Collective Action A Greater Impact by Working Together

MarketLine Case Study
Collective action:
A greater impact by working
together
Reference Code: ML00022-012
Publication Date: June 2016
WWW.MARKETLINE.COM
MARKETLINE. THIS PROFILE IS A LICENSED PRODUCT AND IS NOT TO BE PHOTOCOPIED
INSERT REPORT TITLE Product Code/Published 09/2015
© MARKETLINE THIS PROFILE IS A LICENSED PRODUCT AND IS NOT TO BE PHOTOCOPIED Page | 1

OVERVIEW
Catalyst
Alone, individuals and even companies wield little power to make any significant change. However, when these
individuals or companies come together to campaign for a common goal, they are taking part in collective action.
Collective action has much more impact than the sum of its part acting alone. This case study looks at why people and
companies take part in collective action, and what the benefits for those taking part are.
Summary
Free-market capitalism has led to a number of environmental issues. Slowly, companies have realized that they must
make significant changes in their business practices in order to address these issues. Collective action allows these
companies to make a greater impact working together than they would make working alone. This issue and corruption
lend themselves particularly well to collective action.
Collective action has many benefits for companies, including improving reputation, attracting talent, motivating
employees, and attracting consumers. Businesses can engage in collective action in many ways, including signing open
letters, forming business coalitions, and teaming up with governments.
For consumers, collective action gives support, motivation, and a sense that one is making a change. There are
numerous ways in which individuals can engage in collective action but two prominent ones are boycotts and petitions.
There are numerous examples of boycotts and petitions, some of which are still continuing to make waves years later.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Overview ............................................................................................................................................................................. 2
Catalyst............................................................................................................................................................................ 2
Summary ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Collective action helps individuals reach a common goal.................................................................................................... 7
Collective action is used to help a group of individuals reach a common goal ................................................................ 7
Free-market capitalism has contributed to various environmental issues ........................................................................ 8
Market force is a strong factor in enacting environmental and ethical change................................................................. 8
Collective action brings advantages to companies .............................................................................................................. 9
Benefits include access to information, mutual support, and improved bargaining power ............................................... 9
Collective action often has an indirect effect on company revenues ............................................................................... 9
Being perceived as an ethical company can help attract talent, motivate employees, and attract consumers .............. 10
Non-monetary benefits ............................................................................................................................................... 10
Improved reputation and public perception can positively influence sales ................................................................. 10
Companies can improve their workforce .................................................................................................................... 10
Companies should aim at millennials, but must take care to be genuine ................................................................... 13
Businesses can exert a huge amount of influence when working together ....................................................................... 14
Sustainability and environmental issues lend themselves well to collective action ........................................................ 14
Sustainability requires cooperation to make an impact .............................................................................................. 14
Ineffective climate negotiations by governments ........................................................................................................ 15
Collective action can be a powerful tool to combat corruption ....................................................................................... 17
Corruption prevention is typically aimed at the public sector, but private companies are also affected by corruption 17
Companies can reduce corruption in a number of ways ............................................................................................ 18
There are various ways in which companies can signal their collective support about an issue ................................... 18
Open letters are quick and easy, and there is some evidence of success ................................................................. 18
Companies have joined numerous initiatives to improve energy use ......................................................................... 19
Businesses may also team up with governments ...................................................................................................... 19
Consumer collective action includes boycotts and petitions .............................................................................................. 22
Collective action lends credibility, support, and motivation ............................................................................................ 22
Boycotts are a simple way of registering disapproval .................................................................................................... 22
Boycotts are numerous and target various issues ..................................................................................................... 22
Boycotts target companies, and can have limited success ........................................................................................ 22
Successful boycotts use a variety of tactics ............................................................................................................... 23
Petitions are quick, easy, and have had some success ................................................................................................ 25

There are a number of petitions platforms ................................................................................................................. 25
Petitions can make a difference but they don’t necessarily guarantee success ......................................................... 26
People sign petitions because they want to make a change and lend support to an issue ........................................ 29
Conclusions....................................................................................................................................................................... 32
Collective action is a strong force for change ................................................................................................................ 32
Appendix ........................................................................................................................................................................... 33
Sources ......................................................................................................................................................................... 33
Ask the analyst .............................................................................................................................................................. 35
About MarketLine .......................................................................................................................................................... 35
Disclaimer ...................................................................................................................................................................... 35

LIST OF TABLES
No table of figures entries found.

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Martin Luther King waves to supporters at the Lincoln Memorial on August 28, 1963 ......................................... 7
Figure 2: Global CO2 emissions, 1990-2010 .................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 3: The Mayor’s Summit at the Paris Climate Summit, December 4 2015 .............................................................. 16
Figure 4: Corruption word list ............................................................................................................................................ 17
Figure 5: Carbon pricing initiatives' share of global emissions, 1990-2018 ....................................................................... 20
Figure 6: H&M commits to Greenpeace’s Detox campaign ............................................................................................... 25
Figure 7: Part of Ryan Air’s banned Red Hot ad campaign .............................................................................................. 27
Figure 8: 38 Degrees’ infographic exploring Save our Forests’ campaign success ......................................................... 30

COLLECTIVE ACTION HELPS INDIVIDUALS REACH A
COMMON GOAL
Collective action is often used for social and political goals, but can also be used for business goals. Collective action
allows a group to become powerful than the sum of its parts, meaning it can make an impact on issues such as
sustainability. This has increasingly become an issue due to free-market capitalism, and this has led businesses and
consumers to collective action to improve it. Market force is a strong factor in enacting environmental and ethical change,
as these kinds of changes can positively affect a company’s bottom line.
Collective action is used to help a group of individuals reach a

common goal
Collective action refers to organized action taken by a group of individuals to achieve a common objective or goal.
Collective action strengthens the group to become more than the sum of its parts. Individuals can combine their
knowledge, resources, and efforts in order to reach a shared goal.
Collective action to achieve a social or political goal is common: examples include peaceful protests, grass-roots
campaigns and awareness-raising. However, collective action can be used to reach any common goal.
Collective action can allow a minority to make their voices heard. One extremely influential historical example of
collective action is the Civil Rights movement in the US in the 1950s and 1960s. However, collective action needn't reach
that scale. Any form of organized group working together to achieve a common goal may be considered as collective
action.
This case study will look at the collective action taken by businesses and consumers and the effect it has had on
business practices and revenues.
Figure 1: Martin Luther King waves to supporters at the Lincoln Memorial on August 28, 1963
SOURCE: MPRNEWS.ORG MARKETLINE

Free-market capitalism has contributed to various
environmental issues
A company's most basic obligation is to make money. While it is an over-simplification to argue that economic incentive is
behind every business decision, it is an inescapable fact that businesses exist to make profit for their shareholders.
The rise of global free-market capitalism has aided this and propelled some companies into global money-making
powerhouses. However, it has become ever clear that the capitalist economic system is unsustainable and has
contributed to numerous environmental issues, biodiversity loss and climate change among them.
The negative consequences of this economic system require strong, wide-ranging action. These issues are global,
complicated, and span the length of the value chain, from farmers to consumers. Many individual companies have taken
steps to improve their sustainability, but it can seem difficult to align ecological capabilities with capitalist tendencies.
Pavan Sukhdev is the former managing director of Deutsche Bank, and now founding director of Corporation 2020, a
multi-stakeholder initiative that seeks to blend sustainability into company practices. He says that companies should
move away from seeing private profit as their sole purpose, and instead develop policy-based tools that lead them in that
direction. He argues levies should be applied to waste and pollution and shifted away from income.
In any case, it is clear that a challenge to the free-market norm is needed to address this plethora of issues.
Market force is a strong factor in enacting environmental and

ethical change
Many major brands are keen to improve their business environmentally and ethically, but only if they can see that it will
add to the bottom line. Fortunately, research suggests that it will. According to research conducted in the UK by YouGov
and replicated by Guardian News & Media (GNM), 86% of the GNM audience like buying products from companies that
give something back to society, and 84% agree that companies should be penalized if they fail to care for the
environment. In Fairtrade’s latest Annual Report for 2014-2015, global Fairtrade sales grew by 10%, reaching EUR5.9bn.
In the USA alone, Fairtrade sales grew by more than 120% to reach a total of EUR576.6m.
Companies that are able to promote themselves and their environmental aims efficiently should see revenue growth from
a consumer base that is more environmentally and ethically conscious than it has, arguably, ever been. The YouGov and
GNM surveys suggest that companies can more effectively harness consumer environmental awareness and concern if
they provide availability, visibility, affordability, quality, and clear communication around ethical products and services.
This demonstrates the advantages a corporation can garner through a strong stance on environmental and ethical
issues.

