When you go to the store, many products are covered with green leaves or various certificates signaling that this product should be somehow friendly to nature or the climate. This is not done by chance, because consumers care about the sustainability of their products. According to the results of a survey conducted this year by research company RAIT, 41 percent Lithuanian residents actively boycotted the products or services of companies that carry out unsustainable activities, and even 76 percent. Lithuanian residents expect companies to be open about their environmental impact, supply chain practices and overall corporate responsibility. So far, unfortunately, there is no real product control for green claims.
The same green statements, only in the form of an index, have moved to the digital space. The most visited company data portal rekvizitai.lt published by companies sustainability index. The initiative is welcome if it shows the real situation and does not play the role of eco-bluff. But that raises a number of questions, particularly in light of recent awards for the index, which have honored companies with seemingly little to do with the environment or even a very significant contribution to climate change.
A maximum estimate based on that sustainability index, collected by the Coca-Cola HBC Lietuva company, which is part of the global Coca-Cola corporation. The same one, which is annually announced by the environmental movement “Break Free From Plastic” as the world’s biggest single-use plastic packaging polluter. It is worth noting that, for example, reusable plastic Coca-Cola beverage bottles are also used in Germany, but there are none in Lithuania. Does the Coca-Cola company think that Lithuanians do not deserve much more sustainable, reusable plastic packaging? The thought that sustainability the compilers of the index do not associate reuse with sustainability.
Another, one of the highest ratings according to sustainability companies that collected the index – “KN Energies”, formerly known as “Klaipėdos nafta”. It is difficult to understand how a company providing handling and storage services for oil and its products can be considered sustainable. More than 75 percent is attributed to the use of fossil fuels, including oil and its products. of all greenhouse gases from human activities.
How could such an index that rewards environmentally unsustainable companies come about? Looking at the structure of the index, environmental scores are awarded for standards and reporting, incorporating sustainability into business processes, sustainability-related activities such as employee education and third-party sustainability awards. Even the most polluting companies can and do provide sustainability reports, often in a very loose form, recording what is useful and forgetting what is not.
The situation is very similar with the inclusion of the aspect of sustainability in the operational processes – there are also such corporations that already consider sorting paper in the office and informing employees about it as a huge achievement. Finally, we have a number of international awards that are organized by the same companies with a very loose interpretation of sustainability.
Such sustainability indices not only mislead consumers but also show that the business community and its so-called sustainability for specialists, this interpretation of sustainability is acceptable. Maybe this is because becoming a sustainability specialist takes several weeks of courses, receiving training from the same specialists who work in the mentioned corporation? And practice shows that the absolute majority of them then work not with the transformation of production or services into more sustainable ones, but simply with marketing.
How could the situation be corrected? Strengthen institutions, such as the state consumer rights protection service, so that in the future it actively responds to such things in the public space, educates and, if there is a basis, punishes. In advanced countries such as Denmark, it is even required to provide evidence when publishing sustainability claims, and failure to do so can result in dissuasive fines of up to 4%. annual turnover. Until this is done in Lithuania, I invite users to be vigilant – the cases of green brainwashing will only increase.
#Domantas #Tracevičius #deceive #consumers #sustainability #indices #Business
2024-09-23 05:55:45
