Chapter – IV

LITERATURE REVIEW

pg. 52
Since the industrial revolution, man has done irreparable damage to the environment. He has
exploited natural resources beyond their regenerative capacity, altered ecosystems and
extinguished entire species of plants and animals. Environmentalism has fast emerged as an
important global phenomenon during the last decade owing to increase in environmental
related concerns and ecological pressures derived from non-governmental organisations, local
environmentalists and governmental agencies. There is little doubt that environmental issues
are transforming business practice and consumer behaviour worldwide, and include
governmental regulations, as well as voluntary initiatives by businesses and consumers
designed to minimize the environmental impact of their economic activities. The trend had
recently shifted to the consumers whom have also become concerned with environmental
problems and have started demanding more environmentally friendly products. Within the
green marketing literature, the concept of environmentalism has been operationalized in
terms of consumer goods, industrial goods and even services. The underlying importance of
this concept relates to an economic perspective of how people use their limited resources to
try to satisfy their unlimited wants. To put this into perspective, Polonsky (1994) defined
green marketing as ―all activities designed to generate and facilitate any exchanges intended
to satisfy human needs or wants, such that the satisfaction of these needs or wants occurs,
with minimal detrimental impact on the natural environment‖. Therefore it ensures that the
interests of the organization and all its consumers are protected, as voluntary exchange will
not take place unless both the buyer and seller mutually benefit. There are two slogans like
"less environmentally harmful" and environmentally friendly". Thus green marketing should
look at minimizing environmental harm, not necessarily eliminating it. ‗Green marketing‘ is
defined by Peattie (2001) as ―activities which attempt to reduce the negative social and
environmental impacts of existing products and production systems, and which promote less
damaging products and services.‖ Products that have reduced negative impacts, throughout
their life-cycle, are developed. The market is encouraged to purchase these products thereby
reducing the damage caused by the products they purchase and use.

The term ‗green businesses‘ is defined by Friend (2009) and Smith (2003) as businesses and
practices that are viewed as environmentally sound, including the use of organic and natural
products to build factories, tighter protection against emissions and environmentally friendly
sourcing of materials. Green marketing, also known as sustainable marketing and
environmental marketing involve designing, promoting, pricing and distributing products and

pg. 53
services according to the customers‘ want and need, with minimal detrimental impact on the
natural environment (Grant, 2008; Jain and Kaur, 2004; Kangis, 1992; Pride and Ferrell,
2008). Soonthonsmai (2007) defined green marketing as the process and activities taken by
firms by delivering environmentally sound goods or services to create consumers satisfaction.
Gilbert (2007) identifies a green business activity as any activity that is performed in a
manner that has either limited negative ecological impact or directly benefits the natural
environment in some way. Zsolnai (2002) defines a green business as a business that has
adopted the concept of environmentalism across the various functions of the business. Green
market is identified as a part of market segments based on the ‗greenness‘ of the consumer
(Charter et al., 2002; Simintiras et al., 1994). Therefore, green marketing is now dealing with
fair trade of socio-economical benefits as well as environmental responsibilities through the
green business. Other definition by Welford (2000) stated that green marketing is the
management process responsible for identifying, anticipating and satisfying the requirements
of customers and society, in a profitable and sustainable way. Marketing scholars have used
the term green marketing interchangeably as social marketing, ecological marketing or
environmental marketing. ―The marketing or promotion of a product based on its
environmental performance or an improvement thereof (Charter & Polonsky 1999)‖. Put
simply, green marketing comprises all those marketing activities which the firms undertake to
create a positive impact or lessen the negative impact of their products on the environment.
The concept of ‗green marketing‘ is the business practice that considers consumers concerns
with regards to preservation and conservation of the natural environment (Coddington, 1993).
―A holistic and responsible strategic management process that identifies, anticipates, satisfies
and fulfils stakeholder needs, for a reasonable reward, that does not adversely affect human
or natural environmental well-being‖ (Charter (1992), p. 394)

As per Brundtland Commission (1987), defines sustainable development as ―Development

that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs (Rowell, 1996)‖.

Focus of Green marketing was previously and primarily on the ecological context has now
shifted to more sustainability issues in the marketing efforts and main focus now is on socio-
economic and environmental context.

pg. 54
Rise of environmental concern among consumers has been viewed as perhaps the biggest
opportunity for enterprise and invention the industrial world has ever seen. (Cairncross 1992:
177).

Green marketing concept emerges from societal marketing (Kotler, 1999). Green marketing
is an attempt to characterize a product as being environmental friendly (eco friendly). It holds
the view that marketing which is a part of business not only has to satisfy customers in
particular, but also has to take into account the interests of society in general. That is, all
those who are affected by the activities of a business should be kept in mind when setting the
objectives and the policies of an organization. Thus, a green company is based on its
corporate vision that includes environmental concerns as the company‘s functioning. This
simply means that the company realizes the needs of the ecosystem with which it interacts.
For example, any company wants ―to be a good company, having concern for the community
and the environment‖. This has already helped to increase the recent trend towards the
―greening‖ of the companies.

According to Hawken (Ecology of Commerce, 1995) business has three issues to face. These
are what it takes, what it makes and what it wastes. What it takes is materials from the
environment, (its ecosystem) through extracting, mining, cutting, hunting and other means.
What it makes is the products of commerce, goods and services that are derived from the
natural environment through the process of conversion and transformation. What it wastes
represents eco-costs arising from garbage, pollution and destruction of natural systems, which
are the consequences of taking and making processes. And these costs are not internalized in
most of the accounting systems so far. Zimmer et al. (1994) identified seven major categories
of concern: concern for waste, wildlife, the biosphere, population, health, energy awareness,
and environmental technology.

With an increasing pressure of environmental deterioration affecting numerous businesses,

many firms have taken the step to become more socially responsible through developing
products that meet the demand of environmentally conscious consumers. These companies
are interested in finding the determinants of green purchase behaviour in order to implement
their green marketing strategies. However, this is a challenging tactic as study has shown that
consumers who are environmentally conscious do not always end up purchasing

pg. 55
environmentally friendly or green products (Mainieri et al., 1997). Furthermore, researchers
have also reported that consumers are unlikely to engage in pro-environmental behaviour if
they believe that their action or effort are not making any difference in achieving a positive
environmental outcome (Kim and Choi, 2003).

Straughan and Roberts, (1999) argued that these environmental concerns have evolved
through many different phases. It started in the 1960s with the greening concept,
concentrating on pollution and energy conservation. Afterward, due to increased social and
political pressure, organizations have moved beyond these concepts to recycling, alternative
packaging, redesigning of product, and alternative products. Since 1990s, environmental
concern has become one of the most important issues.

Firms that embraced green marketing encountered numerous challenges such as the
variability of demand, unfavourable consumer perception and high cost of production
involved (Gurau and Ranchhod, 2005).

Rosenburger (2001) proposed that corporate greening could occur across eight activities
(market targeting, green design, green positioning, green pricing, green logistics, marketing
waste, green promotions and green alliances).

Increased use of Green Marketing is depending on five possible reasons. (Polonsky 1994b)

Organizations perceive environmental marketing to be an opportunity that can be

used to achieve its objectives [Keller 1987, Shearer 1990]
Organizations believe they have a moral obligation to be more socially
responsible [Davis 1992, Keller 1987,]
Governmental bodies are forcing firms to become more responsible [Davis 1992];
Competitors' environmental activities pressure firms to change their
environmental marketing activities [Davis 1992]
Cost factors associated with waste disposal, or reductions in material usage forces
firms to modify their behaviour [Keller, K.L. (1993]

Greening product or market is viewed as the outcome of rational strategic choice. It may thus
involve the search for different types of competitive advantage (Gladwin, 1992a). As a result

pg. 56
of staggering pollution levels and the diversity of environmental concerns, a wide range of
pressures is coming to bear upon industry/firms from many sides. The intensity of these
pressures varies by country, sector, industry and firm. It is clear, however, that firms need to
respond in order to ensure further use of scarce resources, public and political legitimacy,
profitability and financial assurance (Schot, Johan & Fisher, Kurt 1993). These green
pressure groups include the customer‘s pressure, government pressure (legislation pressure),
investor pressure, community pressure, business-to-business customers, pressure and
employees‘ pressure.

Customers Pressure: Consumers are increasingly better informed and becoming aware of the
environmental impact of consumer products and are thus demanding that industry improves
the environmental performance of its products. Today consumers are more enlightened and
especially in developed countries, they even seek for sustainable development for their
children. And with increased globalization and media penetration, this concept is catching up
even in developing countries.

Government Pressure: The threat of tougher environmental legislations and its stricter
compliance with rising costs of penalties in case of noncompliance are possible motivating
factors for firms to incorporate environmental concerns in their strategies (Banerjee 1998). In
India the Governments enacted laws concerning pollution control and environmental
protection, including Environment (Protection) Act 1986, the Air (Prevention & Control of
Pollution) Act 1981 & the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act 1974. While
environmental legislation represents the main pressure, increasing costs associated with
managing emissions are also an important factor. Legislation can lead to different degrees of
corporate environmentalism, depending on the level of strategy in which the firm includes
environmental concerns. At a purely functional level, responses to legislative pressure can
mean complying with existing regulations. At a higher corporate level of strategy, threat of
environmental legislation and liability could influence decision on new business
opportunities.

Other stakeholders include environmentalist, academicians, scientific community, media,

retailers, local government, suppliers and buyers. The attitude and behaviour of the corporate
stakeholders suggest that those companies which can establish themselves with a green image

pg. 57
will have the following distinct advantages in the marketplace: Positive company image;
increased sales and market share; improved employee moral and productivity; access to
superior talent and enhanced competitive advantage.

Carrigan and Attala (2001) examine consumer care about ethical behaviour and investigated
the effect of good and bad ethical conduct on consumer purchase behaviour. Although,
consumer sophistication has increased today, yet, this does not necessarily translate into
buying behaviour, which favours ethical companies and punishes unethical firms.

Wessells et al. (1999) suggest that environmental attributes of a product are more difficult for
a consumer to assess compared to other easily observable product attributes. A report by the
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (2002) also suggests that the
difficulty in identifying and locating green products is one of the barriers to green product
purchases. One way to overcome this issue is to utilize eco-labelling (or green labelling)
programs to provide the customers with information while at the same time addressing
environmental issues. An eco-label is a voluntary claim that a product has fewer impacts on
the environment with either production or consumption of that product (Blend and van
Ravenswaay, 1999).

However, though eco-labels serve to educate consumers about the products impact on the
environment, they are a tool developed by governmental and environmental organizations
and not by the marketing department of companies (Rex and Baumann, 2007). Consequently,
they are not utilized for commercial purposes, what has resulted in a low awareness of eco-
labels perceived by consumers.

Previous studies suggest that consumers would purchase and are willing to pay more for
green labelled products (see Bigsby and Ozanne, 2002; Vlosky et al., 1999; Ottman, 1992).
However, green labelled products also contain potential dangers and drawbacks, especially
when producers over-claim ecological responsibility or performance (Cary, Bhaskaran, and
Polonsky, 2004). Some authors further suggest that consumers considered the information
given on product labels inaccurate and confusing, thus they do not rely on these labels to
make purchase decisions toward green products (D‘Souza et al., 2006; Glegg, Richards,
Heard, and Dawson, 2005).

pg. 58
Just by looking at a product it is difficult to see whether it has been made from conventional
or organic raw material, or harmful stuffs (Allwood et al., 2006). Hence it is not easy for the
consumer to make an environmentally responsible purchase decision as one should ideally
consider, product manufacturing process, as well as what will happen to the product during
and after their useful life (Chen and Burns, 2006). Therefore, a class of eco-labels is being
introduced with requirements which manufacturers must meet before they can call their
products ‗green‘ (Allwood et al., 2006). Environment-friendly labels or eco-labels manifest
the efforts of an industry to become or be perceived as environment-friendly (Nimon and
Beghin, 1999). Eco-labels are normally issued either by Government supported or private
enterprises once it has been proved that the product of the applicant has met the criteria set by
them for the label (Hyvärinen, 1999). For the purpose of issuing eco-labels, generally the
Cradle-to-Grave approach is followed, that is, criteria are developed on analysing the entire
life cycle of the product commencing with extraction of raw materials, progressing through
the stages of production, distribution and utilization and disposal after use (3TS, 2008).
Although a product may have met all the criteria for an eco-label certification, a manufacturer
would go for such certification only if it brings credibility to the claims of the manufacturer
regarding the environment-friendliness of his/her ware. In other words, an eco label is like
any other product and has to earn its acceptability and credibility in the marketplace
(Knowledge Bank IIMM, 2008).

Green marketing has not lived up to the hopes and dreams of many managers and activists.
Although public opinion polls consistently show that consumers would prefer to choose a
green product over one that is less friendly to the environment when all other things are
equal, those "other things" are rarely equal in the minds of consumers. (Hackett, 2000)

4.1 THE GREEN CONSUMER

The concern with environmental degradation has resulted in a new segment of consumers, i.e.
the green consumers. These consumers have been identified as one who avoids products
which are possible danger for health, damage the environment during production, use
materials derived from threatened species or environment, and cause unnecessary waste.
Moreover, due to the businesses‘ decision to respond to these consumers‘ environmental
needs green marketing has` started to become an important branch of learning (Finisterra do

pg. 59
Paço, and Raposo, 2008). Green consumers are those who are aware of and interested in the
environmental issues (Soonthonsmai, 2007). Elkington (1994: 93) defines green consumer as
one who avoids products that are likely to endanger the health of the consumer or others;
cause significant damage to the environment during manufacture, use or disposal; consume a
disproportionate amount of energy; cause unnecessary waste; use materials derived from
threatened species or environments; involve unnecessary use of, or cruelty to animals;
adversely affect other countries. They would usually organised petitions, boycott
manufacturers and retailers and actively promote the preservation of the planet (Fergus,
1991). The key concern lies in understanding the characteristics to these green consumers to
enable firms to develop new targeting and segmentation strategies (D‘Souza et al., 2007).
Ottman (1992) reported that consumers were willing to accept green products when their
primary need for performance, quality, convenience and affordability were met. Furthermore
their level of acceptance would also increase when they understood how a green product
could help to solve environmental problems.

According to some studies, thirty to forty per cent of current environmental degradation is
due to the consumption activities of private households (Grunert, 1993). Various
environmental problems pose a threat to environmental sustainability, among which global
warming, urban air pollution, water shortages, environmental noise, and loss of biodiversity.
Many of these problems are rooted in human behaviour and can thus be managed by
changing the relevant behaviour so as to reduce its environmental impacts. Changes in human
behaviour are believed to be needed because technical efficiency gains resulting from, for
example, energy-efficient appliances, home insulation, and water-saving devices tend to be
overtaken by consumption growth. Moreover, physical and technical innovations imply
behaviour changes as well because individuals need to accept and understand them, buy
them, and use them in proper ways.

The solution to environmental and social ills is now looked at on consumer purchase
behaviour (Wells, 1990). Consumers must value protecting the environment before they can
have the intention of buying environmentally friendly products. It is argued that consumers
must feel that, when they purchase an environmentally friendly product, they will make some
sort of material difference. So far, studies have found consumers‘ perceived level of self-
involvement toward protection of the environment to be relatively low; hence the reason why

pg. 60
consumers are less likely to engage in ecologically favourable behaviours (Wiener and
Sukhdial 1990). As part of the solution, Bei and Simpson‘s (1995) study suggested that
emphasizing the importance of environmental issues can motivate consumers‘ environmental
behaviour. Therefore, marketers should communicate to the target audience that buying green
products could have a significant impact on the welfare of the environment (Laroche,
Bergeron, and Barbaro-Forleo 2001).

A number of factors have been responsible for the growth of green consumerism and these
include heightened awareness of green issues among people often as a result of media
coverage; increased levels of information available to help green consumers make informed
decisions; emergence of an increasing number of green substitutes to traditional products;
widespread use of green themes in advertising; a shift in values towards concern for
environment and society; and increased marketing and merchandizing activity among
environmental and social charities (Peattie 1992; Strong 1998).

It may take the form of ecologically conscious consumers or socially responsible consumers.
The concepts of ecological (Kennear et al., 1974) and environmental (Van Liere and Dunlop,
1980, 1981) concern have often been used as surrogate for social responsibility (Roberts,
1996) and are closely related. Webster (1975) used the term socially conscious consumers;
are those who take into account the societal and environmental consequences in purchasing
products. Ethical consumerism (a wider term) on the other hand, addresses the social and
environmental consequences of globalization, where the ‗‗consumer considers not only
individual but also social goals, ideals and ideology‘‘ (Uusitalo and Oksanen, 2004,). Antil
(1984) and Antil and Bennett (1979) formulated the construct: socially responsible
consumption behaviour (SRCB), defined as those consumer behaviour and purchase
decisions which are related to environmental and resource-related problems and are
motivated not only by a desire to satisfy personal needs but also by a concern for the welfare
of society in general. Devinney et al. (2006) in his work, ‗‗the other CSR‘‘, have answered
fundamental questions about ethical consumerism that encompasses socially responsible
consumption behaviour in his term consumer social responsibility (CnSR); which is defined
as the conscious and deliberate choice to make certain consumption choices based on
personal and moral beliefs. It includes two basic components: an ethical one relating to the
underlying importance of the social aspects of a company‘s products and business processes;

pg. 61
and a consumerism component that implies that the preferences and desires of consumer
segments are partially responsible for the increasing influence of ethical or social factors.

In attempts to explain green consumer behaviour, many factors have been proposed as
determinants such as changing consumer values (Peattie, 2001; Lien-Ti & Simpson, 1995),
environmental attitudes (Schlegelmilch, Bohlen, & Diamantopoulos, 1996), demographic
factors such as age, gender, education, and income (Roberts, 1996; Diamantopoulos et al.
2003), as well as psychographic factors including altruism (Stern et al., 1993), knowledge of
environmental problems and alternative products (Chan, 1999), perceived personal relevance
(Mainieri et al., 1997) and the ability of the individual to make an effective contribution
(Dembkowski & Hanmer-Lloyd, 1994). Research has also looked at many external influences
on green consumer behaviour such as the role of price and quality (D‘Souza et al., 2007),
eco-labels (Gulbrandsen, 2006), and consumer beliefs about a firm‘s environmental
performance (Collins et al., 2007). Many existing theoretical models have been applied and
extended to green consumer behaviour as well (Peattie, 2010) including the theory of
reasoned action, theory of planned behaviour, Attitude-Behaviour-Context model, the
Motivation-Opportunity-Ability model, the norm activation theory, and the Value-Belief-
Norm model among others.

The sustainable consumption depends on some macro-level and structural factors in addition
to individual consumer choices (Thøgersen 2005; Kilbourne, McDonagh and Prothero, 1997).
There still exists a significant difference between developing and developed countries in
terms of green awareness (Tantawi, O‘Shaughnessy, Gad, Ragheb, 2009). For example, in a
developed Western Society, sustainable consumption is driven, in part, by the fact that
consumers are more educated, better informed, and awareness is greater of consumer rights
and product requirements (Carrigan and Attala, 2001). As Mostafa (2007) indicates, personal
habits and lifestyles of consumers in the US and Western Europe are becoming more
environmentally responsible; yet Eastern countries, such as Egypt, are just at the stage of
green awakening. Further, sustainable consumption is considered as an important aspect of
sustainable development particularly in Western societies (Abeliotis, Koniari and Sardianou,
2010). Therefore, environmental safety is relatively more crucial in the developing countries.
Similarly, Moisander (2007) indicates, environmental awareness increases especially in
Western markets, yet there are still barriers to the green consumption styles arising from the

pg. 62
cultural, infrastructural, political and economic circumstances. Thøgersen (2010) states
consumers from northern European countries purchase more organic food than Mediterranean
countries. Amine (1996) calls attention to scandals concerning production or marketing of
potentially harmful products in less developed countries such as high-dosage contraceptive
sales; high-pressured baby food promotions; and unhealthy production of asbestos. Besides
green consumption, consumers from different nations have a propensity to analyze ethical
issues in different ways (Rawwas, Strutton and Johnson, 1996). For example, Al-Khatib,
Vittel and Rawwas, (1997) show that ethical beliefs of American and Egyptian consumers
differ significantly. Polonsky, Brito, Pinto and Higgs-Kleyn (2001), identify differences
between the consumers in Northern and Southern European Union countries in terms of
ethical consumption perceptions.

The environment is an issue which affects everyone on the planet yet the development of
green consumer behaviour thought has principally been limited to the developed economies
of North America and Western Europe. This is relevant because it has been suggested that the
‗poor‘ in emerging markets are not able to be green. The contention is that only after more
basic human needs are met can environmental concern become a factor in decision making
and only the wealthy can afford this attitude (Mostafa, 2009). When this line of thought is
extended, it is therefore assumed that emerging markets and developing nations should be
less concerned about the environment than in the developed markets. However, these models
were developed in the West and the traditional wisdom that environmental concern is a
luxury only afforded by those in developed nations must be examined (Mostafa, 2009).
However, in academic research, these kinds of assumptions cannot go unchallenged. There
are dangers of applying what work done in the developed world to the developing world and
emerging markets, not strictly in terms of marketing theory and consumer behaviour, but also
about the assumptions of emerging market consumer being too poor to be green and not
caring about the environment. Even in third world, consumer concern for the earth‘s physical
and natural environment has grown rapidly since the 1990‘s (Egri and Herman [12], Keesling
and Kaynama [18]). According to Greendex survey 2012, conducted by National Geographic
society and research consultancy GlobalScan, Indians had most sustainable behaviour
(Greendex score 58.9) followed by Chinese and Brazilians (China‘s Greendex score 57.8 and
Brazil Greendex score: 55.5). American ranked last in this survey (Greendex score: 44.7)

pg. 63
The green consumers are the driving forces behind the green marketing process. It is they
who drive consumer demand, which in turn encourages improvements in the environmental
performance of many products and companies. Many organizations have found that two out
of every three consumer is green in developed country but developing countries like India,
organizations have found that one out of every six consumer is green, but their environmental
commitments vary because of their different standards, expectation from producers, demand
and buying power. It is thus not efficient to say that the green consumer is one who engages
in green consumption, specifically, consumes in a more sustainable and socially responsible
way. A consumer acquires bundle of wants and needs and this is also true for the green
consumer. To satisfy those needs businesses have to break down the market into different
groups of consumers that differ in their responses to the firm‘s marketing mix program. The
segments (Kotabe & Helsen (1998), p.184) arrived at should preferably have the following
features:
1) Measurable 2) Sizeable 3) Accessible 4) Actionable 5) Competitive intensity 6) Growth
potential

Green consumerism is often discussed as a form of ‗pro-social‘ consumer behaviour (Wiener

and Doesher, 1991). It may be viewed as a specific type of socially conscious (Anderson,
1988) or socially responsible (Antil, 1984) consumer behaviour that involves an
‗environmentalist‘ (Schlossberg, 1991) perspective and may thus be called ‗environmentally
concerned consumption‘ (Henion, 1976). A classic definition (Henion, 1976) describes Green
Consumerism as ‗environmentally concerned consumers.

Although the level of consciousness and concern about environment is proven to be high in
many countries, this doesn‘t translate automatically into pro-environmental behaviour. A
report on forest certification released by the Vermont Sustainable Jobs Fund (VSJF) in 2006,
shows that there is inconsistency between consumer environmental concern and purchase
behaviour of certified products. The impact of environmental consciousness on consumer
purchasing behaviour therefore remains unclear. The presence of biases in willingness-to-pay
(WTP) estimates generated by stated preference methods is well-documented for both private
goods (Wertenbroch and Skiera, 2002; Ding et al., 2005; Urama and Hodge, 2006) and public
goods (Johansson-Stenman and Svedsäter,2003; Schläpfer et al., 2004). The magnitude of the
hypothetical bias problem in studies on ethical consumer behaviour is clearly demonstrated

pg. 64
by De Pelsmacker et al. (2005), who conducted a conjoint analysis among a sample of
Belgian consumers to estimate WTP for Fair-trade coffee. While 10% of the respondents
state that they are willing to pay the actual price premium of 27%, the actual market share of
Fair-trade coffee does not exceed 1%. However, there is a general belief among group of
researchers and environmental activists that through purchasing environmentally friendly
products or green products, products with recyclable packaging or properly disposing of non-
biodegradable garbage, consumers can contribute significantly to improve the quality of the
environment (Abdul-Muhmim, 2007). The quality of the environment depends critically on
the level of knowledge, attitudes, values and practices of consumers (Mansaray and Abijoye,
1998). Attitudes are the most consistent explanatory factor in predicting consumers‘
willingness to pay for green products (Chyong et al., 2006). This means that price is not the
main factor in preventing consumers from purchasing green products if they are pro-
environment.

Consumers claim to care about the environment but seem to only make green purchasing
decisions when there are immediate and tangible benefits other than being more
environmentally friendly. According to Hallin (1995) and McCarty and Shrum (2001), people
engage in environmental behaviour as a result of their desire to solve environmental problem,
to become role models and a belief that they can help to preserve the environment. However,
consumers‘ indications of positive attitude towards environmental issues do not necessarily
lead to actual environmentally friendly purchasing behaviour (Laroche et al., 2002). Majority
of consumers do not purchase products based on the environmental concern alone and they
will not trade-off other product attributes for a better environment (Yam-Tang and Chan,
1998).Green Marketers must always keep in mind that consumers are unlikely to compromise
on traditional product attributes, such as convenience, availability, price, quality and
performance. This study referred to the definitions of Abdul-Muhmin (2002) and Chen
(2008), and defined green product quality as the dimensions of product features, product
design, and product package that are involved in energy-saving, pollution-prevention, waste
recycling, and being environment friendly. It's even more important to realize, however, that
there is no single green-marketing strategy that is right for every company. (Prothero,, and
McDonagh, 1992) Despite the increasing eco-awareness in contemporary market economies,
it is generally recognized that there are still considerable barriers to the diffusion of more
ecologically oriented consumption styles. In lay discourse as well as in much of consumer

pg. 65
research, these barriers are usually attributed to the motivational and practical complexity of
green consumption (Hackett, 2000).