COLLECTIVE ACTION BRINGS ADVANTAGES TO
COMPANIES
Collective action has a huge amount of benefits. This type of action gives those involved greater bargaining power,
something that even the most powerful corporations may struggle with when up against an issue such as fossil fuel use.
Collective action also offers mutual support, shared information, and coordinated campaigning. These all increase the
likelihood of success.
Collective action has many monetary benefits, many of which are indirect and difficult to quantify. These include an
improved perception and reputation, both of which lead to sales. Companies with a strong stance on environmental,
ethical or social practices may also themselves better positioned to attract and retain talented, happy, and productive
employees.
Benefits include access to information, mutual support, and

improved bargaining power
There are multiple benefits to collective action, and these apply to both small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and large
corporations. One benefit is improved bargaining power. Even powerful global corporations, may struggle to enact any
real global change on their own. However, a number of corporations, large or otherwise, improve their bargaining power
a significant amount.
Collective action also has the benefit of mutual support. This brings about a sense of teamwork that is a major positive in
performance: it increase the likelihood that a collective action will retain momentum. Members will motivate each other.
SMEs facing intense competitive pressures may find this a huge benefit.
Information is another benefit. Multiple companies will have numerous experiences and different types of employees.
This can all contribute to a greater amount of information as a whole, which will also increase the power of the group. In
particular, SMEs may benefit from this. They may struggle with a limited knowledge of legal rights and collective action
could help this.
Collective action can also lead to coordinated campaigning. This can make much more of an impact than small, stable
acts of campaigning. Often, coordinated campaigning can be newsworthy.
Lastly, smaller companies which lack access to government officials may find doors opened due to the bargaining power
of the whole.
On the whole, collective action can allow companies to speak with one voice on an issue, lending them greater power
and increased credibility. For example, Aviva Investors worked together to influence the UN Rio+20 Sustainability
Summit. The group called for greater social, environmental and economic impact reporting for businesses, and also
helped in shaping an EU directive on this topic. This outcome would have been unlikely had the companies involved not
been working together, giving them a more powerful voice.
Collective action often has an indirect effect on company

revenues
Famous collective actions tend to be of the political type: women's suffrage, Civil Rights, and the struggle for gay and
lesbian rights. However, collective action can also be undertaken by a business. These collective acts are often taken to
improve an industry or business practices across a wide range of issues. Whether directly or indirectly, this action can
lead to increased revenues, which is the primary, but not the only, reason companies engage in it.
Examples of collective action that directly improve revenues include airlines campaigning for a cut in airport taxes, or
farmers campaigning for a rise in the wholesale price of milk. The outcomes to these actions would directly improve the
business prospects of the company: the airlines would save money from cuts in taxes, and farmers would improve their
revenues by selling their goods at a higher price without worrying that their buyers go to a farmer selling at a lower price.

These examples highlight the benefit of collective action: individual companies or farmers with the same goals would
struggle with the clout and influence needed to change policies such as these.
Collective action is not a new concept, but it is attracting attention from businesses. In fact, the World Bank has explicitly
encouraged collective action, and provides funding for new initiatives. This case study is looking at a different type of
collective action, one in which monetary benefits are less clear.
Being perceived as an ethical company can help attract talent,

motivate employees, and attract consumers
Companies that engage in ethical, social, and governance issues, and improve their business practices accordingly, can
expect to see various benefits. Firstly, this behavior improves the perception and reputation of the company, and an
improved perception can influence sales. Secondly, companies will find themselves better placed to attract and retain
talent. Many employees value ethical business dealings by their employer, and some may even leave a job over ethical
issues. What’s more, this behavior may increase the satisfaction of employees, and this in turn leads to greater
productivity levels. Finally, consumers, particularly millennials, care about companies’ ethical activities.
Non-monetary benefits
The monetary benefits of many ethical or environmentally friendly behaviors a company could adopt do not often have
clear, direct monetary benefits. This range of changes could include reduced corruption; improved sustainability and
environmental practices, including cutting down on certain resources and waste; fair trade; improved ingredients, whether
from a sustainable or environmental approach or from a health approach; and improving governance issues, such as
workers' rights, safe workplaces, and adequate pay. However, there are clear benefits to improving these issues, and
these will be discussed below.
Improved reputation and public perception can positively influence sales

Many companies find that improving their reputation or perception among the public can be just as powerful as if they
were to implement real, company-wide changes.
There are ways that corporations can improve their reputations without making serious, potentially costly, changes to
their business practices. A well-made social media campaign; signing an open letter about a particular issue; and
acquiring a company with an already-strong reputation can all do these things. However, actually implementing changes
will lead to a much better perception. Many corporate and social responsibility (CSR) activities that go above legal or
regulatory requirements are often perceived to be driven by the effect this information will have on a company's
customers. What's more, making positive changes in one area may lead to a halo effect, whereby socially responsible
behavior in one area may influence perceptions of CSR performance in other areas. One study found that "the CSR halo
effect suggests consumers might extrapolate from a small number of examples of CSR-related practices."
This can influence sales - a 2009 study published in MIT Sloan Management Review found that some consumers are
willing to pay a premium for perceived ethical behaviors.
Perhaps more importantly, consumers will also penalize companies they see as unethical.
This has major implications for advertising and branding, which companies can use to further improve their ethical
standings among customers. A popular way of companies showcasing their improved activities or values is to join forces
with a nonprofit and focus an ad campaign on this.
Companies can improve their workforce

Many employees are more loyal to ethical companies, and are willing to take a pay cut
Companies with ethical practices or good reputations tend to benefit from an improved workforce. This improvement may
come in the form of talent, motivation, loyalty to the company, and more.
Ethical practices, or even the perception of ethical practices, can greatly affect the relationship between employer and
employee, as well as organizational dynamics. This is the case in both for-profit and not-for-profit organizations.

A 2011 study by business ethics and corporate compliance solutions company LRN (Employee Engagement: A report on
how ethics affects corporate ability to attract, recruit, and retain employees), surveyed 834 adult US workers over the
phone, with the goal of understand the impact of corporate ethics on its employees. The study also aimed to find out the
business success of the companies as a result of this ethical or non-ethical behavior.
The study found that 94% of workers surveyed said that it was important that they work for ethical companies, and more
than a third (36%) would trade additional pay for ethical business practices. What's more, 36% of workers surveyed had
left a job over ethical issues. Most (56%) workers surveyed gave their employees positive ratings for ethical conduct.
These are generally positive results, and show a clear preference and loyalty towards companies with ethical business
practices. However, there is a huge discrepancy between the percentage of workers who want to work for ethical
companies, and the amount that say they do. This discrepancy should raise alarm bells for the companies not regarded
as ethical by their employees. This study suggests that loyalty could be improved by an improvement in their business
practices as the implications of unethical business practices and unethical reputations can be far reaching.
The study also shows that employees can and will leave a job if they do not agree with the ethical principles of a
company. This can be costly, both due to high staff turnover and loss of productivity. The LRN study estimates that these
costs can range from 25% to almost 200% of an employee's annual compensation. This clearly shows the monetary
benefits of engaging in positive ethical business practices.
In a less direct way, the ability to retain employees that are engaged, motivated, loyal, and happy will further contribute to
the ethical culture of the company. Companies may be able to retain these employees even in the face of more lucrative
offers.
Another study found that the preference towards ethically sound companies occurs even in the early years of an
individual’s employment. The Academy of Management Learning & Education Journal's 2008 study of 759 MBA 2003
graduates found that 83% of employees would be willing to forego financial benefits in order to work for a company with a
highly ethical reputation.
As with the LRN study, it seems that money is important, but this importance reduces depending on the extent of its
conflict with a company's ethical behavior.
Companies may also find a more motivated workforce: writer, social commentator and founder of Global Tolerance,
consultant Simon Cohen, says that, "By creating a culture and environment which has values that are meaningful and
aligned with those of staff, people are more motivated to work for you and will bend over backwards for things that they
believe in."
Overall, these studies demonstrate the importance of behaving ethically to not only attract talent in the first place, but
motivate it and retain it too, and they highlight a critical opportunity to attract an efficient, motivated and productive
workforce could have a huge positive impact on company revenues now, as well as improving the company’s standing to
carry on attracting strong employees in the future.
Ethics are more important to younger workers

One study found that the preference towards ethical companies is more pronounced in young workers.
The study of 2,000 people, carried out by consultancy firm Global Tolerance, found that 62% of millennials (loosely
defined as those born between the early 1980s and late 1990s) wanted to work for a company that makes a positive
impact on the world, compared to 42% of all those surveyed. There was also a difference when asked if they would work
harder if they knew they were making a difference to others. 53% of millennials said they would compared to 36% of
respondents overall. Half of millennials also reported that they prefer purposeful work to a high salary.
This is incredibly important for employers to take on: it is clear that the millennial generation is much more aware and
engaged in the issue of ethical business when it comes to their employer, and companies ignore this at their peril.

