle: how intentions turn into actions (or, in most cases, do not).
Leger research recently released a report on the so-called "Green Gap," which examines the difference between peoples attitudes and intentions about environmentally-friendly choices, and the actual choices people make. Not surprisingly, most people think they are very green-conscious and participate in pro-environmental initiatives. The report finds that most people are wrong. A couple of examples:
1. Seven out of ten people claim that they regularly use a refillable container when buying coffee, but observational evidence proves otherwise. Maybe 70% of people own a refillable container, and mean to use it, but you can't pour coffee into an intention.
2. 85% of people believe they are driving fuel-efficient cars. Look around you. Are 85% of the cars out there fuel-efficient? Sure, according to the pamphlets you get at the dealership they are, but in reality? Come on.
The gap between intention and action is only part of the story. The other part (not in the research report) has to do with they type of actions that actually are taken. The city of Toronto decided last year to impose a 5-cent tax on all plastic bags. In other words, whether a store wants to or not, it has to charge 5 cents a bag. This alone is stupid; there are better, more meaningful ways to be socially conscious than to ban plastic bags (this from a city council that also instituted a ban on plastic water bottles on municpal government property). To make things worse, the money that is charged for plastic bags isn't even going anywhere "green"! The retailer just pockets the extra money. Some retailers (e.g. Loblaws) have made a lot of noise about sending that money to help with environmental causes (primarily to justify their charging for bags across Canada, not just in Toronto) but none are under any obligation to use that money for anything but profit. So Mayor David Miller just gave business permission for an-across-the-board price hike. If he were pocketing some of the money it would at least make sense; as it is, it's just dumb.
The difference is between doing things for show (window dressing) and doing things to affect change. Initiatives like the plastic bag tax or the ban on water bottles is window dressing. Bringing a refillable mug to Tim Hortons is window dressing. It might make you feel good, and certainly doesn't do any harm, but it's not going to change the big picture (I know, I know, if everyone did it, but guess what, everyone won't).
To really affect change often requires sacrifice. If you believe that the green movement is a noble cause (which I question, but that's a whole other issue), then do something real about it. Don't drive a car. Don't patronize businesses that pollute. Don't just take an "organic" label as incontrovertible evidence that the company's actions are friendly.
Doing something real takes time (to investigate those companies whose products you buy) and money (because goods and services that aid in a cause tend to be more expensive). I know people who "boycott" U.S. goods but go to Tim Hortons and Laura Secord (the stores, not the people) all the time, despite the fact that both are U.S.-owned. Most of us are not interested in investing these resources, which is fine. But just like in my blog about BP last week I talked about implicit tradeoffs, recognize that you are doing that here.
I'll finish with one last example. In a similar survey a couple of years ago, respondents were asked about their attitudes regarding the environment. As you might expect, more than 80% were deeply concerned about the natural world and humanity's role in its destruction. But at the end of the call, when the interviewer asked for a $100 donation to a green charity, only 17% ponied up the dough. As AC/DC said (and maybe someone else before them, it's possible I guess): money talks, B.S. walks.
No comments:
Post a Comment