Energy conservation research in the mid-1980s found that even people who are
knowledgeable about an environmental issue and the steps needed to address it often do not
take action to change their behavior (Seligman, 1985, cited in Pelletier, Tuson, Green-
Demers, Noels, & Beaton, 1998). In addition, research in the mid-1990s illustrated that while
environmental interest and concern has become more prevalent, few people take steps to alter
their environmental behaviors in day-to-day life (Blake, 1999). This represents a discrepancy
between knowledge and understanding of environmental issues and actively taking steps to
reduce one‘s impact, better known as the ―value-action gap‖ (Blake, 1999; Kollmuss &
Agyeman, 2002). This idea illustrates that simply providing individuals with information
does not necessarily lead to behavior change. Also, this research indicates that while a large
number of people might indicate awareness and understanding of an environmental issue or
problem and also behaviors to mitigate that problem, fewer people actually follow through
and take action to remedy the problem.

The Boston Consulting Group (Manget 2009) reported that a consumer will not pay for a
product based solely on its green attribute, that there must be some added value to the product
such as better taste, better safety, or to help the customers save money (such as on a gas bill).
Shanka and Gopalan (2005), in their exploratory study of higher education students‘
perception on SRCB compare the mean difference between the demographic groups that
include gender, age, country of residence, level of study, and field of study. Only age and
class levels showed statistically significant differences. Social responsibility and marketing
ethics are controversial issues and years of research continue to present scholars and
practitioners with conflicting and challenging views on the value of adopting such an
approach (Laczniak and Murphy, 1993;). Despite the amount of attention given to marketing
ethics in recent years, the buyer side of the exchange process remains under-researched (Hunt
and Vitell, 1992).

Unfortunately, customers who have concern to green lifestyles still limited because they still
have scepticism over the green products, higher prices, lower quality, lack of information,
etc. For every piece of information that people receive about the need to do something to help

pg. 66
the environment, there must be a hundred promoting the opposite sort of behaviour. Herr et
al. (1991) in their research finding identified that negative information influences consumer
attitudes more than does positive information.

4.2 GREEN PURCHASING BEHAVIOUR

Green consumer behaviour is the behaviour of an individual who considers environmental or

social issues while making purchasing or non-purchasing decisions (Peattie, 1992). Green
purchase behaviour refers to purchasing and consuming products that have minimal impacts
on the environment (Mainieri et al., 1997). There are different terms used interchangeably
with green purchase behaviour, such as green buying behaviour (Kim and Choi, 2003), pro-
environmental purchase behaviour (Soutar et al., 1994) and environmentally responsible
purchase behaviour (Follows and Jobber, 2000). Pro-environmental behaviour can be defined
as the action of an individual or group that contributes to the sustainable use of natural
resources (Halpenny, 2006). Activities that can be classified into green purchase behaviour),
energy saving (Kim, 2002; Kim and Choi, 2003), waste and recycling behaviour (Barr and
Gilg, 2007) and participation in any nature-related activities (Aini et al., 2003).

It is notable that pro-environmental behaviours differ from general purchase-related

consumer behaviours. General purchase behaviour is driven by an assessment of its benefits
and costs that are of immediate relevance solely to the individual consumer performing the
behaviour. By contrast, environmentally conscious behaviour is unlikely to deliver instant
personal gain or gratification, but rather a future-oriented outcome (e.g. cleaner environment)
that often benefits society as a whole (Mc Carty and Shrum, 2001; Kim and Choi, 2005).

Rise of environmental concern among consumers has been viewed as .perhaps the biggest
opportunity for enterprise and invention the industrial world has ever seen. (Cairncross 1992:
177). A number of factors have been responsible for the growth of green consumerism and
these include heightened awareness of green issues among people often as a result of media
coverage; increased levels of information available to help green consumers make informed
decisions; emergence of an increasing number of green substitutes to traditional products;
widespread use of green themes in advertising; a shift in values towards concern for

pg. 67
environment and society; and increased marketing and merchandizing activity among
environmental and social charities (Peattie 1992; Strong 1998).

Dunlap, Van Liere, Mertig, & Jones (2000) and Kaplan (2000) reported that though, a lot of
people are aware of and be concerned about environmental issue, this is not always reflects in
behaviour. In the green section of consumer psychology, mostly researchers have been made
efforts to explicate the gap between consumers‘ reported attitudes and their actual buying
behaviour. In this regard, they often used Ajzen‘s ‗Theory of Planned Behaviour‘ (Kalafatis,
S. P., Pollard, M., East, R., & Tsogas, M. H, 1999). This theory described that intentions
towards an act are determined by attitudes, perceived control and subjective norms. Intention,
in turn, may lead to actual behaviour. Psychologists have examined demography, values,
beliefs, motivation and attitudes in order to comprehend this inconsistency and why some
people engage in environmentally friendly behaviour, while others do not (Allen & Ferrand,
1999; Dunlap, & Mertig, 1995; Nordlund & Garvill, 2002).

Efforts to identify environmentally friendly consumers can be traced back to the early 1970s.
Berkowitz and Lutterman (1968), as well as Anderson and Cunningham (1972), were
pioneers in studying the profile of socially responsible consumers. Overall, their combined
results portray a highly socially conscious person as female, pre-middle aged, with a high
level of education (finished high school) and above average socioeconomic status.

In the past two decades, the results of Berkowitz and Lutterman (1968) and Anderson and
Cunningham (1972) were sometimes supported, but often not. For example, recent studies
found that females tend to be more ecologically conscious than men (McIntyre et al., 1993;
Banerjee and McKeage, 1994). However, Reizenstein et al. (1974) found that only men were
willing to pay more for control of air pollution, and Balderjahn (1988) reported that the
relationship between environmentally conscious attitudes and the use of non-polluting
products was more intensive among men than among women.

Following Berkowitz and Lutterman‘s (1968) study, Henion (1972) also thought that
consumers with medium or high incomes would be more likely to act in an ecologically
compatible manner due to their higher levels of education and therefore to their increased
sensitivity to social problems. However, the results did not support his hypothesis:

pg. 68
environmentally friendly behaviour was consistent across income groups. Moreover, Sandahl
and Robertson (1989) found that the environmentally conscious consumer is less educated
and has a lower income than the average American. This brought them to conclude that
income and education are not good predictors of environmental concern or purchase
behaviour.

Early research identified the green consumer as being younger than average (Berkowitz and
Lutterman, 1968; Anderson and Cunningham, 1972; Van Liere and Dunlap, 1981).
Surprisingly, this trend has been reversed in the last decade and several recent studies
identified the green consumer as being older than average (Sandahl and Robertson, 1989;
Vining and Ebreo, 1990; Roberts, 1996).

Although most findings about the impact of consumers‘ demographic characteristics on their
environmentally conscious behaviour are contradictory (Roberts, 1996), it is clear that they
exert a significant influence. However, most authors agree that demographics are less
important than knowledge, values and/or attitude in explaining ecologically friendly
behaviour (Webster, 1975; Brooker, 1976; Banerjee and McKeage, 1994; Chan, 1999).

Weigel (1983, p. 257) defines attitude as ―an enduring set of beliefs about an object that
predisposes people to behave in particular ways toward the object‖. It refers to the
―psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree
of favour or disfavour‖ (Eagle and Chaiken, 1993, p.1). The Theory of Reasoned Action
(Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975) is the most popular theory used to discuss the attitude-behaviour
relationship. According to them, specific attitude is a relatively strong predictor of a single
behaviour on a particular attitude object, while a general attitude explains the general
tendency engaged in relevant behaviours on a category of attitude objects. In regards to the
effects of environmental attitudes on behaviour, findings suggest that attitudes are the most
consistent predictor of pro-environmental purchasing behaviours (Schlegelmilch, Greg, and
Diamantopoulos 1996). Generally, studies have found positive correlations between
environmental concern (i.e. attitude) and environmental friendly behaviour (Van Liere and
Dunlap 1981; Roberts and Bacon 1997). Simmons and Widmar (1990) found a significant
relationship between environmental concern and ecologically responsible behaviour in the
case of recycling. Berger and Corbin (1992) found that green consumers‘ behaviour could be

pg. 69
influenced by their consumer perceived effectiveness (i.e., attitude) towards the protection of
the environment. Others have found weak or insignificant relationships between attitudes and
behaviour or substantial differences between intention and actual behaviour (Wicker 1969).

Values influence behaviour (McCarty and Shrum 1994). Consumers must value protecting
the environment before they can have the intention of buying environmentally friendly
products. Peattie (2001) argued that consumers must feel that, when they purchase an
environmentally friendly product, they will make some sort of material difference. So far,
studies have found consumers‘ perceived level of self-involvement toward protection of the
environment to be relatively low; hence the reason why consumers are less likely to engage
in ecologically favorable behaviours (Wiener and Sukhdial 1990).

In regards to how knowledge affects consumers‘ ecological behaviours, findings have been
contradictory. Kempton et.al (1995) notified that most people do not know enough about
environmental issues to act in an environmentally responsible way. Environmental
knowledge can be defined as ―a general knowledge of facts, concepts, and relationships
concerning the natural environment and its major ecosystems (Fryxell & Lo, 2003, p. 45). In
other words, environmental knowledge involves what people know about the environment,
key relationships leading to environmental aspects or impacts, an appreciation of ―whole
systems‖, and collective responsibilities necessary for sustainable development. In most
cases, knowledge was found to be significantly related to how consumers gather, organize,
and evaluate products (Alba and Hutchinson 1987), as well as being a significant predictor of
environmentally friendly behaviour (Vining and Ebreo 1990; Chan 1999). Because
knowledge influences all phases of the decision-making process, the wrong information can
cause consumers to make a less perfect choice.

Fundamental to environmental research is an individual‘s concern for the environment (Hines

et al., 1987). Based on the pioneering research of Dunlap and Van Liere (1978),
environmental concern is defined as a global attitude with indirect effects on behaviour
through behavioural intention. Environmental concern is a strong attitude towards preserving
the environment (Crosby,,Gill and Tylor 1981). Attitudes are defined as the enduring positive
or negative feeling about some person, object, or issue. The AMA defines it also as ―a
cognitive process involving positive or negative valences, feelings, or emotions. In our

pg. 70
research study we will also use some elements of the functional theory of attitudes which was
firstly developed by Katz. This theory outlines that attitudes ―serve a function for the person‖
and they are ―determined by person‘s motives‖ (Solomon et al., 2010, p. 275). Four functions
can be identified:

The utilitarian function: This is ―related to the basic principles of reward and
punishment. People develop positive or negative attitudes towards products or
services when they bring them satisfaction or pain (Solomon et al., 2010, p 276).

The value-expressive function: At the opposite of the utilitarian one, this function is
related to what the product or service that consumers use ―say about them‖. Indeed
this function is linked with the self-concept of consumer and implies that consumers
do not use products for their own benefits but for what they embody. As Solomon and
al. say it is linked with the consumer lifestyle (2010, p 276). For example a teenager
will buy a sport brand shirt not because he likes the quality of the product, the
features, and the comfort that provide him but just because this product shows that he
is trendy.
The ego-defensive function: These attitudes that consumers develop serve to protect
them, for example, holding to attitudes that protect your self-image. Some consumers
have attitude towards eco-friendly products in order to protect from global warming
and be healthy (Solomon et al, p. 208)

The knowledge function: These attitudes that consumers develop serve their need of a
world which is formed of order and stability. This allows the individual to have a
sense of control and helps to organize and structure our experience.

Simmons and Widmar (1990) found a significant relationship between environmental

concern and ecologically responsible behaviour in the case of recycling. Berger and Corbin
(1992) found that green consumers‘ behaviour could be influenced by their consumer
perceived effectiveness (i.e., attitude) towards the protection of the environment. Others have
found weak or insignificant relationships between attitudes and behaviour or substantial
differences between intention and actual behaviour (Wicker 1969).

pg. 71
In the context of environmental studies, Hines et al. (1986-1987) divided the environmental
attitudes into ―attitudes towards the environment‖ and ―attitudes towards a specific
environmental behaviour‖. They revealed that the lower attitude-behaviour correlation was
found when attitude was operationalzed as a general environmental attitude compared to
when it was operationalzed as a specific attitude towards environmental behaviour. Schultz et
al. (2004) stated that environmental attitude as ―the collection of beliefs, affect, and
behavioural intentions a person holds regarding environmentally related activities or issues‖.
It refers to the degree that an individual perceives himself or herself to be an integral part of
the natural environment (Schultz and Zelezny, 1999). Most environmental sociologists
referred to the attitude towards natural environment as ―environmental concern‖ (Vining and
Ebreo, 1992). The Revised New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) scale, which consists of 15
items, has been used extensively to measure environmental attitude (Dunlap et al., 2000).
NEP scale has been validated in numerous environmental studies across different countries
(e.g., Schultz and Oskamp, 1996; Thapa, 1999; Schultz and Zelezny, 1999; Kim, 2002;
Nordlund and Garvill, 2002; Kim and Choi, 2003 and 2005; Bedrous, 2007).

Mainieri et al. (1997) revealed that green purchase behaviour was significantly related to
specific environmental belief (specific attitude), but not to the general environmental
concern. More specifically, Chan (2001) reported that green purchase attitude of consumers
are significantly related to their green purchase intention. Their research was a longitudinal
study as the researchers contacted the respondents a month after the interview in order to
examine the relationship between green purchase intention and behaviour. Findings by
Mainieri et al. (1997) and Chan (2001) were consistent with the suggestion by Ajzen and
Fishbein (1975) that there were higher correlations when behaviour and attitudes were
measured in the same level of specificity. However, the relationships between environmental
attitude and behaviour were still found to be significant in various environmental studies,
such as in general environmental behaviour (Straughan and Roberts, 1999; Kim and Choi,
2002; Lopez and Cuervo-Arango, 2008), green purchase behaviour (Aoyagi-Usui, 2001; Kim
and Choi, 2005; Tilikidou, 2007) and apparel purchasing behaviour (Shim, 1995; Butler and
Francis, 1997). The above findings supported the predictive power of general environmental
attitude on both the general and specific environmental behaviour. Thus far, the contrasting
results reported in the past merit further study in the future.

pg. 72
4.3 PERCEIVED CONSUMER EFFECTIVENESS (PCE):

Kinnear et al. (1974) described perceived consumer effectiveness (PCE) as a measure of

individual belief that he or she is an effective contributor to pollution abatement. Initially,
PCE was measured as an element of personality variable to predict ecological concern
(Kinnear et al., 1974) and ecological consumption responsible patterns (Balderjahn, 1988).
Ellen et al. (1991) distinguished the measure of PCE from environmental concern and
highlighted its predicting power on certain pro-environmental behaviour. In other words,
attitude and PCE can be modelled as two distinct constructs in the environmental studies.
According to Berger and Corbin (1992), attitude can be defined as an evaluation of an
individual‘s beliefs or feeling about an issue, and PCE refers to a self-evaluation in the
context of the environmental issue, for instance, pollution abatement. It was found to have a
direct and positive relationship with environmental attitudes (Kim and Choi 2003; 2005). It
means that people who have exhibited higher PCE are likely to be more environmentally
concerned than those who have lower PCE. However, Ellen et al., (1991) reported that the
interaction between PCE and concern was not significant. The relationship between PCE and
environmental concern is far from conclusive.

This leads to an extensive attention to focus on the concept of perceived consumer

effectiveness (PCE) in predicting the pro-environmental behaviour of consumers. PCE refers
to an extent to which an individual believes that he or she can be effective in pollution
abatement (Kinnear et al., 1974). Studies have shown that consumers need to be empowered
or to be convinced that their effort in performing any pro-environmental behaviour would be
able to minimize environment deterioration. It is therefore important that environmental
behaviour be examined separately as the determinant might have different influence on each
specific types of pr o-environmental behaviour (Kim and Choi, 2003).

Ellen et al. (1991) also warned against the use of PCE to predict generalised pro-
environmental behaviour by stating that ―if an individual believes that an environmental
problem can be solved by a specific activity, then this belief should strongly influence the
individual‘s willingness to engage in that specific activity but not his or her willingness to
engage in other pro-environmental actions‖. This proposition was in line with the suggestions
revealed in the past studies that specific attitude measurement should be used to predict

pg. 73
specific pro-environmental behaviour (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975; Vining and Ebreo 1992).
Ellen et al. (1991) reported that PCE was found to be a significant contributor to the purchase
of ecologically safe products, recycling, and contribution to environmental groups, but was
not a significant factor in the individual‘s membership in environmental groups and
communication with public officials on environmental issues. The results of their findings
were consistent with the findings from Balderjahn (1988), where significant direct linkages
were found between PCE and energy saving and purchase of non-polluting products, but was
unrelated to home insulation, support for an environmental organisation and ecologically
responsible use of cars. In short, PCE exerted different impacts on different types of pro-
environmental behaviour.

Straughan and Roberts (1999) examined PCE as an attitudinal variable to predict

environmental behaviour. They found that PCE was a strong attitudinal variable to predict
ecologically conscious consumer behaviour (EECB) which explained 33 % of the variation in
ECCB. The finding was consistent with an earlier discovery by Roberts (1996) that
demonstrated 32.8 % of the variance in ECCB could be explained by PCE. It provides greater
insight on the roles of PCE on ECCB. In both studies, PCE was measured as one of the
attitudinal variables in predicting the behaviour and was found to be a better predictor than
environmental concern in predicting ECCB.

According to Lee and Holden (1999), there are two types of environmental behaviour, high
and low cost behaviour. PCE was found to be positively related to high cost consumer
behaviour but was not related to the low-cost consumer behaviour. Kim (2002) also reported
that PCE was a significant predictor of energy saving, green purchases, and recycling
behaviour. In addition, Kim and Choi (2003) concluded that PCE have different impacts on
different types of pro-environmental behaviour and an indirect effect on green purchase
behaviour via environmental attitudes. It supported the notion proposed by Ellen et al. (1991)
that PCE should be used to predict specific types of pro-environmental behaviour and not the
general pro-environmental behaviour. Further research by Kim and Choi (2005) also
confirmed the role of PCE as a predictor on green purchase behaviour. Webb et al. (2008)
reported that when consumers believed that their actions made a difference; they would be
more likely to be influenced by the environmental impact in their purchase and usage
decisions to recycle. In their study, the PCE scale was found to be a key variable associated

pg. 74
with socially responsible behaviour. In a follow up research, Joonas (2008) conducted a
survey among 213 members of environmental organization in the US to investigate the role
of PCE on information search. A significant positive relationship between PCE and search for
information in relations to environmentally friendly goods and services was reported. About
19% of the variation in search for information was explained by PCE, while 6 % accounted
for by income. This supported the past findings that PCE is a better predictor than
demographic variables. As a result, consumer marketers need to intensify efforts to
strengthen PCE among consumers to encourage them to search for information on
environmentally friendly goods.

A number of previous research studies by: Kassarjian (1971); Anderson and Cunningham
(1972); Anderson et al. (1974); Kennear et al. (1974); Riezenstein et al. (1974); Webster
(1975); Crosby et al. (1983); Michell (1983); Antil (1984); Roper Organization (1990, 1992);
and Pickett et al. (1993) have used demographic information to predict
ecological/environmental concern of the people. Education and occupation found to be
positively related with the dependent variables in case of Berkowitz and Lutterman (1968);
Anderson et al. (1974); Riezenstein et al. (1974); Michell (1983); and Roper Organization
(1990, 1992), whereas, in case of Kassarjian (1971); Kennear et al. (1974); Webster (1975);
and Antil (1984), the relationship found to be not significant.

Several researchers have identified the decision whether or not to behave pro-environmental
as a social dilemma (Van Vugt, Van Lange,). Choosing to conserve the environment is
considered to be a pro-social behaviour because it serves the interest of society in the long
term. On the other hand, behavioural costs associated with this type of actions, like money,
time, effort, and inconveniences (Follows & Jobber, 2000) tempt individuals to make selfish
choices. It is the responsibility and the challenge of social marketers to persuade individuals
to act in the benefit of society. In the social marketing tradition, the strategies chosen for this
aim typically rely on the assumption that it is necessary to provoke some active
contemplation of behavioural alternatives. Consumers need to be convinced that the
collective goal is worth pursuing and that it is likely to materialize. Further, they claim that
social marketers should emphasize the importance of each individual‘s contribution.
However, the traditional social marketing approach has not always met with unequivocal
success. Furthermore, researchers have also reported that consumers are unlikely to engage in

pg. 75
pro-environmental behaviour if they believe that their action or effort are not making any
difference in achieving a positive environmental outcome (Kim and Choi, 2003).

4.4 DEMOGRAPHICS

Although much research has been done on the demographic profiles of green consumers,
findings are still relatively mixed with some demographic characteristics showing more
consistent results than others. Based on past demographic profiling, green consumers
generally fall in the following category: educated, pre-middle aged females earning mid to
high-incomes.

4.4.1 Education: In regards to education, demographic profiles done in the past show that
education is linked to green consumers‘ attitudes and behaviors. Most demographic profile
studies done on the relationship between education and the behaviors of green consumers
have been positively correlated (Arbuthnot 1977; Schwartz and Miller 1991; Newell and
Green 1997). Because most studies have found positive correlations between green
consumers‘ education and attitude and/or behavior, we can expect that future findings will be
consistent.

4.4.2 Age: In general, the socially responsible consumers‘ demographic profile is young
and/or pre-middle age (Anderson and Cunningham 1972; Weigel 1977; Roberts and Bacon
1997). But results have been far from conclusive. Roberts (1996b) found the relationship to
be significant and positively correlated. Van Liere and Dunlap (1981) found that the
relationship between age and green sensitivity and behavior is significant and negatively
correlated – green consumers being older than the average. In contrast, McEvoy (1972) found
no significant relationship between age and green attitudes and behavior. In summary, the
demographic profile of green consumers in regards to age is still uncertain.

4.4.3 Gender: Gender-related studies between males and females in regards to the
environment are also inconclusive. In general, researchers argue that females are more likely
than males to be ecologically conscious (Banerjee and McKeage 1994). In regards to the
relationship between gender and environmental concern, MacDonald and Hara (1994) found
the relationship to be significant. Moreover, results from Laroche, Bergeron and Barbaro-

pg. 76
Forleo‘s (2001) studies showed that gender influences consumers‘ willingness to pay more
for green products in a statistically significant way. On the other hand, Samdahl and
Robertson (1989) found the relationship between gender and environmental concern to be
insignificant. Thus, the demographic profile of green consumers in regards to gender is still
questionable.

4.4.4 Income: The same case holds true for the demographic profile on the income of green
consumers and the environment; the results of studies of the relationship between income and
environmental concerns have been conflicting. While Zimmer (1994) found significant
relationships between income and environmental attitudes and behavior, Roberts (1996b)
found no significant relationship between income and environmental concerns. Once again,
in regards to the demographic profile of green consumers in relation to income, the results are
far from being conclusive.

In conclusion, researchers have found that using demographics alone to profile and segment
green consumers is not as effective as expected (Straughan and Roberts 1999). Roberts
(1996a) claimed that the demographic profile lacks the ability to predict socially responsible
consumer behavior and suggests that marketers identify and incorporate relevant attitudes and
behaviors, personality characteristics, and purchase intentions into their research. In addition,
past attempts to extend environmental marketing initiatives from one ecologically conscious
behavior to another have been relatively ineffective. Ecologically conscious consumers try to
protect the environment in different ways (Suchard and Polonski 1991); therefore, there are
different categories of eco-concerned consumers. A consumer who recycles aluminum may
not be the same consumer who cares about recycling plastic or about air pollution. Due to
these findings, marketers and policy-makers are more cautious when attempting to target
ecologically conscious consumers.

The current research is important especially in the Indian context as the country is facing
great challenges in ensuring a good balance between development and environmental
sustainability. As stated by Fisher et al. (2005: 11), ―studies have shown that markets for
certified forest products in developed countries are relatively limited, and that the prospects
for reaping a premium can be poor. [..] We can only suspect that such prospects are even
poorer in developing countries‖. The assumption underlying this statement is that consumers

pg. 77
from a developing country cannot afford to care about the ethical profile of their
consumption. This reasoning is in line with Maslow's well-known hierarchy-of-needs
(Maslow, 1970 [1954]), in which the need to act in accordance with one's ethical beliefs is a
so-called ‗higher-order‘ need. While these assumptions are plausible, their empirical validity
has barely been under scrutiny.Hence, the objective of this research is to examine the
influence of three independent variables (i.e., general environmental attitude, specific green
purchase attitude, and perceived consumer effectiveness) on the green purchase behaviour
(GPB) of Indian consumers.

In India, it is reported that consumers are still easy prey to high tech products (Chitra, 2007)
and as such, the market for eco-friendly products is yet to become mainstream. There is very
little academic information available about green consumers in India. It is within the
background of this research gap that the present research was conducted to assess Indian
consumers‘ pro-environmental concerns, knowledge of environmental issues, awareness of
eco-friendly products, and any potential effect that these factors may have on green buying
behaviour.