Companies must be ethical, not just market themselves so
writer, social commentator and founder of Global Tolerance, consultant Simon Cohen also warns against companies
"greenwashing", where a company or product advertises and markets itself as “green” without actually being so. Cohen
says he has seen a huge boom in corporations marketing themselves as values-driven, as they have seen the business
potential in doing this.
However, he says, "compassion needs to penetrate the whole business". A company extolling its ethical values while not
demonstrating them throughout their business culture may fall short of attracting and retaining the employees it is aiming
for. Nowadays, says Cohen, the public is very "astute" and can often see through these ploys.
One company that is taking this seriously is British electricity gas utility company National Grid. Resourcing manager
Sharon Goymer says that the trend towards values-driven business models has had a big impact on recruitment in an
industry where a lot of the energy industry is "made up of male workers in their 40s, 50s, and 60s." She says that the
company is prioritizing improving diversity and attracting the next generation of workers. National Grid has done this by
running education activities in schools which encourage a diverse array of young people to pursue science, technology,
engineering and mathematics (STEM) careers. National Grid employees are also encouraged to take up some form of
volunteering. This led to the company being named Responsible Business of the Year in 2014.
This provides evidence that proactively cultivating an ethical culture could be a major step forward for a company.
Happier employees are more productive

Employees that feel that they can make an impact tend to be more satisfied with their jobs, and this satisfaction could
save the economy billions in lost productivity earnings.
A Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index, which polled 1,000 adults between January 2008 and September 2011, found
that people felt more apathetic and unhappy with their jobs, and estimated that this disengagement costs the US
economy around $300bn in lost productivity annually.
There is evidence that employees in jobs where they could make a social or environmental impact were more satisfied
with their jobs (as reported in Net Impact's Talent Report: What Workers Want in 2012). What's more, other evidence
suggests that a satisfied or happy employee is a productive one.
Net Impact's Talent Report looked at a national sample of 1,726 students about to enter the workforce and currently
employed college graduates from three generations (Millennials, Generation X, and Baby Boomers). The Report looked
at life goals, job satisfaction, and the prioritization of making an impact at work compared to other key job criteria. Liz
Maw, CEO of Net Impact, explains that "employee engagement is a hot topic these days… employers proudly tout
making one of the coveted '100 best places to work' lists, and today, more than 25% of Fortune 200 companies have
dedicated budget to maintain their rank on such lists."
The Report found that 53% of workers considered a "job where I can make an impact" as "very important or essential to
my happiness". What's more, 35% of students said they would take a 15% pay cut to work for a company that was
committed to CSR, and 45% would take a 15% pay cut "for a job that makes a social or environmental impact".
The Report found that 55% of professionals said they were in a job where they could make a social or environmental
impact on the world, and that these respondents were more satisfied with their jobs by a 2:1 ratio (49% reported high
satisfaction levels compared with 24% who didn't have the same impact opportunities.) The Report concluded that "in
order to satisfy, attract, and engage top talent, employers would be well advised to place a greater emphasis on
connecting jobs to social and environmental impact."
Many consumers care about companies’ ethical activities

There is evidence that customers are increasingly aware of and feel strongly about ethical, environmental and
sustainability issues. However, how this transfers to spending behavior remains complex. In the UN's Global Compact-
Accenture CRO study for sustainable business, one CEO said, "sustainability started as a moral obligation, but has now
become a differentiator for consumers". Another CEO said, "how a company is perceived on sustainability makes a
difference to consumers' decisions - it's a reputation built over time".

However, many companies are uncertain of the importance of sustainability to consumers' purchasing decisions, with
one commenting, "the holy grail is to be able to say that the impact on purchasing behavior of consumers for sustainable
brands is clear. It's not.", and another saying, "consumers are aware of sustainability, but are not willing to compromise
on quality, convenience or price." Despite this, many consumers do support sustainability: the Do Well Do Good Public
Opinion Survey on Sustainability found that 83% of consumers think that companies should accomplish business goals
while improving society and the environment. Additionally, 70% of consumers believe that corporate CROs have a high
level of responsibility regarding their company's impact on the environment, employees, and community. What's more,
many consumers said they would take punitive action in the form of switching to a competitor or selling an investment if
companies were involved in activities they found objectionable, such as employing children under 10, harming the
environment, and giving little or no money to charities. 72% of consumers said a "complete overhaul" of an offending
company's business practices would influence them to resume purchasing from a company.
In the report, consumers chose from 17 issues, rating them in terms of how important it was for companies to address
them. The top five important issues were: paying employees competitive wages and benefits; providing training and
educational opportunities for employees; managing energy usage; being honest and transparent about business
practices; and ensuring that suppliers respect human rights.
This evidence suggests that many consumers believe that companies should engage in sustainable and ethical
behaviors as standard. Rather than paying more for a particular product, consumers are willing to disengage with an
unsustainable company and reward a sustainable company with their custom. However, consumers are still motivated by
quality, convenience, and price. So, companies must find a way of improving their sustainability and ethical behaviors
without compromising on price and quality.
Companies should aim at millennials, but must take care to be genuine

Millennials are an incredibly important target market when it comes to advertising CSR campaigns. As discussed above,
millennials are particularly engaged in issues of sustainability and ethics when it comes to employment. This is a
powerful group too: this group represents a huge $2.45 trillion in global spending power.
What's more, this group tends to care about CSR issues as a consumer. According to the 2015 Cone Communications
Milenial CSR Study, 91% of millennials would switch brands to one associated with a cause, and 70% would spend more
on brands that support causes. They are also more likely to make other personal sacrifices such as sharing, rather than
buying, a product, and taking a pay cut to work for a more responsible company.
Targeting a carefully constructed ad campaign at millennials can pay dividends, as millennials are more likely than
average to use social media to engage around CSR (66% compared to an average of 53%).
However, brands must be careful to be genuine in their CSR actions. Millennials are often quick to see through
businesses supporting a campaign they don't believe in, or that doesn't align with their business practices. This can
quickly go south, as millennials spread the word throughout social media.
For example, KFC's 2010 ad campaign with breast cancer awareness and research organization "Buckets for the Cure"
was quickly picked up by bloggers and other media voices, who criticized the company's calorific content and the link of
obesity to cancer. This type of backlash is a risk.
Companies must make more than just gestures. Millennials expect to be kept updated on company progress and
companies must show they really mean it.

BUSINESSES CAN EXERT A HUGE AMOUNT OF
INFLUENCE WHEN WORKING TOGETHER
Companies can be involved in collective action to address any number of issues, but two that lend themselves
particularly well to collective action are corruption and sustainability. This is because these complicated and far-reaching
issues benefit from strong, industry-wide actions, rather than the actions of a small number of righteous companies.
Sustainability and environmental issues lend themselves well

to collective action
Sustainability and environmental issues lend themselves particularly well to large-scale cooperation by businesses as
they are vast, complicated issues that require the commitment of many to make a difference. In the past, attempts at
cooperation between governments over climate goals have been ineffectual and agreements have often been stifled by
infighting over which countries should bear the brunt of emissions cuts. More recently, though, this has improved. It’s
possible that this cooperation was inspired by the ongoing cooperation of many multinational corporations in this area.
Sustainability requires cooperation to make an impact

Business coalitions are a significant way in which a number of companies can join together to make a bigger impact than
if they were acting on their own.
American politician and environmentalist, Al Gore, once said, "We must abandon the conceit that individual, isolated,
private actions are the answer. They can and do help. But they will not take us far enough without collective action. Let
us say together: ‘We have a purpose. We are many. For this purpose we will rise, and we will act."
Coalitions are vital to address global challenges such as water stress, climate change, and waste. Governments,
businesses or non-government organizations acting alone are unlikely to make an impact alone.

Ineffective climate negotiations by governments
It is clear that governmentally-negotiated climate goals have struggled and have at times been ineffectual. In the last few
decades, CO2 emissions have continued to grow, despite agreements like the Kyoto Protocol, discussed below.
Figure 2: Global CO2 emissions, 1990-2010
SOURCE: GUARDIAN MARKETLINE
Global attempts to cut emissions have been largely unsuccessful, as many countries have struggled to agree on whether
the brunt of emissions cuts should be bore by developed countries such as the US, while countries that are still going
through industrialization, such as China, should be given more time, or whether all countries should be held equally
accountable for reducing emissions and developing renewable capacity.
In 1997, 193 countries signed the world's first binding agreement to cut emissions - the Kyoto Protocol, but the United
States dropped out in 2001. The Kyoto Protocol's aim was for global emissions to be cut by 5% by 2012, compared to
1990 levels. The success or failure of countries to meet this target varied wildly. For example, countries including New
Zealand, Canada, Spain and Australia failed to meet their targets. The UK, Poland, Portugal, and Norway met targets.
Overall, there were more countries that met their targets than didn't, leading to a drop in the sum of emissions from Kyoto
targets. However, during the same time period emissions in the rest of the world – particularly China – rose sharply. In
2009, Copenhagen, Denmark, hosted the UN climate summit. The summit involved 115 world leaders and was expected
to launch the treaty that would succeed the Kyoto Protocol, which ended in 2012. However, the agreement that was
reached fell far short from what many countries were hoping, and was more of a weak outline of a global agreement. In
the end, the US, China, South Africa, India, and Brazil brokered the deal, known as the Copenhagen Accord. One of its
aims was to subsidize poor countries to adept to climate change, but many countries were disappointed, especially
vulnerable companies that had been holding out for deeper emissions cuts.

