Marketing and Communicating Sustainability

  • Helen Lewis
  • Helaine Stanley


Sustainable development creates new challenges for marketing and communication strategies. This is particularly so for packaging because consumers tend not to be aware of the potential environmental benefits of packaging other than those relating to disposal (recyclability, reuse, biodegradability and over-packaging). Optimal life cycle-based solutions may be counter-intuitive to consumer perceptions. However, in addition to products and brands, individuals and businesses ‘buy’ corporate philosophies and policies. While developing its strategy, a business should therefore determine how to market and position itself, its brands and its products from the perspective of sustainability. Packaging has a major role in this positioning, which affects both packaging and label design. This chapter provides an overview of research conducted on consumer attitudes and purchasing behaviour relating to ‘green’ products in general and packaging in particular. On balance, consumers have negative rather than positive associations with packaging. Different approaches can be taken to packaging design and communication within a business’s broader marketing strategy. These are provided together with an introduction to the use of environmental claims and labels often associated with packaging.


Purchasing Behaviour Federal Trade Commission Forest Stewardship Council Sustainable Development Goal Green Consumer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Polonsky MJ, Rosenberger PJ (2001) Re-evaluating green marketing—a sophisticated strategic marketing approach, Business Horizons 44(5): 21–30Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Belz FM, Peattie K (2009) Sustainability marketing: a global perspective. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Charter M, Peattie K, Ottman J, Polonsky M (2002) Marketing and sustainability. Centre for business relationships, accountability, sustainability and society (BRASS) in association with the Centre for Sustainable DesignGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cambridge Dictionaries Online (2010) Cambridge advanced learner’s dictionary (cited 9 September 2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Deloitte (2009) Finding the green in today’s shoppers: sustainability trends and new shopper insights. Report to the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ipsos-Mori (2000) Ethical consumerism research. (cited 14 February 2010)
  7. 7.
    Spears M, Larson A (1992) Mobil Chemical Corporation. World Resources InstituteGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    The Co-operative Bank (2008) The ethical consumerism report 2008. Manchester, UKGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stengel R (2009) The responsibility revolution, Time, pp 24–27Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ray P, Anderson SR (2000) The cultural creatives: how 50 million people are changing the world. Harmony, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    United Nations Environment Program (2005) UN Global Compact and Utopies. Talk the walk. United Nations Environment Program, ParisGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Worldwide Fund for Nature (2008) Weathercocks and signposts: the environment movement at a crossroads. Godalming, Surrey, UKGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Business in the Community—Ireland (2003) The first-ever survey of consumer attitudes in Ireland towards corporate responsibility. Dublin, IrelandGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    D’Souza C, Taghian M (2005) Green advertising effects on attitude and choice of advertising themes. Asia Pac J Mark Logist 17(3):51–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pegram Walters associates (1993) Consumer attitudes to packaging: summary report of findings. Report prepared for INCPEN, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pegram Walters associates (1997) Project packaging II: report of findings. Report prepared for INCPEN, LondonGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    IPSOS Mori (2008) Public attitudes to packaging 2008. Report to INCPEN and Valpak, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    New Zealand Paperboard Packaging Association (2005) Code of practice for the New Zealand paperboard packaging industry, Lower Hutt, NZGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    van Dam Y (1996) Environmental assessment of packaging: the consumer point of view. Environ Manag 20(5):607–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    New Zealand Paperboard Packaging Association (2005) Attitudes to packaging, recycling and the environment, Lower Hutt, NZGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Taverner Research Company (2004) Consumer demand for environmental packaging. Report to the NSW Jurisdictional Recycling Group, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nielsen (2008) Packaging and the environment: a global Nielsen report, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hewlett Packard (2010) HP standard 011 general specification for the environmentGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hewlett Packard (2010) Global citizenship strategy.
  25. 25.
    Murphy M (2010) Proving cred is worth the effort. In: The Sydney Morning Herald, Fairfax, Sydney p 5Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    ISO (1999) ISO 14021:1999, Environmental labels and declarations—type II environmental labelling—principles and procedures. International Standards Organization (ISO), GenevaGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    DEFRA (2003) Green claims—practical guidance. (cited 12 July 2009)