4.5 GREEN CONSUMER SEGMENTATION

Another thematic area of study included green consumer segmentation (11 percent). In this
review, seven studies attempted to segment green consumers based on attitude, intention, and
behaviour, demographic and psychographic information.

Chan (1999) was the earliest and attempted to segment the Hong Kong consumers according
to the level of their environmental concerns in purchase decisions. He was able to segment
Hong Kong‘s green consumers into three groups. The Heavy Green Consumers (27% of
market) were more likely to have higher education and higher incomes, feel that green
products are good for them and the environment, and strongly self-identity as someone who
cares about the environment. The Medium Green Consumers (38%) were positioned in
between Heavy Green and Light Green. Finally, the Light Green Consumers (35%) found
green products difficult to access, thought of them as nothing more than trendy, expensive
and not of better quality.

pg. 78
Gao et al. (2002) set out to understand the profiles of consumer groups for green products in
China by focusing on green refrigerators and green packaged food. They segmented the
Chinese green consumer as Universal Acceptors (40%), Selective Acceptors (10%), and
Universal Rejecters (50%).

Al-Khalib (2003) presented the only multi-country attempt to segment green consumers by
analyzing the green consumer in three Gulf markets (Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Kuwait). The
analysis resulted in three distinct segments: ―Principled Purchasers‖, ―Suspicious Shoppers‖
and ―Corrupt Consumers‖.

Principled Purchasers (Kuwait – 33.5%, Oman – 30.1%, Saudi Arabia – 56.1%) –

segment tended to be less Machiavellianistic, less opportunistic, more trusting of
others, less relativistic, more idealistic and perceived questionable actions in a
negative light.

Suspicious Shoppers (Kuwait – 47.4%, Oman – 38.8%, Saudi Arabia – 17.8%) –

were less trusting, tended to proceed with caution in their dealings, were
somewhat opportunistic but placed a high emphasis on ethical behaviour.

Corrupt Consumers (Kuwait – 18.8%, Oman – 31.1%, Saudi Arabia – 26.2%) –

Like Suspicious Shoppers, they were not trusting individuals. Unlike Suspicious
Shoppers, however, Corrupt Consumers were Machiavellianistic, took advantage
of opportunities, were not ethically oriented and were more likely to act in an
unethical manner

Juwaheer (2005) performed an exploratory study of the environmental friendliness of 1000

consumers in Mauritius in an effort to gauge perception of green products in this island
nation. She found five segments:

Indifferent Green (19.4%) – not green at all, price most important

Poor Green (13.4%) – willing to switch to green products, ready to pay premium,

pg. 79
 Light Green (33.6%) – largest, high scores on green dimensions, much higher green
potential, however, most important concern is pricing element of green products, price
more important than the environment

Moderate Green 22%) – high scores on green dimensions, price not main concern
issue

Pure Green (11.6%) – smallest segment, very green conscious, they disagree that they
are ineffective in addressing ecological problems

Bodur & Sarigollu (2005) examined the relationship between Turkish consumers‘ attitudes and their
behaviours toward the environment. They found the following three segments: Active concerned
(30%), Passive concerned (43%), and Unconcerned (27%). In terms of demographics, they concluded
that green consumers are better educated than others while they did not show that they were younger
or had more children on average. In their analysis of green behaviour and gender, they could not
substantiate a higher likelihood for females to be environmentally sensitive. Overall, they found that
while attitudes were useful in differentiating green consumers, measuring attitudes toward specific
behaviours was a better predictor of environmental behaviour than are those measuring general
attitudes toward the environment.

Mostafa (2009) used self-organizing maps to examine the effect of various psychographic
and cognitive factors on green consumption in Kuwait. In this study, he found that green
consumers could be segmented into 4 clusters: True Greens (45.22%) who had high scores on
all dimensions, Reluctant Greens (20.57%) who had some high scores on attitude, low scores
for intention, Basic Browns (21.77%) who had low scores and with high scepticism, and
Potential Greens (12.44%) who had high scores in attitude and intention but also in
scepticism. What is interesting about these results is that the largest segment is the True
Greens. Overall, in previous studies the largest segments have been somewhere in the middle
in terms of their commitment to green choices. Also, the previous study in Kuwait by Al
Khalib (2003) showed the Suspicious Shoppers to be the largest segment. This group would
be akin to Mostafa‘s Potential Greens, who represent the smallest segment in this study.

The Roper survey divides consumers into the following groups:

pg. 80
 True Blue Greens {9%): True Blues have strong environmental values and take it
upon themselves to try to effect positive change. They are over four times more likely
to avoid products made by companies that are not environmentally conscious.

Greenback Greens (6%): Greenbacks differ from True Blues in that they do not take
the time to be politically active. But they are more willing than the average consumer
to purchase environmentally friendly products.

Sprouts (31%): Sprouts believe in environmental causes in theory but not in practice.
Sprouts will rarely buy a green product if it means spending more, but they are
capable of going either way and can be persuaded to buy green if appealed to
appropriately.

Grousers (19%): Grousers tend to be uneducated about environmental issues and

cynical about their ability to effect change. They believe that green products cost too
much and do not perform as well as the competition.

Basic Browns (33%): Basic Browns are caught up with day-to-day concerns and do
not care about environmental and social issues.

These figures indicate that somewhere between 15% and 46% of tbe overall consumer market
could be receptive to a green appeal, depending on the product category and other factors.

And there are social, cultural and economic trends that could cause the size of this target
market to grow. One trend worth noting is the aging of the baby boomers — their concern
about living longer, healthier lives is leading them to place a high priority
on environmental quality.''

4.6 GREEN PRODUCT

In general, green product is known as an ecological product or environmental friendly

product. Shamdasami et al., (1993) defined green product as the product that will not pollute
the earth or deplore natural resources, and can be recycled or conserved. It is a product that

pg. 81
has more environmentally sound content or packaging in reducing the environmental impact
(Elkington and Makower, 1988; Wasik, 1996). Green products refer to ―no pollution,‖ ―no
environmental pollution,‖ and ―environmental protection‖, and symbolizes ―health‖ and
―sustainability‖ (Ottman, 1999). In other words, green product refers to product that
incorporates the strategies in recycling or with recycled content, reduced packaging or using
less toxic materials to reduce the impact on the natural environment. Krause (1993), in his
research found that consumers were becoming more concerned about their everyday habits
and the impact on the environment. The outcome of this is that some of the consumers
translated their environmental concern into actively purchasing green products commitment
(Martin and Simintiras, 1995).

Development and Technology:

Production Technique

Environmental
Degradation

Product

Green Products

Customers

Green Customers

Society: Economic Social Aspects

Green Society

Fig No.2: Conceptual model for Green Products (Nugrahadi)

pg. 82
The general criteria of green products are as follows: the processes of production,
consumption, use and discard would not over-consume energy or resources, damage the
environment, affect human or animal health, result in unnecessary wastes due to over-
packaging and short product life, or use endangered animal species for raw materials, as well
as products that can be reused or recycled.Some examples of these products are ―household
items manufactured with post-consumer plastics or paper, recyclable or reusable packaging,
energy-efficient light bulbs and detergent containing ingredients that are biodegradable, non-
polluting and free of synthetic dyes or perfumes‖ (Mostafa, 2007, p.220). Common terms
normally used by companies promoting green products are ―eco-friendly‘, ―environmentally
safe‖, ―recyclable‖, ―biodegradable‖ and ―ozone friendly‖.

There is no widespread agreement on what exactly makes a product Eco-friendly. By One

perception of eco-friendly products mean:

Energy efficient (both in use and in production)

Water efficient (both in use and production)
Low emitting (low or no VOCs, formaldehyde, or other hazardous emissions)
Safe and/or healthy products
Recyclable and/or with recycled content
Durable (long-lasting)
Biodegradable
Renewable
Reused products
Low impact products (life cycle analysis)
Third party certified to public or transparent standard (e.g., organic, certified wood)
Locally‖ producedProducts with environmentally responsible packaging

Another viewpoint of eco-friendly products includes:

Products that do not present any health hazard to people or animals

Products that relatively efficient in their use of resources during manufacture, use and
disposal

pg. 83
 Products that do not use materials derived from endangered species or threatened
environments

4.7 PRICING OF GREEN PRODUCTS

Will Consumers Pay More for Green Products?

It depends: on efficacy, availability, and awareness.

We are not here to sell the consumer on saving the

Planet. This is about ‗saving me‘ - we are the next

Endangered species on the list.

-Jacquelyn Ottman

Green pricing programs concern pricing practices that account for both the economic and
environmental costs of production and marketing, while providing value for customers and a
fair profit for business (Martin and Schouten 2012). Price is a critical and important factor of
green marketing mix. Indeed, price is the largest barrier to buying green products; most of the
consumers will only be prepared to pay additional value if there is a perception of getting
extra value from the goods purchased. This value may be: improved performance, durability,
function, design, visual appeal, or taste. Companies promoting eco-friendly products should
take all these factors into consideration while charging a premium price. At the sae time It is
likely that consumers find it difficult to ascertain the environmental performance of a
product. Green claims made by producers, such as .organically grown, biodegradable or
packaging containing at least 50% recycled material, are not always verifiable, hence do not
always convey much direct information about the environmentally friendliness of a product

Environmental costs impact organizational strategic decisions: sourcing raw material,

locating production facilities, managing wastes and energies (Smart 1992). Pricing of eco-
friendly products is important and considering the fact that they support environmental
friendliness so the value can be added to the product for changing its appearance,
functionality and through customization, etc. Pricing of such products can be higher than the
pg. 84
conventional products/alternatives available in the market. The customers are also aware of
the benefits held by green products so even they are willing to pay higher prices for the
benefits associated with the green products. There is also a widespread presumption that
environmental protection and health protection are closely related. Consuming organic foods,
free from pesticides, for example, will reduce health care cost.

It seems that respondents consider the extra payment for the long-term green products as
investment, which will help them in saving and earn benefits in future. At the same time In
contrast with green products, which are usually more expensive than ordinary ones,
refurbished and remanufactured products are usually priced lower than new ones. They are
environmentally friendlier because, compared with new products, less material and energy is
needed to refurbish and remanufacture used products, which would otherwise be disposed of
and place burden on waste management or even damage the environment.

4.8 DISTRIBUTION OF ECO-FRIENDLY PRODUCTS

Environment-friendly or green distribution is the process of moving a product from its

manufacturing source to its customers with a low impact on the environment. Green
distribution programs involve actions related to monitoring and improving environmental
performance in the firm‘s demand chain (Godfrey 1998; Martin and Schouten 2012).

Reverse logistics is identified as the process of planning, implementing, and controlling flows
of raw materials, in-process inventory, and finished goods from a manufacturing, distribution,
or use point to a point of recovery or point of proper disposal (Ilgin and Gupta 2010;
Srivastva 2007). The use of green fuel-like compressed natural gas-driven vehicles may
exhibit seriousness about green efforts of an organization.

Having decided to buy Earth-friendly items, many consumers encounter a final hurdle: They
can‘t find them. The reason consumers cannot find these products is that businesses are not
stocking them. For companies with green brands, embedding sustainability in entire value
chain – from sourcing, production and distribution through to consumption and disposal—
becomes part of the brand promise. Often creating green products requires a different
approach to procurement of not only the raw materials, but packaging and production and
distribution as well. It also helps reduce risk of consumer backlash. The choice of where and
pg. 85
when to make a product available will have significant impact on the customer‘s buying
decision. Very few customers will go out of their way to buy green products. Developing a
green product without the entire supply chain support makes the economic value or return on
investment of green products very difficult to justify.

This P of marketing mix provides a choice to make a product available to customers. The
logistics are very important in marketing, while talking of green marketing the management
of logistic becomes very important and crucial since proper management of logistics can cut
down transportation emissions, which would result in reduced carbon footprint. Some
logistics companies begin to fuel their transportation vehicles with bio-diesel. Integrating
environmental management and logistics services has become an important topic for the
logistic industry. Another way to avoid pollution is by promoting local production instead of
imported goods, since local production will reduced shipping cost and in turn more
importantly the reduction in carbon emission by the Ships and other means of transportation.

Store display plays significance role in the purchasing behavior of the consumers for
recognition of the products through displays of the items in the store. It is the source of the
information for the consumers to make a decision to purchase products. As advertising, place
can lead to unplanned buying; for example, ―a Danish survey indicated that that nine out of
ten customers did not plan purchase of at least one-third of the goods they acquired‖
(Solomon et al, 2010, p. 83). Consumers find products in the store display, leading them to
make purchases which were not in the shopping list. This explains also the significance
importance of place on recall and recognition in identifying a product in the store. Indeed a
display can remind to the consumer a need, a purchase that he/she has to do or just remind
something that he/she saw on television (Blackwell et al, 2006, p. 151). Certain green
products deteriorate with time. In such cases, products have to be made available within the
prescribed time limit. Customers will not buy green products if some sort of bondage is put
on them to hasten its use/consumption.

Previous studies mainly focused on eco-friendly places such that most of consumers prefer to
make their purchases in non-polluting places (Wanninayake and Randiwela, 2008 and Purohit
2011). Here we will consider the assortment inside the supermarket we do not focus on eco-
friendly distribution channels. Our main objective is to show if consumers find easily green
products in their supermarket and if they are available. The consumers attitude on the point of

pg. 86
purchase and store display are important when consumers are examining the purchasing of
the grocery brands, they add extra information to the consumers when processing and ready
to make purchases in the store (Anselmsson and Johansson, 2007, p.850). They focused on
the Sweden retail market evaluating on the consumer environmentally concern on the grocery
brand and others on the corporate social responsibility of retails market how the green
consumers evaluate product information and responsibility on the point of purchase to
influence consumers attitude before make purchases in the store. This shows the influence of
place in the marketing mix elements on consumer attitude on the purchases of the
environmentally products.

4.9 PROMOTION OF GREEN PRODUCTS

Over the last decade, firms have increasingly included environmental product claims in their
advertising and packaging. By green advertising, I mean commercial advertising that uses an
environmental theme to promote products, services, or corporate public images. New
products are positioned based on environmental appeal and green advertising is on the rise as
more manufacturers are informing their consumers about pro-environmental aspects of their
products and services.

Green advertising, like all other forms of advertising, should be truthful and not deceptive or
misleading to reasonable consumers. While a determination of whether a promotion or
advertising claim is ―misleading‖ to a reasonable consumer is more art than science, the
following guidelines can help you minimize the legal and public relations risks associated
with a green marketing campaign. These guidelines apply to advertising as well as any form
of promotional materials, including product packaging and websites. They also apply to
business‐to‐business promotional materials and claims

There are three types of green advertising: -

Ads that address a relationship between a product/service and the biophysical

environment
Those that promote a green lifestyle by highlighting a product or service
Ads that present a corporate image of environmental responsibility

pg. 87
For the purpose of this study, ―green‖ advertisements refer to advertisements that meet the
following, developed by Banerjee et al. (1995):

The ad explicitly or implicitly addresses the relationship between a

product/service and the biophysical environment.
The ad promotes a green lifestyle with or without highlighting a product/service.
The ad presents a corporate image of environmental responsibility.

The promotion mix is concerned with the vehicles used the business organization to inform
and make the customers aware about the companies offerings through advertising, public
relations, word of mouth, branding, packaging etc. The major concern of companies now a
days are people, planet and profits, so they employ the strategies to promote Green as a
promotional tool through advertising, marketing materials, white papers, web sites, videos
and presentations. The companies like ITC have taken a step by introducing environmental-
friendly, free from elemental chlorine papers and boards. Toyota, a well knoen car brand has
been promoting itself as eco-friendly Car Company by pushing gas/electric hybrid
technology into the product line.

Schuhwerk and Lefko-Hagius suggest that environmental appeal is more persuasive than
economic appeal even for consumers who are less involved with the environment. Carlson,
Grove and Kangun (1993) sought to identify the different types and the frequency of
environmental claims in advertising while also judging the extent to which these claims were
considered misleading or deceptive. The first typology looked at the claim type and consisted
of five claim types:

- Product orientation—claim focused on environmental attributes of the product

Example: ―This product is biodegradable.‖

- Process orientation—claim focused on environmental benefits of an

organization‘s internal technology, production or disposal techniques Example:
―Twenty percent of the raw materials used in producing this good are recycled.‖

Image orientation—claim connected organization to an environmental cause

pg. 88
 or activity; Example: ―We are committed to preserving our forests.‖

Environmental fact—claim from an organization consisted of factual information

about the environment or its condition; Example: ―The world‘s rain forests are
being destroyed at the rate of two acres per second.‖
Combination—claim consisted of two or more of the above

In recent years, consumers have caught companies red-handed at ―green washing‖—that is,
claiming that their products are far more environmentally friendly than they actually are. To
rebuild public trust, companies must inform the public about their true environmental impact,
as well as about their attempts to reduce that impact. The second typology was designed to
classify deceptive or misleading claims of environmental advertising:

Vague/ambiguous—claim was too broad or vague to have a clear meaning

Example: ―This product is environmentally friendly.‖

Omission—claim left out important information relevant to its truthfulness or

Reasonableness; Example: ―This product contains no CFCs.‖ (when it contains
other environmentally harmful chemicals)

- False/outright lie—claim was inaccurate or fabricated information; Example:

―This product is made from recycled materials.‖ (when it is actually not)
Combination—claim consisted of a multiple of any of the above
Acceptable—claim was not deceptive or misleading in nature must be based on
strategies emphasising environmental issues. Implementation of the strategies is
not possible without structures taking environmental issues into account.
Environmental advertising is part of marketing communication, which in turn
belongs to marketing functions. The principle assumption to be tested in this study
is that environmental marketing communication obtains its objectives from
marketing strategies which are based on the objectives of the business unit, in this
case environmental business values. In practice this means that if a company uses
environmental claims in advertising they should be based on a sound
environmental emphasis in strategic-level decisions.

pg. 89
In order to be convincing, green claims made in advertising,

Environmental Claims Must Be Accurate and Not Misleading

Substantiate Your Environmental Claims: Many environmental claims like
―degradable‖ or ―compostable‖ must be substantiated through scientific evidence,
such as tests, analyses, research, or studies.

Claims must be clear and specific: The more specific an environmental claim is the
less likely it is to be misleading. Vague claims that are open to varying interpretations
are more likely to be deemed misleading

Identify Whether Claims Apply to the Product, Packaging, or Your Company’s

Practices.

Qualify and Limit General Terms: If you do use general terms or catch phrases like
―eco‐friendly,‖ ―environmentally friendly,‖ or ―sustainable,‖ you should qualify and
explain them clearly so that consumers can understand the nature of your claim.

Take Care with Comparative Claims: Claims comparing your product to a

competitor‘s are particularly tricky and should be rock solid. If you say your detergent
biodegrades faster than your competitor‘s, you should have scientific evidence such as
test results conducted by a professional testing facility to back up your statement.

Don‘t Take Your Suppliers‘ Claims at Face Value: If a vendor, supplier, or

manufacturer makes a deceptive environmental claim to you about its product, and
you repeat that claim to consumers, you (in addition to your supplier) are liable for
false advertising.

Furthermore, green products have to provide personal benefits. In other words, consumers
must be convinced of the surplus value in comparison with non-green alternatives. Because
green advertising often focuses on altruistic motives, namely saving the environment in order
to purify one‘s conscience instead of on individual benefits, the above mentioned condition
pg. 90
might not be satisfied (Iyer, 1995), which might be a major shortcoming of green
advertisements. This finding is affirmed by the consumer value concept, which takes the view
that consumers will only purchase green if the price premium is compensated by other
benefits such as recycling or energy saving (Holbrook,1999).

The Federal Trade Commission of USA (―FTC‖) has provided detailed guidance for the use
of several popular advertising terms, and failure to comply with this guidance could result in
a finding that your advertisement is false or deceptive.

Degradable

A product or package advertised as degradable or biodegradable must completely break

down and return to nature in a reasonably short period of time after customary disposal. For
example, a trash bag marketed as ―degradable‖ should completely break down in a landfill
where trash bags normally end up after consumer use. It is not sufficient that the bag breaks
down when buried in soil.

Compostable

Product or packaging advertised as compostable must break down into usable compost in a
safe and timely manner in a composting facility or in a home compost pile or device. If the
material will not break down through typical home composting, the advertiser must qualify
the claim to state this fact.

Recyclable

A product or package can be marketed as recyclable only if it can be collected, separated,

or otherwise recovered from the solid waste stream through an established recycling
program. If the product is comprised of both recyclable and non‐recyclable components,
the advertising claim should make this clear. And you should make clear whether the claim
refers to the product, the package, or both. Recyclable claims are only appropriate when the
product or packaging is made from materials that are accepted by recycling programs in a
substantial majority of communities.

pg. 91
 Recycled

A claim that a product is produced from recycled content is appropriate only where
materials have been recovered or otherwise diverted from the solid waste stream, either
during the manufacturing process (pre‐consumer) or after consumer use (post‐consumer). If
the product or packaging is only partially constructed from recycled material, this must be
clear. Where a product‘s content consists of used, reconditioned, or remanufactured
components, the ―recycled‖ claim should be qualified.

Refillable

A ―refillable‖ claim is appropriate only where a system is provided for the collection and
return of the packaging for refill by consumers. You should not make ―refillable‖ claims
where it is up to the consumer to find new ways to refill the package.

4.10 GREEN-WASH

Ethical messaging ―has the potential to backfire (Smith 2003).‖ It can illicit unintended
scepticism, creating damage to reputation that is difficult to reverse. According to Wicki and
Van Der Kaaij (2007) corporate reputation consists of ―distinctiveness, authenticity,
transparency, visibility and consistency(Wicki, and Kaaij 2007) ‖ When a company projects
an image that is at odds with the perception of that company held by the public, an
―authenticity gap‖ occurs, creating space for accusations of ―green-washing‖. In order to reap
benefits to brand from sustainability, the companies‘ stakeholders must believe the claims to
be authentic and representative of the business model as a whole. Building trust in ethical
claims reduces the authenticity gap. Ensuring messaging is coherent with business practices
as a whole reduces scope for damaging accusations of green-wash.

In addition to this, a lack of consensus as to what constitutes ‗eco-performance‘ (Peattie, Ken.

1995) and where the boundary of the firm‘s responsibility lies creates scope for accusations
of green-washing. Claiming green credentials using standards less rigorous than expected by
consumers and NGOs can result in overt green claims attracting criticism.

pg. 92
4.10.1 The Seven Sins of Green Washing

1. Sin of the Hidden Trade-off: committed by suggesting a product is ―green‖ based on an

unreasonably narrow set of attributes without attention to other important environmental
issues. Paper, for example, is not necessarily environmentally-preferable just because it
comes from a sustainably-harvested forest. Other important environmental issues in the
paper-making process, including energy, greenhouse gas emissions, and water and air
pollution, may be equally or more significant.

2. Sin of No Proof: committed by an environmental claim that cannot be substantiated by

easily accessible supporting information or by a reliable third-party certification. Common
examples are tissue products that claim various percentages of post-consumer recycled
content without providing any evidence.

3. Sin of Vagueness: committed by every claim that is so poorly defined or broad that its real
meaning is likely to be misunderstood by the consumer. ―All-natural‖ is an example. Arsenic,
uranium, mercury, and formaldehyde are all naturally occurring, and poisonous. ―All natural‖
isn‘t necessarily ―green.‖

4. Sin of Irrelevance: committed by making an environmental claim that may be truthful but
is unimportant or unhelpful for consumers seeking environmentally preferable products.
―CFC-free‖ is a common example, since it is a frequent claim despite the fact that CFCs are
banned by law.

5. Sin of Lesser of Two Evils: committed by claims that may be true within the product
category, but risk distracting the consumer from the greater environmental impacts of the
category as a whole. Organic cigarettes might be an example of this category, as might be
fuel-efficient sport-utility vehicles.

6. Sin of Fibbing: this least frequent sin is committed by making environmental claims that
are simply false. The most common examples are products that falsely claim to be Energy
Star certified or registered.

7. Sin of Worshiping False Labels: committed by a product that, through either words or
images, gives the impression of third-party endorsement where no such endorsement actually
exists; fake labels, in other words.

Green washing poses at least three serious issues for companies:

pg. 93
 Reputation and relationship damage
Compromising organizational behaviour
Violation of laws and regulations

It has been said that a reputation takes a lifetime to build and only seconds to destroy. Green
washing can quickly result in substantial harm to an organization‘s reputation and
relationships. (King, 2011) End-user consumers may elect not to purchase the offender‘s
products and may even boycott the company. Image-conscious suppliers, retail customers,
and other partners may terminate business relationships with the offender, or may impose
more stringent requirements on the offender in subsequent negotiations. Environmentalists or
Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO) may begin to actively campaign against the
offender or reduce its relative sustainability ranking in influential reports available to the
public and investors. Companies should bear in mind that powerful green marketing devices,
such as the internet and social media, can quickly be turned against a greenwashing offender.
For this reason alone, green washing can very quickly derail a company‘s overarching
strategic plans.

Green washing does not just damage a firm‘s external reputation and relationships; it also
risks compromising a firm‘s organizational behaviour. Human capital is a vital company
asset and is often a critical aspect of a company‘s competitive advantage. A particularly
newsworthy green washing incident may affect the ability of a company to hire and retain
superior talent, affecting all aspects of the company‘s business. It could also damage
employee morale and reduce motivation, leading to decreased productivity. Green washing
hypocrisy may subvert managerial authority, as the company‘s stated values become
misaligned with its actual actions. A pattern of green washing incidents could even change
the culture of the organization for the worse.

Lastly, some green washing incidents may violate various state and federal laws and
regulations as well as trade association ethical standards. Laws and regulations can also vary
significantly by jurisdiction and change from time to time, which may pose risks for
companies that continue doing business as usual. Additionally, if a company is part of a trade
association or similar organization, that organization may impose yet another layer of rules
and norms related to green marketing and green washing.

pg. 94
Compliance with laws and regulations is clearly necessary for successful green marketing,
but it is really just the bare minimum. Compliance is not a safe harbour from all green
washing claims, nor does it mean that a company is successfully communicating its
sustainability efforts. One way to communicate sustainability efforts is to identify and
comply with appropriate sustainability standards, labels, and certifications. This usually
evidences a superior level of transparency and commitment.

Eco-labels have emerged as one of the main tools of green marketing (Rex and Baumann,
2007) by conveying information about consumers‘ demands for environmental protection
(Bruce and Laroiya, 2007) through product labels. As a resource protection tool (Charles,
2009) eco-label ensures that, concise and specific measures have been taken for certain
product in order to avoid or limit undesirable externalities on the ecosystem and the
environment (Boude et al., 2005). However, the concept of ―white goods‖ (Bleda and
Valente, 2009) through eco-labelling does not ensure environmental sustainability all the
time. There are different types of eco-label such as mandatory (EU energy label) and
voluntary (eco label) are available in practices based on different environmental context
(environmental preservation, climate change, carbon credit, environmental performance,
ecological etc.). Voluntary labels are classified according to the ISO standard into three
groups): type I (eco labels-most often research one), type II (self-declared environmental
claims) and type III (environmental product declarations where quantified environmental
information is presented in a standardized way) (Leire and Thidell, 2005).

4.11 CERTIFICATION SCHEMES

Credible standards, certifications, and labels are powerful green marketing tools. However,
there are also a lot of them – recently there were at least 400 eco-labels in 215 countries and
25 industry sectors. (Ecolabelindex, 2011).

Certifications are evidence that a third party has independently verified adherence to certain
published requirements. (Sinha, 2010, p. 1) Certifications can be very specific (e.g.,
confirming a product‘s low energy consumption) or very broad (e.g., evaluating all
sustainability impacts of a product throughout its lifecycle). If a company satisfies the
necessary requirements, then a certification can be displayed on its products, often in the

pg. 95
form of a recognizable label. These certification labels allow the company to concisely
convey important sustainability information directly to its consumers. Interested consumers
can also easily look up the meaning of a certification to help them select a product.

Certified companies are granted use of the certification label that can be incorporated into the
marketing mix in order to add credibility to ethical claims and assist consumer purchasing-
decisions. They provide an additional ―brand that explicitly associates progressive practices
with certain products‖ Certification therefore provides a marketing incentive for, and
independent recognition of, ethical improvements. They provide a mechanism that connects
consumer demand with sustainable production, stimulating production. They provide a link
between sustainability activities and brand perception, increasing business benefit to the
business and connecting otherwise fragmented activities.

Most extant environmental labelling programmes are of the ‗seal of approval‘, or ‗ecolabel‘
type. These are certification marks awarded to those products in a particular category that
have met certain predefined criteria. Several arguments have been made in favour of eco-
labels as an aid to consumer purchasing decisions, of which the following seem the most
persuasive:

first, most consumers are apt to invest little time discovering the likely environmental
impact of a product – even if accurate information is provided – so a single
comparable measure might reach a wider audience;

second, those consumers who are willing to spend time discovering the expected
environmental impact of a product may find themselves attempting to compare
incommensurables such as ‗water pollution‘ and ‗recycle-ability‘, so such consumers
might prefer to rely on experts to carry out this task for them;

Third, marks certifying environmental information may be misinterpreted by

consumers as being seals of approval, so an actual seal of approval certifying
environmental superiority within a product category might be preferable.

pg. 96
Aside from providing the consumer with accurate information concerning the relative
environmental impact of a product, it has been suggested that eco-labels might accomplish a
number of other goals, for instance:

(i) An eco-label might improve the sales or image of a labelled product. As an OECD report
on eco-labelling points out: ‗This goal is actually a necessity, for if the use of environmental
labels does not increase sales or improve the product‘s or company‘s public image, then the
labelling programme is doomed to failure. As a voluntary market-based instrument,
environmental labelling will only be effective if it is accepted and used by manufacturers as a
marketing tool. And this will only occur if consumers accept the objectivity and goals of
environmental labels‘ (OECD, 1991, p.12).

(ii) An eco-labelling programme might encourage manufacturers to account for the

environmental impact of their products. This may be accomplished in one of two ways. First,
by ensuring that the entire product life-cycle is taken into consideration in the eco-label
criteria, firms supplying companies who are seeking an eco-label must provide evidence that
their own environmental impacts conform to some standard (for example, by complying with
ISO 14000 or by carrying out an Eco-audit). Second, firms producing products without eco-
labels may wish to compete with firms whose products do bear an eco-label, so they too may
wish to signal their environment friendlier behaviour to the market by carrying out an Eco-
audit or complying with ISO 14000.

(iii) Eco-labels might make consumers more aware of environmental issues

(iv) Eco-labels might help to protect the environment. As the OECD report notes, ‗This is,
after all, the ultimate benefit of labelling programmes‘

A credible standard or certification does not necessarily have to include a full lifecycle
analysis. However, the ―greenest‖ certifications and standards generally include a lifecycle
assessment. These sorts of certificates evidence the most comprehensive approaches to
evaluating sustainability.

Lifecycle Assessment

pg. 97
A Lifecycle Assessment (LCA) is a ―cradle-to-grave‖ approach for assessing industrial
systems. ―Cradle-to-grave‖ begins with the gathering of raw materials from the earth to create
the product and ends at the point when all materials are returned to the earth. An LCA
evaluates all stages of a product‘s life from the perspective that they are interdependent,
meaning that one operation leads to the next.

An LCA enables the estimation of the cumulative environmental impacts resulting from all
stages in the product lifecycle, often including impacts not considered in more traditional
analyses (e.g., raw material extraction, material transportation, ultimate product disposal,
etc.). By including the impacts throughout the product lifecycle, an LCA provides a
comprehensive view of the environmental aspects of the product or process and a more
accurate picture of the true environmental trade-offs in product and process selection.

Unfortunately, a lot of concepts concerning alternative methods of growing or trading

products are being confused with one another in the global public domain. ‗Organic‘ and ‗fair
trade‘ are not the same. Likewise, the term ‗sustainable‘ is supposed to integrate the two but
mostly is too vague when applied to the production process. At the same time the fair trade
movement needs to be differentiated from the internationally distinguished Fair-trade label
provided by the Fair-trade Labelling Organizations International (FLO-I).

4.12 FAIR TRADE GOODS

Fair trade products are certified by one of the several certification agencies existing
throughout the world. Many of them do not operate in India at the moment, but are
gradually making their entry.

More certifying agencies want to move from certifying ‗only‘ the raw material like
cotton e. g. to certifying the full production process including every single step
involved in converting the raw material into the usable, finished product.

Fair trade labels for foodstuff and natural textiles do not give any information about
the use of chemical pesticides in production. However, fair trade certification

pg. 98
 agencies have started to integrate the reduction of chemical pesticides into their
standards and are moving towards environmentally sustainable practices as well.

The purpose for promoting fair trade is to improve the living and working conditions
of economically disadvantaged farmers and artisans.

India is home to a significant number of fair trade certified producers. Most fair trade
products made in India are exported to markets in other countries where the fair trade
labelling is in place. The Fair Trade Forum – India (FTF-I) is the Indian national network for
Fair Trade. It is working to develop a label that certifies fairly produced foods and other
products in India.

4.12.1 Best practice example: Fair-trade label for food in India

Internationally, the most widely recognized ethical label is the FAIRTRADE Certification
Mark. When a consumer product bears the mark it ensures that the product has been traded
according to international Fair-trade Standards. An increasing number and variety of Fair-
trade certified products are being sold on the Indian market. For instance, a large variety of
Fair-trade Basmati rice from the Sunstar-Federation of Small Farmers of Khaddar Area is
sold on the Indian market. An assortment of Fair-trade products like tea and coffee is also
brought to Indian consumers by international brands like Clipper Teas.

Energy Star
Energy Star (trademarked ENERGY STAR) is an international standard for energy efficient consumer
products originated in the United States of America. It was created in 1992 by the Environmental
Protection Agency and the Department of Energy. Since then, Australia, Canada, Japan, New
Zealand, Taiwan and the European Union have adopted the program.

pg. 99
Devices carrying the Energy Star service mark, such as computer products and peripherals, kitchen
appliances, buildings and other products, generally use 20%–30% less energy than required by
federal standards. In the United States, the Energy Star label is also shown on Energy Guide
appliance label of qualifying products.

Organic goods

Are certified by one of the several certification agencies existing throughout the
world.

Guarantee the absence of chemical pesticides or alterations like genetic modification

in the production.

Mostly, natural raw material like cotton is certified as organic – this does not however
state the conditions in which the garment made out of the cotton was manufactured.

Lot of organic products come from India but are exported to markets in other
countries where the organic labelling is fully in place.

The India Organic label is a government authority which provides national standards for
organic products. Products with the India Organic label are grown without the use of
chemical fertilizers and pesticides.

pg. 100
Green Seal
Green Seal is a non-profit, third-party certifier and standards development body in the United
States. Since 1989 it has provided independent, objective, science-based guidance to the
marketplace and to consumers. Green Seal is the largest US-based eco-labelling organization
and meets the United States Environmental Protection Agency's Criteria for Third Party
Certifiers, the requirements of ISO 14020 and 14024, and the standards of the Global Eco-
labelling Network. Green Seal is the U.S. member of GEN which consists of 26 of the
world's leading eco-labelling programs, including Germany's Blue Angel (certification) and
the Nordic swan.

Green Seal takes a life cycle assessment approach, evaluating a product from the raw
materials through the manufacturing process and ending with recycling or disposal.

Green Seal currently has standards and provides certification for products and services in the
following categories:

Building & Construction Products

Cleaning Products & Services
Company Certification
Hotels & Lodging
Household Products
Institutional Products
Lighting & Control Products
Paint & Coating Products
Paper Products
Personal Care Products
Restaurant & Food Services
Vehicles & Vehicle Maintenance Products

pg. 101
The Indian equivalent of Green Seal is "Eco mark", which covers close to 16 categories of
consumer goods, which however does not yet include the products for cleaning and hygiene
maintenance for use at Institutions and Industries.

Eco-mark India: A label for environment-friendly products

Eco-mark India is a government operated seal of approval program for environmentally

preferable consumer products.

To increase consumer awareness, the Government of India launched the eco-labelling scheme
known as `Eco-mark‘ in 1991 for easy identification of environment friendly products. The
criteria follow a cradle-to grave approach, i.e. from raw material extraction, to
manufacturing, and to disposal. The Eco-mark label is awarded to consumer goods that meet
the specified environmental criteria and the quality requirements of Indian Standards.

AGMARK Certification: This certification is a standard controlled by the Government of

India to ensure quality and purity of agricultural products.

Certification of adulteration prone commodities such as rice, pulses, butter, ghee, vegetable
oils, ground spices, honey, wheat and atta is most common. The quality of a product is
determined with reference to the size, variety, weight, colour, moisture, fat content and other
factors.

pg. 102
Nordic swan

The Nordic Eco-label or Nordic swan is the official sustainability eco-label for the Nordic
countries, (The Nordic countries make up a region in Northern Europe and the North Atlantic which
consists of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden) introduced by the Nordic Council of
Ministers. This is done by a voluntary license system where the applicant agrees to follow a
certain criteria set outlined by the Nordic Eco-labelling in cooperation with stakeholders.
These criteria include environmental, quality and health arguments. The criteria levels
promote products and services belonging to the most environmentally sound and take into
account factors such as free trade and proportionality (cost vs. benefits).

The Nordic Eco-label now covers 67 different product groups, from hand soap to furniture to
hotels. Products must verify compliance using methods such as samples from independent
laboratories, certificates and control visits. The label is usually valid for three years, after
which the criteria are revised and the company must reapply for a license.

The EU Eco-label

The EU Eco-label helps you identify products and services that have a reduced environmental
impact throughout their life cycle, from the extraction of raw material through to production,
use and disposal. Recognised throughout Europe, EU Eco-label is a voluntary label
promoting environmental excellence which can be trusted.

pg. 103
Recyclable product symbol: This symbol shows the simple Mobius loop used extensively all
over the globe. There are two variations of this symbol. The outline form and the filled form.
Both convey the same message that the product can be recycled. These are marked on
products which are made of recycled materials. Not all recycled products are made of 100%
recycled materials. A percentage inside the

Mobius loop indicates the percentage of recycled materials used in manufacturing the
product.

The perception of ‗green‘ products in the mainstream can actually be negative, inferring
inferior performance, value for money or convenience. Therefore, Ginsberg & Bloom
recommend exercising caution in using overt green messaging in external communications as
it may prove to alienate ones target market. They define a range of green marketing
strategies, suitable depending on how substantial the company‘s green market segment is and
how able the company is to differentiate itself on green attributes.

Figure No.3: Green-Marketing Strategy Matrix

Source: Ginsberg, J. M. & Bloom, P. N. 2004, p81

pg. 104
FMCGs may contain niche brands but as a whole, are directed at the mainstream consumer
market. For sustainability to have maximum impact on the business, environment and
society, it must be incorporated into the mainstream offering of FMCG firms. FMCG
companies tend to fit into the Defensive Green or Shaded Green category:

Defensive Green: Green marketing is used ―as a precautionary measure, a response to a crisis
or a response to a competitor‘s actions‖ The green segment is recognised as significant but
the company are not able to differentiate themselves on green issues so avoid overt green
campaigns.

Shaded Green: This strategy involves investing significantly in long-term environmental

improvements. The rationale being that sustainability is ―an opportunity to develop
innovative needs-satisfying products and technologies that result in competitive advantage‖
Although the capability to differentiate on green grounds is there, they instead opt to stress
other attributes in order to appeal to the mainstream market. ―Environmental benefits are
promoted as a secondary factor‖

Lean Green: Lean Greens try to be good corporate citizens, but they are not focused on
publicizing or marketing their green initiatives. Instead, they are interested in reducing costs
and improving efficiencies through pro-environmental activities, thereby creating a lower-
cost competitive advantage, not a green one. They are usually seeking long-term pre-emptive
solutions and want to comply with regulations, but they do not see substantial money to be
made from the green market segments. Lean Greens are often hesitant to promote their green
activities or green product attributes for fear of being held to a higher standard — and not
always being able to live up to it or differentiate themselves from competitors.

Extreme Green: Holistic philosophies and values shape Extreme Green companies.
Environmental issues are fully integrated into the business and product life-cycle process of
these firms. Usually greenness has been a major driving force behind the company since day
one. Practices involve life-cycle pricing approaches, total-quality environmental management
and manufacturing for the environment. Extreme Greens often serve niche markets and sell
their products or services through boutique stores or specialty channels.

pg. 105
4.13 GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY INFORMATION OF INDIA

India is a Party to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
and the Government of India attaches great importance to climate change issues. India has
reasons to be concerned about climate change. Its large population depends upon climate-
sensitive sectors like agriculture and forestry for its livelihood. Any adverse impact on water
availability due to recession of glaciers, decrease in rainfall and increased flooding in certain
pockets would threaten food security, cause dieback of natural ecosystems including species
that sustain the livelihood of rural households, and adversely impact the coastal system due to
sea-level rise and increased extreme events. This aside, achievement of vital national
development goals related to other systems such as habitats, health, and energy demand and
infrastructure investments would be adversely affected. Changes in key climate variables;
namely temperature, precipitation and humidity, may have significant long term implications
for the quality and quantity of water.

Changes in key climate variables; namely temperature, precipitation and humidity, may have
significant long term implications for the quality and quantity of water. Impacts of climate
change and climate variability on the water resources are likely to affect irrigated agriculture,
installed power capacity, environmental flows in the dry season and higher flows during the
wet season, thereby causing severe droughts and flood problems in urban and rural areas.

4.14 ANNUAL MEAN TEMPERATURE TRENDS

India‘s annual mean temperature showed significant warming trend of 0.56°C per 100 years
during the period 1901–2007. Accelerated warming has been observed in the recent period
(1971–2007), mainly due to intense warming in the recent decade (1998–2007). This
warming is mainly contributed by the winter and post-monsoon seasons, which have
increased by 0.70°C and 0.52°C, respectively in the last 100 years. The pre-monsoon and
monsoon temperature also indicate a warming trend. Mean temperature increased by about
0.2°C per decade (that is, 10 years) for the period 1971–2007, with a much steeper increase in
minimum temperature than maximum temperature. The all India maximum temperature
shows an increase in temperature by 1.02oC per 100 years

pg. 106
4.15 Projected changes in 2030s

Indian Network for Climate Change Assessment (INCCA) has projects 1.5–2°C warming in
the annual mean temperature over the Indian landmass, while winter (January–February) and
Spring (March–April–May) seasons show higher warming. As a result, 10% increase in the
Indian monsoon rainfall over central and peninsular India in the 2030s has been projected. It
is also estimated that there will be 1.5–2°C warming in the annual mean temperature over the
Indian landmass, while winter (January–February) and Spring (March–April–May) seasons
show higher warming.

The regional climate model simulations indicate that the cyclonic disturbances over Indian
oceans during summer monsoon are likely to be more intense, and the systems may form
slightly to the south of normal locations.

There is a clear case for developing water resources and its conservation, owing to India‘s
high share in the world population (According to UN Population database, India shares nearly
18% of the world‘s population in 2010), but it has only 4% of the total water resources. Due
to wide temporal and spatial variation in the availability of water, there exists a water crisis-
like situation in most areas of the country. It is expected that due to climate change, water
availability situation is likely to be aggravated. The Himalayas are often referred to as the
―water towers of Asia‖ because they are the source of nine of the largest rivers. But the
Himalayan glaciers are generally experiencing rapid and unprecedented rates of melting;
retreating faster than nearly all other glacier regions around the world; and retreating at
highly variable rates, depending on glacier size, orientation, and climate zone. Possible
reasons for the melting of the glaciers include human-induced CO2 emissions and growing
levels of short-lived aerosols in the air, snow, and on glaciers.

Forests in India are already subjected to multiple stresses including - over extraction, insect
outbreaks, livestock grazing, forest fires and other anthropogenic pressures. Climate change
will be an additional stress. Forests are likely to be more vulnerable to climate change. At the
same time, there are the regions that are likely to witness a high increase in temperature and
either decline or marginal increase in rainfall. Most of the mountainous forests (sub-alpine

pg. 107
and alpine forest, the Himalayan dry temperate forest, and the Himalayan moist temperate
forests) are susceptible to the adverse effects of climate change.

The agriculture sector, including crop, animal husbandry, fisheries, and agro-processing, is
vital for the food and nutritional security of the nation. The contribution of the agriculture
sector to the national gross domestic product (GDP) has declined from 19% in 2004/05 to
14.2% in 2010/11, while overall GDP has grown by an average of 8.62% during 2004/05 to
2010/11. This rapid decline is essentially due to high growth experienced in the industry and
services sector, in a fast growing and structurally changing economy of India. However, this
sector provides the underpinning for the food and livelihood security and support for the
economic growth and social transformation of the country. Nearly two-third of country‘s
population depends directly or indirectly on the agriculture sector for their livelihood. With
about 60% of the cultivated area as rain-fed, the agricultural production is strongly influenced
by the movement of south-west monsoon. However, in the recent past, out of 526 districts,
215 districts (41%) received excess/normal rainfall and the remaining 311 districts (59%)
received deficient/scanty rainfall during the season, which reflected adversely on the overall
production of kharif crops, especially, rice and the coarse grains. Changes in climate are
expected to affect hydrological balances, input supplies, livestock production, and other
components of agricultural systems. A 1oC increase in temperature alone could lead to a
decrease of 6 million tonnes of wheat production. This loss is likely to increase to 27.5
million tonnes at 5oC increase in mean temperature. Increase in temperature during grain
development phase of rice and wheat affects their grain quality. High temperature reduced
1000-grain weight and amylase content and adversely affected important quality traits such as
grain elongation and aroma in basmati cultivars. Increase in temperature from 23°C to 31°C
resulted in a sharp decline in amylase content due to change in starch composition, which
ultimately will result in stickiness in the cooked rice. In wheat, high temperature reduced both
1000-grain weight and hecto-litre weight, and increased grain protein content. The impact
was more pronounced on bread wheat than durum wheat cultivars. An increase of
temperature from 1ºC to 4ºC reduced the grain yield of rice (0–49%), potato (5–40%), green
gram (13–30%), and soybean (11–36%). These changes are likely to increase the pressure on
Indian agriculture, in addition to the ongoing stresses of yield stagnation, land use,
competition for land, water, and other resources, and globalization. It is estimated that by
2020, food grain requirement would be almost 30–50% more than the current demand. This

pg. 108
will have to be produced from same or even shrinking land resource due to increasing
competition for land and other resources by non-agricultural sector. Any perturbation in
agriculture can considerably affect the food systems and thus increase the vulnerability of a
large fraction of the resource-poor population.

There is a two-way relationship between environment and economic activities. Not only do
economic activities, especially the energy-related activities, contribute towards climate
change and other environmental pollution, there is a reverse link too, whereby the impacts of
climate change are felt on the energy systems. The impact analysis for energy and
environment indicates that a rise in average temperature increases cooling space requirement
for the residential, services, and transport sectors. This results in an increased electricity
requirement, thus, requiring higher power capacity build-up.

Climate plays a key role in the propagation of majority of the diseases either impacting
directly or indirectly through interaction with the ecological systems. The direct health
impacts can be in the form of heat strokes, and indirect impacts include diarrhoeal risk from
water contamination via flooding, or higher risk of mortality from the impact of large-scale
loss of livelihoods. Other indirect health impacts can be in terms of deterioration in
nutritional health arising due to crop failure caused by droughts and especially from high
night temperatures, reducing cereal yields. Changes in climate may alter the distribution of
important vector species (for example, mosquitoes) and may increase the spread of disease to
new areas that lack a strong public health infrastructure. High altitude populations that fall
outside the areas of stable endemic malaria transmission are particularly vulnerable to
increases in malaria, due to climate warming. The seasonal transmission and distribution of
many other diseases transmitted by mosquitoes (dengue, yellow fever) and by ticks (Lyme
disease, tick-borne encephalitis) may also be affected by climate change.

The concentration of urban development in a few large cities has led to tremendous pressure
on civic infrastructure systems like water supply, sewerage and drainage, solid waste
management, parks and open spaces, and transport. It has also led to the deterioration in the
quality of city environment. In several cities, the problem of traffic congestion, pollution,
poverty, slums, crime, and social unrest are assuming alarming proportions. Climate change
is likely to exacerbate the existing stresses that these settlements already face. It may also

pg. 109
impact the measures that are being undertaken for sustainable development of these areas.
Climate change impacts are felt locally—in cities, towns, and other human settlements. Due
to rapid urbanization, cities are more at risk, given the existing environmental, economic and
social problems. The cities with large concentration of population, property, and crucial
economic assets and infrastructure are highly vulnerable.

Climate change could affect water supply systems in a number of ways. It can affect the
water demand for drinking and cooling systems. Where climate change leads to the failure of
small local water sources such as wells, it could lead to greater demand for regional water
supplies. Changes in precipitation patterns could lead to reduction in water availability and
fall in water tables. In coastal areas, it could lead to saline intrusions in rivers and
groundwater. Loss of melt water could reduce river flows during critical times. A change in
water availability and supply also affects sanitation and drainage systems. When water
supplies reduce, sewerage systems also become vulnerable. Further, sewage treatment plants
are vulnerable to floods or sea level rise, as these are often located near rivers or seas. Where
the sewer outfalls are in the sea, sea level rise will affect the functioning of such systems.
Storm water drainage systems could become frequently overloaded and cause flooding, and
heavy storms become more frequent due to climate change. The impact of inadequate
drainage systems in cities like Mumbai is already being felt, leading to flooding and huge
economic losses. More frequent floods could also present a significant threat if these lead to
contamination of flood water with faecal material. Climate change may impact the transport
and other infrastructure due to extreme local climatic experience, leading to significant
economic losses. Rising sea levels in the coastal area would increase the risk of flooding and
increase the vulnerability of communities residing in these areas, especially the poor. The
urban heat island effects could get exacerbated due to increase in baseline temperatures,
affecting climatic comfort of the urban population and may consequently lead to additional
costs in climate control.

4.16 PROGRAMMES RELATED TO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

India‘s development plans are crafted with a balanced emphasis on economic development
and environment. The planning process, while targeting an accelerated economic growth, is
guided by the principles of sustainable development with a commitment to a cleaner and

pg. 110
greener environment. Planning in India seeks to increase wealth and human welfare, while
simultaneously conserving the environment. It emphasizes promotion of people‘s
participatory institutions and social mobilization, particularly through empowerment of
women, for ensuring environmental sustainability of the development process.

On 30th June 2008, India announced and launched its National Action Plan on Climate
Change (NAPCC). The NAPCC, guided by the principles of sustainable development (SD),
aligns the environmental and economic objectives. Broadly, the NAPCC is based on the
following principles:

- Protecting the poor and vulnerable sections of society through SD strategies that are
sensitive to climate change,
_ achieving national growth targets by means that enhance ecological sustainability,
_ devising an efficient and cost-effective strategy for demand-side management,

pg. 111