There were accusations that emerging economies had undermined the talks, but Chinese and Indian officials rejected
them. However, China and other emerging economies blocked the inclusion of detailed targets. As industrializing nations,
they feared they would bear the brunt of the responsibility meeting the targets, while the West has benefitted from
industrialization boosted by fossil fuels long ago. Attempts to ratify climate change legislation have long been peppered
with disagreements over who should bear the brunt of emissions cuts: developing countries' use of fossil fuels is growing
more quickly than in the West, but the West has benefited from using fossil fuels during its industrialization. Tim Gore,
Oxfam's international climate policy adviser told The Guardian, "The irony of the situation is that rich countries are in their
position of wealth because of the role they have played in exacerbating climate change. We have enjoyed the fruits of
carbon intensive industrialization while it is the world's poorest who are disproportionately affected."
However, this may now be changing for the better, as the December 2015 Paris Summit led to 195 countries adopting
the Paris Agreement after two weeks of intense negotiations. United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said, "They
have unanimously decided to work as one to rise to the defining challenge of our times".
Figure 3: The Mayor’s Summit at the Paris Climate Summit, December 4 2015
SOURCE: TIME MARKETLINE
This kind of collective action has the possibility to garner more power than independent emissions goals set by individual
countries, with Mr Ban saying that it represents a new approach to climate change, one of global cooperation.
These issues are wide-ranging and incredibly complicated, and collaborations between businesses, suppliers and
customers, NGOs, international agencies, public sector bodies and academic institutions, and more, are vital.
In the last few decades, these coalitions have become more widespread. In the UK, there is Business in the Community,
and international coalitions include Business for Social Responsibility and the World Business Council for Sustainable
Development.
Another example is the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, a collaboration of 100 Circular Economy companies and partners.
The Foundation addresses the challenges that come with switching from the old model of "take, make, use, and waste."

Another group, Aviva Investors, brought together the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Coalition to influence the UN
Rio+20 Sustainability Summit. The group called for greater social, environmental and economic impact reporting for
businesses, and also helped in shaping an EU directive on this topic.
Other coalitions include the Sustainable Shipping Initiative, which involves 19 shipping companies; the UK's Aldersgate
Group, and the Global Commission on Business and Sustainable Development.
In short, there are no shortage of coalitions vehicles to work through, should a business or business leader wishing to
collaborate. However, this number of coalitions can be daunting, and collaborations often fail. This can be due to
conflicting or unrealistic goals, the absence of senior leadership, and insufficient power to carry out goals.
Therefore, sustainability coalitions must be approached as would other potential partnerships, with important questions
about objectives and implementation asked.
Collective action can be a powerful tool to combat corruption

The issue of corruption lends itself well to collective action, as it requires the cooperation of many to make a real
difference.
Corruption prevention is typically aimed at the public sector, but private companies
are also affected by corruption
As well as sustainability and environmental practices, business coalitions lend themselves well to issues of corruption.
This is a global issue, and in recent decades several organizations have been formed to tackle it: the Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) adopted the Convention on Bribery of Foreign Public Officials; the
World Bank established a formal anti-corruption strategy, and the United Nations launched the Convention Against
Corruption.
Often, reform efforts by governments, international donors and NGOs focus on the public sector, through the creation of
oversight bodies, regulatory reform, and disclosure requirements. However, there has been a growing awareness that
private sector initiatives are needed too. The private sector, particularly in the case of small businesses, is also harmed
by high levels of corruption.
The Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE) is one organization that has demonstrated that private businesses
are not only interested in reducing corruption, they can also be mobilized to take action.
Figure 4: Corruption word list
SOURCE: SIERRA EXPRESS MEDIA MARKETLINE

Corruptions is often a symptom of problems in governance, including problems with regulations, weak enforcement
mechanisms etc. Therefore, actions that identify and punish those "caught in the act" ignore these underlying issues and
leave the conditions that will incentivize corruption in other.
Therefore, it becomes clear that, in order to address the institutional framework that underlies corruption, collective action
to change this framework and reduce the incentives and opportunities for corruption, is a more effective approach.
However, while a single company implementing its own anti-corruption policies can set a positive example and limit its
exposure to risks of corruption; any anti-corruption effort will be restrained by competitive pressures. However, if
companies unite, it is less likely that less scrupulous companies will carry on benefiting from corruption while those who
have made changes do not receive these benefits.
Companies can reduce corruption in a number of ways

Certain types of corruption cannot be tackled alone. One example is facilitation payments: one individual, or a small
numbers of individuals, might not have much of an effect on this practice.
Collective action can provide the structure and power to make a real difference, through both one-off projects or through
long-term initiatives. Some of these initiatives include integrity pacts and anticorruption declarations. Integrity pacts are
formal, written contracts which stipulate the rights and obligations between government agencies offering contracts, and
the companies bidding for it. Integrity pacts contain stipulations about bribery and corruption, and are include sanctions in
the case of contract infringement.
Anticorruption declarations are principle-based documents, in which signatories agree not to engage in corruption during
a project. These documents can be published and shared with subcontractors, and it is this public accountability, through
stakeholder awareness and public pressure, that leads to enforcement.
These initiatives require multiple companies to comply and cooperate in order for success. They highlight the importance
of collective action over the issue of corruption.
There are various ways in which companies can signal their

collective support about an issue
Businesses have a number of ways to signal their support over a particular issue, some with more influence than others.
Some are also more time consuming than others. For example, the signing of an open letter is a quick, cheap, and easy
way for a company or company leader to show their affiliation to a particular position. Signing an open letter may have a
degree of short-term success but is unlikely to make a difference to a long-term issue. Teaming up with governments or
forming environmental coalitions are aimed at making longer-term changes.
Open letters are quick and easy, and there is some evidence of success
Open letters are letters that are intended for a certain individual or group but which are intended to be read by a wide
audience. For example, they are intended to be published in a newspaper or journal. Open letters are a way in which
signatories can target their message at a particular recipient, while being published on a platform public enough to spark
a wider debate about a particular issue. However, this is not the only reason companies sign open letters. Open letters
are also an ideal way for the signatory to state their position on a particular issue. They also help to focus attention on the
letter's recipient, prompting them to action.
One recent example is the letter signed by 197 UK business leaders backing Britain to remain a member of the EU. The
business leaders, who together employ over one million people in the UK and include leaders from BAE Systems,
Goldman Sachs, and Unilever, laid out their reasons for wanting to remain part of the UK, chiefly unrestricted access to
the 500 million people that make up the European market. The letter said that leaving the EU would "deter investment…
threaten jobs… [and] put the economy at risk."
It remains to be seen whether or not this letter will make a difference to the decision to remain in the EU. However, it is
clear that this letter is much more powerful as a result of collective action, than it would be if pursued individually.

However, business letters have been successful in the past if the success can be attributed to them, although this
success may be correlational rather than causational. For example, in the UK letters signed by business leaders have
preceded some political landmarks. These have included a letter before the Scottish referendum, signed by more than
130 business leaders, backing union. And in the 2015 General Election, 103 business leaders warned that a Labour
government would "threaten jobs and deter investment" and, in another letter, more than 100 business leaders declared
their support for the Conservatives, praising their economic policies.
It is difficult to quantify how much influence these letters had on the electorate; however, in hindsight those closest to
then-Labour leader Ed Miliband have acknowledged the damage the letter did to their reputation, cementing the
perception of the party as economically incompetent.
Companies have joined numerous initiatives to improve energy use

There are a number of energy-driven coalitions which have the support of a huge range of some of the world’s most
powerful companies.
For example, the RE100 is an initiative of some of the world's largest companies committed to using 100% renewable
power. The RE100 was convened by the Climate Group in partnership with CDP, another group that brings together
companies and business leaders to enact change. According to the Climate Group, the RE100 is an ambitious initiative
that aims to "engage, support, and showcase influential companies" that are committed to using 100% renewable power.
By working together, the companies can benefit from "peer-to-peer learning" as well as public recognition. The
involvement of influential companies also means that the initiative may inspire a number of countries worldwide to make
their own energy changes.
The RE100 was launched at New York's Climate Week in 2014, and now has nearly 60 members, including BT Group,
Coca-Cola, Goldman Sachs, Google, H&M, Johnson & Johnson, Microsoft, Procter & Gamble, Tata Motors, Unilever,
Walmart, and more. These companies cover sectors as diverse as telecommunications, confectionery, IT, electronics,
home furnishings, banking, consumer goods, and more.
When the initiative was first launched, there were 13 original partners - IKEA Group, Swiss Re, BT Group, Formula E,
H&M, KPN, Mars Incorporated, Nestlé, Philips, RELX Group, J. Safra Sarasin, Unilever and YOOX Group - which shows
how influential these 13 originals have been in causing the RE100 to expand to nearly 60 companies less than two years
later.
What’s more, CDP and The Climate Group are not the only business coalitions working towards environmental goals.
We Mean Business is another coalition of corporations which works to drive climate action. We Mean Business
represents 400 companies with over $8 trillion in revenue, and over 180 investors with assets under management of over
$20.7 trillion.
The huge scale of these three initiatives alone demonstrates the company- and investor-accepted argument that
businesses working together in a coalition can deliver huge change. What’s more, these large-scale agreements may be
more successful than individual companies making their own energy targets. The existence of the coalitions provides a
huge level of accountability, which should lead to success.
Businesses may also team up with governments

The coalition between both companies and governments provides a hugely powerful group.
One example of a business coalition that has the potential to make a huge difference around the world, both now and in
the future, is the September 2014 carbon pricing coalition.
In the lead up to the UN Secretary-General's Climate Leadership Summit in September 2014, 73 countries and 11 states
and provinces - together representing 54 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions and 52 percent of GDP - teamed
up with over 1,000 businesses and investors to signal their support for carbon pricing. During the summit the Czech
Republic and Lagos State were added to the list.
The list of countries included those that are planning carbon pricing - such as China and South Africa - as well as Russia

and other countries at high risk from climate change. The investors involved have more than $24 trillion in assets. This
teaming up of governments and businesses sets a strong basis for the future of carbon trading. The fact that
governments and businesses are willing to work together also sends a clear message that will be hard to ignore.
Figure 5: Carbon pricing initiatives' share of global emissions, 1990-2018
SOURCE: SIERRA EXPRESS MEDIA MARKETLINE
As can be seen in the figure above, the World Bank carbon pricing has taken off in recent years, and will continue to rise.

The World Bank praises the independent implementation of carbon pricing as having various benefits for companies,
including financial benefits. However, most importantly for this case study, the World Bank recognizes the effect the
corporate carbon pricing can have on governments, noting that corporate carbon pricing can be "a powerful advocacy
tool for companies to influence policy development."
These companies acting alone may not be able to exert enough influence to have an affect on government policy, but
working together big changes can be brought about.
The World Bank concludes that governments and businesses are "interdependent" in this space.

CONSUMER COLLECTIVE ACTION INCLUDES
BOYCOTTS AND PETITIONS
Collective action enables a large number of individuals who share a common goal to come together and lend credibility,
support, and motivation to each other and an issue. Popular consumer collective action includes boycotts and petitions,
and there are many cases in which these have led to success.
Collective action lends credibility, support, and motivation

Collective action has many benefits for the consumer. Collective action amplifies the effect of efforts. The effort put in by
individuals would not be able to match the effects by the group as a whole. According to Porter’s Five Forces industry
analysis framework, individuals have little to no buyer power. However, collectively they have a much greater influence
on corporations and governments. In this way, the whole is more than the sum of its parts. Individual efforts may struggle
to get noticed; they may not be able to put in as much time as they want; and they may struggle with motivation.
Collective action supports individual players; each member who is part of a collective effort is supported and motivated
by a wide outer circle of like-minded individuals. This is important because it can be difficult, time-consuming and
disheartening to try and spark change. Collective action also lends credibility to an initiative. This is important in a
situation that is resistant to change.
Boycotts are a simple way of registering disapproval

There are numerous boycotts going on around the world at any given time. Some can have limited success, with little
long-term changes made. Successful boycotts use a variety of tactics, including attacking a company’s stock value and
putting pressure on its leadership. Successful boycotts can also lead to an on-going dialogue about a company’s
performance.
Boycotts are numerous and target various issues

Historically, boycotts have been the way for consumers to make their feelings known about a particular company or
issue. These can be undertaken individually; however, they have a greater effect if many individuals come together to
take part in the same boycott.
At any given time there are a number of boycotts going on. According to UK-based consumer activist magazine Ethical
Consumer, there are 49 current boycotts, as at the time of writing in March 2016. These include boycotts against huge
corporations including Adidas, Amazon, Walmart, Nike, and Unilever, as well as countries including Israel and China.
The boycotts are started by a wide range of groups and for a wide range of reasons. For example, the boycott of Amazon
due to tax avoidance was called by Ethical Consumer; the boycott of Chevron Texaco over its involvement with Burma
was called by global civic organization Avaaz; and the boycott of FedEx over its sponsorship of the Washington
Redskins, whose name is racially offensive, was called by the Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of
Alaska.
However, these boycotts just scratch the surface. All over the world there are innumerable products, companies, actors,
movies, TV programs and events being shunned by consumers for various reasons.
Boycotts target companies, and can have limited success

Boycotts are listed as one of Ethical Consumer's four types of ethical buying. Boycotts differ from negative purchasing,
which means the avoidance of products a consumer disapproves of, such as battery eggs or products containing palm
oil. Boycotts target the company as a whole; boycotters will avoid all the products made by a company.

One big example is the Nestle boycott. The company's brands and subsidiaries were all targeted in a bid to change the
company's marketing of baby milk formula across the world. The boycott began in the late 1970s in Switzerland and the
UK and spreading to the US. This boycott is still on-going, and there is an international Nestle-Free Week each year.
Following the boycott, an international code on the marketing of formula milk was drawn up and ratified by members of
the World Health Organization. This should have ended the matter but boycotters continue to claim that the company has
failed to abide by its requirements. The International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN), which consists of over 270
groups in more than 160 countries, publishes reports that detail violations by breastmilk substitutes, feeding bottle, and
teat companies, every three or four years. The latest, published in 2014, found that Nestle continues to violate the
resolution set by the WHO.
Grassroots boycotts follow the same sort of basic narrative. A company or retailer engages in a business practice that
angers consumers, and consumers then refuse to purchase products from that company. These consumers then get like-
minded consumers involved and the boycott grows. The end-game is to negatively affect the company's sales.
However, targeting a company's sales can bring about only fleeting success. The widely-publicized 2003 US boycott of
French wines led to a 26% drop in sales, but had little further effect. The boycott was called by American politicians in
response to France’s “ungrateful” opposition to the war in Iraq. The boycott failed to have a long-term effect on France's
wine industry or its politics.
This shows that boycotts alone often do not have the impact needed to make real changes.
Successful boycotts use a variety of tactics

As explained above, there are countless boycotts occurring at any particular time, and for a range of reasons.
Boycotts which purely attack a brand's sales may not be successful in the long-term, as the boycott of French wine in the
US demonstrates.
However, boycotters may experience more long-term success if a company's brand is attacked, not just its sales. As
discussed above, a company’s reputation is incredibly important to both its employees and its consumers. An issue that
could affect that reputation could affect sales.
Attacking a brand can do long-term damage to a company’s sales

Attacking a company's brand can do far more long-term damage than an attack on its immediate sales.
Brendon Steele, a senior manager of stakeholder engagement at non-profit organization Future 500 says, "Smart
campaigners combine boycotts with carrots such as brand promotion if a company makes a change, and other types of
sticks if it does not, such as targeted protests, social media campaigns, and brandjacking".
In other words, boycotts combined with a collection of carrots and sticks are the most effective. Steele also says that
providing businesses with two paths, one in which the brand loses value because it is associated with a problem, and
one in which the brand can improve its image by becoming a leader, gaining value. This is a clear way in which
boycotting can have a more long-term effect on a company.
The 1990s boycott of Nike, launched after activists accused Nike of using child labor, is still being felt today. Not only
were the short-term hits to the company's profits significant, the brand took a long-term hit. Nike is a brand "dependent
on cutting edge styles", explains Judith Samuelson, executive director of the Aspen Institute's business and society
program. So, "the loss of sales caused immediate, serious harm". However, one of the long-term effects has been
Oxfam's NikeWatch, which uses Nike to draw attention to its workers' rights campaign. This focus has led Oxfam to fuel
wider discussions about business practices, including wages, trade unions, and other workers' rights issues.
A combination of the boycotts effect on Nike's brand as well as continued awareness by Oxfam has led Nike to
significantly improve its practices in order to rehabilitate its reputation. The company is "proactive", says Samuelson, and
it now a sustainability leader.
This shows that boycotts can be successful if a company’s brand is attacked.

Boycotters can target shareholders and stock value
One way to make a company feel the effects of a boycott quickly is to affect its stock value and put pressure on its
leadership. According to Brayden King, professor at Northwestern University's Kellogg school of management, every day
in which a company’s boycott is in the news caused its stock price to decline.
Activists want to keep a company's boycott in the news as long as possible. Not only is it a direct way of attacking the
company, it also leads to a wider conversation about an issue itself. King says, "They often regard these companies as a
visible, public stage that they can use to draw interest. They will change or evolve their tactics to keep the spotlight on
their cause as long as possible."
However, obviously, a company wants to resolve the boycott as quickly as possible. Not only are companies keen to halt
anything that is causing their stock market price to drop, but company leadership also needs to send a message to its
stockholders. A strong leader could even use a controversy to their advantage.
King said, "If an executive can quickly put a controversy to bed, it may even improve his or her standing among
stockholders." On the other hand, "investors may perceive that a CEO's inability to resolve a conflict may be indicative of
a bigger leadership problem at the company."
So, boycotters that can increase the publicity around an issue may force a company into making changes, in order to
protect its stock price and reputation with shareholders.
On-going dialogues lead to long-term business practice improvements

An on-going dialogue is a good way for activists to ensure a company has improved its business practices in the long
term. Often, companies expect that activists will go away when the problem is resolved. However, opening up a dialogue
with a company, particularly a powerful one, is a huge coup for activists.
The on-going dialogue between Nike and Oxfam's NikeWatch shows the impact this can have.
Companies who have been targeted for boycotts often improve business practices in ways that were unrelated to the
original boycott. The reasoning is that these companies have become sensitive to public perception. This is another way
in which Nike's business practices have improved since its boycott. Nike has spearheaded initiatives to a wide range of
environmental and social issues For example, when Greenpace launched its Detox Challenge, which aimed to stop
global brands' suppliers from dumping toxic chemical waste into waterways around the world, in 2011, Nike produced a
plan to go toxic waste-free by 2020 within a matter of weeks. This is a clear example of how successful a boycott can be,
and that a boycott can really affect a company in the long-term.

Figure 6: H&M commits to Greenpeace’s Detox campaign
SOURCE: STYLE AND THE START UP MARKETLINE
According to Rob Harrison, editor of Ethical Consumer, "For a company which 20 years ago was denying that workers'
rights at supplier factories were any of its concern, Nike has come a long way."
One positive knock-on effect of this success is that companies in the same sort of area may feel pressure to improve
their businesses in the same way.
Petitions are quick, easy, and have had some success

Petitions have existed for hundreds of years, and e-petitions have become particularly popular in recent years. There are
numerous websites worldwide where individuals can quickly and easy sign a petition about an issue that they care about.
Many petitions have been successful, particularly when combined with other campaigning efforts, such as campaigning
on social media.
There are a number of petitions platforms

Petitions are hundreds of years old, and have been a form of expression since the Magna Carta was drawn up in 1215.
Modern technology has allowed the online petition to proliferate, and now there are dozens of popular petition-signing
websites. These include Change.org, one of the world's largest petition sites; Care2 Petitions; Avaaz; and 38 Degrees
etc.
Most websites are varied in their focuses, and include petitions on a wide range of topics including animal welfare,
politics, LGBT issues, corporate accountability, human rights, and more.

Many of these are run by nonprofits and social or environmental change organizations; however, there are some run by
governments. In 2011, the British Government decided that 100,000 signatures on its online petitions were enough to
warrant the petition's issue being considered for debate. The US government also has an official petition website called
We the People. We the People was launched under President Barack Obama’s administration in September 2011. The
website was set up so that any petition that gathered at least 100,000 signatures in 30 days would be reviewed, seen by
the relevant policy experts, and would receive an official response. Other countries have these petitions too: for example,
Germany has the Deutscher Bundestag petition, as does the UK.
Petitions can make a difference but they don’t necessarily guarantee success
Petitions can be successful, and there are numerous examples of petitions that have made real changes. However, the
amount of signatures does not always explain success. Some petitions have been signed by millions and have made no
impact, while others have garnered a small amount of signatures and success. Some petitions have had success with
huge corporations such as Coca-Cola.
Going by the numbers of signatures is not reliable

Counting the number of signatures on a petition is not the best way to gauge the success or even the importance of a
particular petition.
Neil Kingsnorth, head of activism at environmental organization Friends of the Earth, said, "It's important not to be drawn
into that numbers game. A 100,000-signature petition doesn't stand up in the way it used to, because some organizations
are able to exceed that substantially when they jump on an issue in the right way."
There is often a huge difference in the numbers signed and the success of the petition.
One of the most-signed petitions in the UK was Change.org's petition to reinstate ex-Top Gear presenter Jeremy
Clarkson to the BBC. He was previously let go from the show after an "unprovoked physical and verbal attack" on a Top
Gear producer. At the time of the petition closing, the petition had garnered 1,065,721 signatures. However, the petition
was not successful, and Clarkson was not reinstated to the BBC.
On the other hand, relatively small petitions can claim success. An online petition to restrict the sale of North American
headdresses at Glastonbury Music Festival gained only 65 signatures but was credited with having successfully
convinced the festival's organizers against the products. However, the issue of cultural appropriation, which prompted the
petition, had been ongoing in the months leading up to the petition, and it's possible that the decision would have been
made regardless.
Despite their proliferation in recent years, particularly in the form of e-petitions, the amount of signatories on single
petitions does not reach the number it has in recent centuries. According to Friends of the Earth, popular petitions were
th th
signed by as many as 1 in 5 men in the 18 and 19 centuries. This is the equivalent of around 10 million signatures in
the UK today, as women are politically empowered as both activists and voters nowadays.
In a way, modern petitions cannot be fairly compared to the petitions of old. Petitions in earlier centuries were tended to
work through local institutions and were presented by MPs during parliamentary sessions. These petitions' connections
to their local town or constituency gave them weight with the local MP. What's more, the young and the poor were often
prevented from signing. The right was reserved for respectable inhabitants whose judgment, crucially, would be less
likely to be questioned by elites. For these reasons, petitions often rocked the establishment because elites feared
revolution.
Today, petitions rarely threaten government figures and don't tend to work through local institutions. Many people live in
democracies, and have ballot papers to pressure MPs with. This means that many government figures can ignore
petitions, and this has led to many petition sites encouraging members to email their MPs, rather than solely focusing on
petitions.

Petitions are often dismissed as ‘slacktivism’
There are now a number of petitions websites, but it is difficult to find comprehensive figures on members or signatures.
However, some websites have information that shows the scale of their reach. For example, Change.org has more than
100 million users in nearly 200 countries as of June 2015. Roughly 1,500 new petitions are launched on the website
every month in the UK. Avaaz.org has nearly 44.5 million members in 194 countries, as of May 2016, with over 288
million actions taken since January 2007.
With this many petitions being started each month, it is easy to dismiss the petition as 'slacktivism', which refers to
actions to bring about social or political change that require minimum effort, commitment, or risk. 'Slacktivism' often refers
to these actions being performed via the internet, as it takes users a matter of minutes to sign a petition.
The media is often keen on reporting them, but petitions are often dismissed as "being the result of bored people clicking
buttons and showing only a fleeting interest in an issue", wrote Rhodri Marsden in the Independent, an online newspaper.
For this reason, activists must go beyond petitions to increase their changes of running a successful campaign.
According to David Babbs, director of campaigning website 38 Degrees, many great campaigns start with a petition, but
few end with one: "They can either be the focal point of an inspiring campaign with a good strategy and lots of different
tactics, or a kind of black hole into which a load of names disappear." With the emergence of so many online petition
websites, the impact of a huge number of signatures on a particular petition has been diluted.
Petitions can target various aspect of a company or product

Many petitions focus on social and political change; however, there have been a number of petitions aimed and
corporations and their leaders, and some have been successful. Only one of Change.org's largest victories falls into this
camp: over 728,000 people signed a petition to have Grand Theft Auto V released on the PC. However, most petitions of
this kind focus on improving the practices of a company or its products, in terms of supply, healthfulness of ingredients,
energy use etc.
One example is the 2012 petition against Ryanair's "sexist" 'Red hot fares and crew' ad campaign. After 11,000 people
signed the petition, the advertising watchdog ruled that "we considered that the ads were likely to cause widespread
offence". This example shows that collective action has worked to stop a potentially damaging advertising campaign.
Figure 7: Part of Ryan Air’s banned Red Hot ad campaign
SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN MARKETLINE

Another corporate advertising victory, this time in the US, was the 2011 petition against Scholastic Inc., one of the world's
largest producers of children's books, to "stop pushing corporate PR in classrooms." According to the petition, the
company's InSchool Marketing division "offers its services to corporations as a curriculum producer for hire". Its clients
have previously included McDonald's, Disney, Cartoon Network, and Nestle.
The company's InSchool division had previously gained notoriety before the petition, when the Campaign for a
Commercial-Free Childhood Boston advocacy group criticized a lesson packet, paid for by the American Coal
Foundation, that talked about the benefits of coal while neglecting to talk about greenhouse gases, mining, or toxic
waste. Scholastic withdrew its coal materials, the first victory in this case for collective action (by the Campaign for a
Commercial-Free Childhood group). This led to the petition was signed by nearly 60,000 people and led to Scholastic
reducing its InSchool marketing program by 40%, with a program sponsored by water filter producer Brita, and a $3m
Microsoft campaign ended completely. This victory benefited from collective action that went beyond petitioning too -
according to the petition website, petition signers also wrote on the company's Facebook wall and called CEO Richard
Robinson.
Petition starters have also targeted business's practices. One petition asking flower company 1-800-Flowers, signed by
nearly 55,000 people, asking for the company to offer Fair Trade certified arrangements. The company agreed, offering a
Fair Trade collection for Mother's Day, as well as publishing information on flower sourcing and creating a supplier's code
of conduct.
Like the Scholastic petition, signers also used other means to persuade the company - signers used Twitter, Facebook
and sent emails as well as signing the petition.
Petitions can affect some of the world's biggest companies

Some of the world’s largest companies have made changes off the back of petitions.
The Coca-Cola Company has had its fair share of petitions against it, including Sum of Us's petition about Coca Cola's
recycling practices, and Change's petition to stop Coca Cola funding anti-GMO labeling campaigns. One 2014 petition
has been successful - the Change petition focused on the removal of brominated vegetable oil (BVO) from its beverages
such as Powerade. In the EU and Japan, BVO is patented as a flame retardant and, as such, was not included in these
products in these places.
The petition against Coca Cola's use of BVO garnered over 50,000 signatures, and followed another successful petition,
started by the same Mississippi teenager, that convinced PepsiCo to remove BVO from its Gatorade products. However,
PepsiCo still uses BVO in its Mountain Dew and Amp products, suggesting that the company did just enough to meet the
petition's demand and nothing more.
The Coca Cola petition was successful, with Coca Cola announcing that it was working to remove BVO from all of its
beverages. However, Coca Cola still claimed that the ingredient is safe and distributed flavors more evenly in fruit-
flavored drinks, such as Powerade. This suggests that the petition's potential effect on consumer perception did enough
to force the company into changing the ingredients in its product, despite the company still believing it to be a safe
product.
This shows the power of perception in consumer purchasing habits, and suggests that petitions that begin to do damage
to this perception may be more likely to witness a victory.
The petition followed other successful US petitions against ingredients in some of the world's largest companies. One
petition helped to convince restaurant chain Chick-fil-A to switch to antibiotics-free chicken, while another convinced
Subway to remove chemicals from its bread.
These numerous and various examples demonstrate the potentially large-scale changes that can be made in huge
corporations.

People sign petitions because they want to make a change and lend support to an
issue
Individuals sign petitions for various reasons. Signers want to make change around an issue, and also want to lend their
support to an issue. Individuals also find that the sense of community and support that comes with signing a petition.
Finally, many individuals are disillusioned with politics and see petitions as a way to make real changes.
Petition signers want to make a change

One of the biggest reasons people sign petitions is in an attempt to enact change. While many petitions fail to make an
impact, there has been huge success with petitions for hundreds of years. Famous historic petitions include the 1674
Women's Petition Against Coffee, the 1880 Petition for Reprieve of Ned Kelly, and the 1891 Women's Suffrage Petition
of Victoria, Australia.
As discussed above, while many petitions fall into obscurity, some can make a difference. This is likely to keep people
signing petitions. However, given the number of petitions that fail to make a change, there are other factors at play in the
signing of petitions.
People want to lend their support to an issue, and find a sense of community in it
Many petitions don't work and influencing a government can be difficult with petitions, so there are other reasons at play.
One of these is that petitions can be important in building a sense of community between campaigners. This can help
mobilize campaigners, increasing support for other action. As discussed above, most campaigns can benefit from going
beyond the petition.
However, a petition can lay a good solid base to support further action.
For example, 38 Degrees' petition to save national forests in England was signed by over half a million people. The
petition was started following a contentious plan for a £250m (approximately $411m) sale of England’s forests. These
signatories then funded a YouGov study, spoke to their MPs, put advertisements in national newspapers, and applied
pressure to an independent panel. This lasted for 27 months, ending with the UK government forced to revoke the sell-off
policy.

Figure 8: 38 Degrees’ infographic exploring Save our Forests’ campaign success
SOURCE: 38 DEGREES MARKETLINE
This campaign may have struggled to get off the ground without the initial support through the petition. Petitions websites
often collect and save the signatories' email address. This is sometimes criticized as a potential invasion of privacy, or
accusations that some petitions are started merely to collect data.
However, this policy allows petitions websites to easily and quickly update people on a campaign, which is central to
websites such as change.org and 38 Degrees.
Signers may be frustrated with the illusion of choice

Many of us feel we have very little power with which to enact change or challenge the powerful.
38 degrees' Babbs says, "For most of us – by which I mean not multi-millionaires – we have relatively little power with
which we can challenge the powerful. But we can pool our resources and act together. And a petition is an incredibly
convenient way in which we can do that."
As discussed above, modern petitions have little to do with the petitions of former times; living in a democracy, our vote is
our way to exert political influence, not petitions.
However, we also live in a time of disillusionment and declining voter turnout. Babbs says, "We see the Westminster
parties as anti-democratic ladders for career politicians," he says, "and it's at these times when the formal democratic
mechanisms feel less responsive that there are more of these outsider approaches: people organising, making demands,
contrasting their needs with those of the elite."

This explains why, at a time when voter turnout is low (for example, national turnout in the US’s 2014 midterm elections
was 36.3%, the lowest since in 72 years); engagement in petitions is high.
To many, petitions feel like a more meaningful and more impactful way to get engaged.

CONCLUSIONS
Collective action is a strong force for change
The existence of collective action is not new. Collective action has been used for centuries to bring about social and
political change, and there are a number of famous historical collective actions that have shaped the world we live in
today. One extremely influential act of collective action was the Civil Rights movement in the US in the 1950s and 1960s.
The notion of collective action is very broad: at its most basic, it can be defined as organized action taken by a group in
order to achieve a common goal. This definition allows us to look at collective action in terms of both consumer and
corporations.
Collective action in terms of corporations means the coalition of a number of businesses, business leaders or investors
which work together to reach a common goal. In terms of consumers, collective action is the grouping of a number of
individuals.
Businesses can engage in collective action in a number of ways. This case study has described a number of business
coalitions and open letters that have worked for companies that share a common goal. Collective action in terms of
business tends to lend itself to some key issues, namely corruption and sustainability/the environment. These issues
benefit from collective action because they are both complicated and are impossible to fix without cooperation.
In the case of energy use, governments around the world have struggled to come together to impose strict energy
guidelines for years. In 2015, after years of cooperation and shared goals between companies and organizations, the
Paris Summit reached an accord. It is possible that this level of cooperation was inspired by the collective action
happening around the world on this topic.
Collective action can bring about many benefits for businesses. These include the strengthening of bargaining power,
mutual support, shared information, and coordinated campaigning, which can be impactful. Companies might also see
the business benefits that come from acting on issues that require collective action, such as environmental issues or
corruption. These companies will be likely to improve their public perception and reputation. A good reputation can be an
extremely powerful sales driver for a company. Ethical practices often attract consumers to a company.
However, there is also evidence of internal benefits. Studies have found that companies that care about and act upon
these issues tend to attract and retain talent. These positive effects are likely to last throughout an employee's life with
the company too, with evidence that happier employees are more productive.
There are various ways in which consumers can join together to form a collective outfit, campaigning for one common
goal. Consumer collective action brings about many of the same benefits as collective action of companies: mutual
support, shared information and talent, coordinated campaigning, and increased bargaining power. Alone, these
consumers will have little to no impact but together, real changes can be made. Examples of consumer collective action
include boycotts and petitions. Boycotts are a simple way of a consumer registering their dislike of a company by simply
refraining from buying any of their products. Petitions are another way in which consumers can come together to form a
more powerful whole. Boycotts and petitions can have limited success. Often, successes are down to coordinated
campaigning and attacking a company’s brand, or supporting the boycott or petition by campaigning in other ways, such
as through social media.
Overall, there is evidence to suggest that collective action, whether by businesses or by individuals, is extremely
powerful, and has the ability to make real changes in our world.

APPENDIX
Sources
Collective Action: Definition, Theory, Logic & Problems, Study.com
http://study.com/academy/lesson/collective-action-definition-theory-logic-problems.html
What every American should know, MPR News, July 7, 2015
http://www.mprnews.org/story/2015/07/07/mpr_news_presents
Capitalism v environment: can greed ever be green?, The Guardian, November 26, 2014
http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2014/nov/26/capitalism-environment-green-greed-slow-life-
symposium-tony-juniper
Annual Report 2014-2015, Fairtrade
http://annualreport.fairtrade.net/en/
Collective Action as a competitive advantage: don’t go alone, Norton Rose Fulbright, March 2015
http://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/knowledge/publications/126812/collective-action-as-a-competitive-advantage
Consumer perceptions of corporate and social responsibility: the CSR halo effect, Insead
http://sites.insead.edu/facultyresearch/research/doc.cfm?did=43990
Millennials want to work for employers committed to values and ethics, The Guardian, May 5, 2015
http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/may/05/millennials-employment-employers-values-ethics-jobs
LRN Ethics Study: Employee engagement, Health Care Compliance Association
http://www.hcca-info.org/Portals/0/PDFs/Resources/library/EmployeeEngagement_LRN.pdf
Talent Report: What Workers Want in 2012, Net Impact
https://www.netimpact.org/research-and-publications/talent-report-what-workers-want-in-2012
The UN Global Compact-Accenture CEO Study on Sustainability 2013, UN Global Compact
https://www.unglobalcompact.org/library/451
Study: Millennials Are Strongest CSR Supporters in U.S., Sustainable Brands, September 24, 2015
http://www.sustainablebrands.com/news_and_views/marketing_comms/mike_hower/study_millennials_are_strongest_cs
r_supporters_us
How Agencies Are Meeting Millennials' Demand for Socially Responsible Marketing. Doing some good is good for
business, Adweek, December 15, 2015
http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/agencies-are-carving-out-niche-socially-responsible-marketing-
168592
The Most Imaginative CSR Ad Campaigns, Forbes, July 9, 2010
http://www.forbes.com/2010/07/09/pepsi-macys-twitter-tide-levis-advertising-responsibility-cmo-network-imaginative-
csr.html
Ban hails Paris climate accord as ‘health insurance policy for the planet’, United Nations, December 14, 2015
http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2015/12/ban-hails-paris-climate-accord-as-health-insurance-policy-for-
the-planet/