  28. 28.
    Federal Trade Commission (1998) Part 260—guides for the use of environmental marketing claims, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    ACCC (2008) Green marketing and the Trade Practices Act. (cited 8 August 2008)
  30. 30.
    Australian Consumers Association (2008) Supermarket green watch, Choice, pp 12–16Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    TerraChoice Environmental Marketing (2007) The ‘six sins of greenwashing’: a study of environmental claims in North American consumer marketsGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Federal Trade Commission (2010) Green guides: summary of proposals. (cited 12 February 2011)
  33. 33.
    DEFRA (2011) Green claims guidelines: how to make a good environmental claim. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, LondonGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kleiner A (1991) What does it mean to be green? Harvard Business Review, pp 38–47 (July–August)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Landor (2010) Cascade green: greening an authentic brew. (cited 27 December 2010)
  36. 36.
    Atkins G (2001) Why green marketing fails, Asian Correspondent, 31 October 2001. Accessed 26 Dec 2010
  37. 37.
    Boase F (2008) Walking the talk—it ain't easy being green. The Leader, November, Australian Business SchoolGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lee J (2008) ACCC to probe green beer claims. The Age, 25 August 2008. Accessed 12 Feb 2011
  39. 39.
    Foster’s (2008) Cascade launches 100% carbon offset beer. Media release, 4 March 2008 (cited 26 December 2010)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Freeman RE (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Pitman, BostonGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Elkington J, Knight P (1992) The green business guide. Victor Gollancz, LondonGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Capatosta T, Langert R, Magnuson K, Sprehe D, Denison R, Prince J, Ruston J (1991) McDonald’s Corporation—Environmental Defense Waste Reduction Taskforce. McDonald’s Corporation and Environmental Defense, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Oleck J (1992) The great clamshell debate. Restaur Bus 91(16):68–70Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Nude Food Movers (2011). (18 March 2011)
  45. 45.
    Peattie K (1999) Trappings versus substance in the greening of marketing planning. J Strateg Mark 7:131–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hartmann P, Ibanez VA, Sainz FJF (2005) Green branding effects on attitude: functional versus emotional positioning strategies. Mark Intell Plan 23(1):9–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Visy Industries (2010) Visy environment. (cited 2 January 2011)
  48. 48.
    Visy Industries (2009) National Packaging Covenant Report 2009, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Patagonia (2007) Baselayer packaging: the good and the bad. (cited 19 March 2011)
  50. 50.
    Verbraucher Initiative (2011) Label online. Undated. (cited 18 March 2011)
  51. 51.
    Pocock R, Stone I, Clive H, Smith R, Jesson J, Wilszak S (2007) Barriers to recycling at home. WRAP, BunburyGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Society of the Plastics Industry (2008) Letter from the SPI to the Federal Trade Commission: green packaging workshop, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    OPRL Retailers and brand owners FAQ. Undated. (cited 29 January 2010)
  54. 54.
    APME, Report on polymer identification codes for packaging. Undated, Plastics EuropeGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    ASTM (2008) ASTM international working to adapt SPI resin identification codes as new standard. Media release, July 2008. (cited 27 January 2010)
  56. 56.
    Society of the Plastics Industry (2009) SPI resin identification code—guide to correct use. (cited 27 January 2010)
  57. 57.
    PACIA (2003) Plastics identification code. Plastics and Chemicals Industries Association (PACIA), MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    WRAP (2007) Consumer attitudes to biopolymers. (cited 17 February 2009)
  59. 59.
    Federal Trade Commission (2009) FTC announces actions against Kmart, Tender and Dyna-E alleging deceptive ‘biodegradable’ claims. Press release, 9 June 2009. (cited 1 February 2010)
  60. 60.
    DEFRA (2004) Reducing litter caused by 'food on the go': a voluntary code of practice for local partnerships. Accessed 9 Oct 2009
  61. 61.
    CFPA (2010) Chlorine Free Products Association (CFPA). Undated. (cited 7 January 2010)
  62. 62.
    FSC (2010) The FSC principles and criteria for responsible forest management. Undated. (cited 7 January 2010)
  63. 63.
    Program for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (2010) National standards (cited 12 January 2010)Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Program for Endorsement of Forest Certification (2007) PEFC council information register. (cited 24 December 2010)
  65. 65.
    The Carbon Trust (2008) Working with PepsiCo and Walkers: product carbon footprinting in practice, LondonGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Ellis H (2007) Food matters, 3 November. (cited 4 November 2007)
  67. 67.
    AEA Technology (2005) The validity of food miles as an indicator of sustainability, July 2005. (cited 5 November 2007)
  68. 68.
    Environmental Leader (2007) Sun Chips adds Green-e label to package. 14 September 2007. Accessed 15 Feb 2010

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for DesignRMIT UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations