Green Brands Forum 2010 promotes Greenwash
We are very disappointed to hear that the biggest Green brand event in Australia is promoting Greenwashing as a legitimate approach, pushing back Australian green marketing back to the dark Ages.
The Forum includes Paul Allen in the “cream of Australia’s crop of sustainable brand leaders”
Paul Allen is from Australian paper, and he will be promoting the ENVI paper brand. This paper is made from Australian Native Forests and is marketed as “greenhouse friendly”
Please read more about the Envi paper greenwash, with referenced facts on Australia’s paper destruction of our forests.
[Bindarri apologises for the exaggerated tone of this (unedited) post.. yes it was over the top, however we still take our original position that The Forum is misguided in presenting Australian Paper as a leader - ED]
5 Responses to Green Brands Forum 2010 promotes Greenwash
Leave a Reply
We are very disappointed with Bindarris unprovoked attack on 3Pillars Network who are a group of committed people working hard to promote sustainable practices in business.
3Pillars does not and did not promote Paul Allen or Austrlain Paper as being a “green leader” but invited them to participate as an organisation that have made strides forward in this area and seek to promote this using one of their product lines.
Bindarri has a one-eyed and somewhat ignorant view of the issues around paper production and sustainable forestry, and puts itself out to be Australia’s expert ion this field. We disagree.
Bindarris is acting as an obstacle to progress in this area.
“In its third year, the Green Brands Forum 2010 brings together the cream of Australia’s crop of sustainable brand leaders to explore and share their strategic wisdom in a collaborative and practical environment. ”
The above quote is from your marketing materials. Under the list of speakers which are the “cream of Australia’s crop of sustainable brand leaders” you list Paul Allen.
Currently, Australian paper is linked to logging in the Central Highland, Strzelecki Rainforest Reserve and the Baw Baw National Park, which has been recognised by several key scientific studies as one of Victoria’s most biologically significant sites and one of its most important water catchments
I am disappointed that an organisation that is putting themselves out as leader in green Marketing fail to understand even the basic concepts of marketing (credibility by association) and continue to deny any responsibility for your framing of Australian paper in this way.
If you doubt our expertise in the area of paper marketing, please highlight what parts of our feature on Envi paper are incorrect. I would argue that your organisation lacks expertise in this area as you a naive enough to promote Australian Paper as a good example of supply chain management, when clearly they are manipulating the process to deceive consumers.
I am disappointed that we have been debating such a simple and basic issue for so long with the Green Marketing Forum.
I would be more interested in debating more complex areas (which don’t have simple answers) such as the role of large advertising agencies who take money from polluters who start up green marking services or the ISO marketing guidelines that prohibit the use of unsubstantiable words such as “green” and “sustainable”, or how all speakers at the forum came from a corporate, government or profit based background.
Not one NGO was invited to participate in this forum. I see this as “one-eyed and somewhat ignorant view of the issues”. Unfortunately the green marketing forum is focusing narrowly on corporate ideology and leaving little room for any advanced debate around the complexities of this area.
Lets work together and allow us to assit you to make your Forum have more substance, credibility and value for your audience. We are happy to review your speakers and help you source speakers from other areas outside of your sphere. We are happy to work probono to help you.
It would add huge value to organisations that want to learn about green marketing to also hear from organisations that run boycot campaigns and consumer awareness around brands and product impacts.
We are very proud that we are acting as an obstacle to the progress of the promotion of Australia Papers logging of valuable forests as green and sustainable.
see the ENVI Paper article
see my submission to the green marketing blog on greenwashing
3Pillars is proud of its contribution to more sustainable business practices.
The reason we suggested the Bindarri approach is “one-eyed and naive” is as follows:
1. Definition of ‘sustainability”. For us “sustainability” is a journey, not a defined state. In our view it is misleading to characterise organisations as “sustainable” or “unsustainable”; rather you can be engaged on the journey (as Australian Paper are, in our view)
2. Engagement. 3Pillars Network seeks to engage business, government and the community on this journey, and to create a fuller understanding of the tenets of sustainability. Economic, social and environmental. We create forums to engage people and organisations.
3. Greenwash. Which large companies are not guilty of greenwash, or some broad definition of it? How about Bindarri and its clients – have you ever been guilty of greenwash? Is your supply chain completely clean? Why pick only on AP when there are so many others who are guilty?
4. Your role as a design company. Fair enough that you are passionate people, but I’m afraid you are not the arbiters of what is acceptable and what is not, and nor should you be. The Vic government has a definition of sustainable forestry, and whilst we accept there are some serious problems with that, at least they have some claim to be entitled to decide what is “sustainable forestry” and what is not.
5. More importantly, the role of the ACCC. We defer to the ACCC judgements about green marketing. They have been active in this area and we have supported their investigations where we can, not least by organising our Green Marketing forums and inviting them along. Does Bindarri not accept the ACCC’s role in this area?
6. Our promotion of the event in question. I agree that the quote you keep mentioning (which appeared on our marketing material – “crean of Australia’s crop” etc) was too overtly promotional and should not have been used as it was. We accept your criticism of this language. Was there any other part of our promotion you didn’t like? Does Bindarri agree it is ok to have a Green Marketing Forum at all, given that most companies are or have been guilty of greenwash?
As far can see, 3 Pillars Network is an independent organisation promoting open debate and discussion on issues of sustainability….What’s wrong with that ?
1. I agree that “sustainability” is a journey, not a defined state.
Australian paper are not on a journey. There business model is coverting native forests to paper. Australian Paper have never announced they are phasing out logging of important forests. They have no plans to.
All of their “sustainability” measures have been understaken to allow them to continue their business model without changing their fundermental environmental impacts.
They are “taking the piss” out of evey company and organisation who is working towards greening business
When you ask why the Australain people are so cynical about green maketing. This is why. This apathy holds back all the companies trying to do the right thing (even if tehy get it wrong)
Australian paper, ACCC’s failure to act and other organisations who ligitimise this approach contribute to this apathy which counters all the great work 3 pillars are doing.
2. I fully commend and support 3 Pillars ideology, approach and great work in this area. I only have one exception to this, which we are now discussing.
To show how much I support this event, here is a proposal I sent to Cheryl from the 3 Pillars on the 28/08/09 with the aim of expanding and supporting the event.
I am regretful that this issue has blownup and is reflecting badly on 3 Pllars. However the future of the TRUST in green marketing depends on the leaders getting these thing right and rejecting companies who are seeking to decredit all companies doing the right thing for their personal gain.
3. There are many “grey” areas of green marketing. Bindarri is not a commerical entity but for my commercial services we do take this issue very seriously and look for help when not sure.. But yes, we can miss things and are likely to have made mistakes.
We are not critising Australian Paper for trying to do the right thing and making some mistakes. Their fundimental aim here is to decieve. Australian paper are one of Australia’s leaders in understanding these issues… they are smart, well articulated and they are not making a mistake here… this is a very sophisicated strategy to use the green marketing trend to hide their core business – logging forests
4. Bindarri is not a company. We are modeled off Indymedia.
The Victoria Goverments relationship with the logging and paper companies has a long history of corruption as well as the suppression of scientific evidence and environmental reports. We reject totaly this defininition and how it was formulated.
5. We are dumbfounded on ACCC’s failure to act on this issue. I have not done any resarch here so I cannot comment on ACCC role. We would appraciate any information you have on ACCC;s position regarding this issue.
6. I hope i answered the question about the forum earlier and why we are open to companies making mistakes on their journey but are critical of Australian Paper.
I dont have the problem with the quote at all or any of your materials. The issue is that it was used to Describe Australian Paper.