Companies’ collective action shapes way forward, Financial Times, June 2, 2015
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/be6f2e64-f7f7-11e4-8bd5-00144feab7de.html?siteedition=uk#axzz434d9Vwkv
Global commission on business and sustainable development, We Mean Business Coalition
http://www.wemeanbusinesscoalition.org/content/global-commission-business-and-sustainable-development
Anti-corruption Collective Action: Why now?, Norton rose Fulbright, Decmber 2014
http://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/knowledge/publications/124538/anti-corruption-collective-action-why-now
Business leaders' letter to the Times in full, ITV, February 23, 2016
http://www.itv.com/news/2016-02-23/business-leaders-letter-to-the-times-in-full/
Impact of a letter from business chiefs can be 'devastating', ITV, February 23, 2016
http://www.itv.com/news/2016-02-23/impact-of-a-letter-from-business-chiefs-can-be-devastating/
Catalyzing business and government action, CDP
https://www.cdp.net/en-US/Pages/About-Us.aspx
RE100, The Climate Group
http://www.theclimategroup.org/what-we-do/programs/re100/
Corporate Action for Putting a Price on Carbon, World Bank
http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/Climate/background-note_corporate-action-carbon-
pricing.pdf
Boycotts List, Ethical Consumer
http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/boycotts/boycottslist.aspx
Why Buy Ethically?, Ethical Consumer
http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/shoppingethically/whybuyethical.aspx
Do boycotts really work?, The Guardian, January 6, 2015
http://www.theguardian.com/vital-signs/2015/jan/06/boycotts-shopping-protests-activists-consumers
How activism forced Nike to change its ethical game, The Guardian, July 6, 2012
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living-blog/2012/jul/06/activism-nike
Jeremy Clarkson sacked by the BBC: official, The Telegraph, March 25, 2015
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/11494513/Jeremy-Clarkson-sacked-by-the-BBC-official.html
Online petitions: Sign here to change the world, The Independent, October 22, 2014
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/features/online-petitions-sign-here-to-change-the-world-
9809308.html

Ask the analyst
We hope that the data and analysis in this brief will help you make informed and imaginative business decisions. If you
have any questions or further requirements, MarketLine's research team may be able to help you. The MarketLine
Research team can be contacted at ReachUs@MarketLine.com.
About MarketLine
At MarketLine, we deliver accurate, up-to-date insights on over 30,000 companies, 300 industries, and 215 countries, as
well as the latest news and financial deal information from within your market and across the globe.
Established in 1997 when the Internet was in its infancy, we recognized the need for a convenient and reliable data
service to help our clients understand local and global markets and the companies operating within them.
In today’s information-rich world, sifting fact from fiction to pick out what’s relevant and what’s up to date has become the
new ‘holy grail’ in business information provision.
Our 170 dedicated research professionals aggregate, analyze, and cross-check facts in line with our strict research
methodology, ensuring a constant stream of new and accurate information is added to MarketLine every day.
Disclaimer
All Rights Reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher, MarketLine.
The facts of this report are believed to be correct at the time of publication but cannot be guaranteed. Please note that
the findings, conclusions and recommendations that MarketLine delivers will be based on information gathered in good
faith from both primary and secondary sources, whose accuracy we are not always in a position to guarantee. As such
MarketLine can accept no liability whatever for actions taken based on any information that may subsequently prove to
be incorrect.

MarketLine | John Carpenter House, John Carpenter Street |
London, United Kingdom, EC4Y 0AN
T: +44(0)203 377 3042, F: +44 (0) 870 134 4371
E: REACHUS@MARKETLINE.COM
WWW.MARKETLINE.COM

Collective Action A Greater Impact by Working Together

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Collective Action A Greater Impact by Working Together

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MarketLine Case Study

Publication Date: June 2016

INSERT REPORT TITLE Product Code/Published 09/2015

© MARKETLINE THIS PROFILE IS A LICENSED PRODUCT AND IS NOT TO BE PHOTOCOPIED Page | 1

INSERT REPORT TITLE Product Code/Published 09/2015

© MARKETLINE THIS PROFILE IS A LICENSED PRODUCT AND IS NOT TO BE PHOTOCOPIED Page | 2

Collective action helps individuals reach a common goal.................................................................................................... 7

Free-market capitalism has contributed to various environmental issues ........................................................................ 8

Market force is a strong factor in enacting environmental and ethical change................................................................. 8

Collective action brings advantages to companies .............................................................................................................. 9

Collective action often has an indirect effect on company revenues ............................................................................... 9

Non-monetary benefits ............................................................................................................................................... 10

Companies can improve their workforce .................................................................................................................... 10

Sustainability requires cooperation to make an impact .............................................................................................. 14

Ineffective climate negotiations by governments ........................................................................................................ 15

Collective action can be a powerful tool to combat corruption ....................................................................................... 17

Companies can reduce corruption in a number of ways ............................................................................................ 18

Companies have joined numerous initiatives to improve energy use ......................................................................... 19

Businesses may also team up with governments ...................................................................................................... 19

Consumer collective action includes boycotts and petitions .............................................................................................. 22

Collective action lends credibility, support, and motivation ............................................................................................ 22

Boycotts are a simple way of registering disapproval .................................................................................................... 22

Boycotts are numerous and target various issues ..................................................................................................... 22

Boycotts target companies, and can have limited success ........................................................................................ 22

Successful boycotts use a variety of tactics ............................................................................................................... 23

INSERT REPORT TITLE Product Code/Published 09/2015

© MARKETLINE THIS PROFILE IS A LICENSED PRODUCT AND IS NOT TO BE PHOTOCOPIED Page | 3

Collective action is a strong force for change ................................................................................................................ 32

Ask the analyst .............................................................................................................................................................. 35

About MarketLine .......................................................................................................................................................... 35

INSERT REPORT TITLE Product Code/Published 09/2015

© MARKETLINE THIS PROFILE IS A LICENSED PRODUCT AND IS NOT TO BE PHOTOCOPIED Page | 4

INSERT REPORT TITLE Product Code/Published 09/2015

© MARKETLINE THIS PROFILE IS A LICENSED PRODUCT AND IS NOT TO BE PHOTOCOPIED Page | 5

Figure 2: Global CO2 emissions, 1990-2010 .................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 4: Corruption word list ............................................................................................................................................ 17

Figure 5: Carbon pricing initiatives' share of global emissions, 1990-2018 ....................................................................... 20

Figure 6: H&M commits to Greenpeace’s Detox campaign ............................................................................................... 25

Figure 7: Part of Ryan Air’s banned Red Hot ad campaign .............................................................................................. 27

INSERT REPORT TITLE Product Code/Published 09/2015

© MARKETLINE THIS PROFILE IS A LICENSED PRODUCT AND IS NOT TO BE PHOTOCOPIED Page | 6

Collective action is used to help a group of individuals reach a

SOURCE: MPRNEWS.ORG MARKETLINE

INSERT REPORT TITLE Product Code/Published 09/2015

© MARKETLINE THIS PROFILE IS A LICENSED PRODUCT AND IS NOT TO BE PHOTOCOPIED Page | 7

Market force is a strong factor in enacting environmental and

INSERT REPORT TITLE Product Code/Published 09/2015

© MARKETLINE THIS PROFILE IS A LICENSED PRODUCT AND IS NOT TO BE PHOTOCOPIED Page | 8

Benefits include access to information, mutual support, and

Collective action often has an indirect effect on company

INSERT REPORT TITLE Product Code/Published 09/2015

© MARKETLINE THIS PROFILE IS A LICENSED PRODUCT AND IS NOT TO BE PHOTOCOPIED Page | 9

Being perceived as an ethical company can help attract talent,

Improved reputation and public perception can positively influence sales

Companies can improve their workforce

INSERT REPORT TITLE Product Code/Published 09/2015

© MARKETLINE THIS PROFILE IS A LICENSED PRODUCT AND IS NOT TO BE PHOTOCOPIED Page | 10

Ethics are more important to younger workers

INSERT REPORT TITLE Product Code/Published 09/2015

© MARKETLINE THIS PROFILE IS A LICENSED PRODUCT AND IS NOT TO BE PHOTOCOPIED Page | 11

Happier employees are more productive

Many consumers care about companies’ ethical activities

INSERT REPORT TITLE Product Code/Published 09/2015