GOING GREEN: MAKING CLIMATE CHANGE HOT

No one seems to care about global warming. The problem, argues Robert Butler, is the dull and nannyish way we are beseeched to "save the planet". Being green could be far sexier than that ...
From INTELLIGENT LIFE magazine, Winter 2008
Here’s how Texas solved the problem of highway litter. They did some research and found that the biggest culprits were 18- to 35-year-old males who drove pick-up trucks and liked sports and country music. The threat of penalty fines didn’t work; nor did appeals to the young men’s sensitive natures about the harm done to local wildlife. So the Department of Transportation ran an advertising campaign that recruited Texas’s sporting and country-music heroes, from Lance Armstrong and Chuck Norris to Willie Nelson and Lyle Lovett. One advert had Mike Scott, the Houston Astros pitcher, pick up some litter and—using his famed split-fingered technique—hurl it at a roadside trash can. Cue massive explosion, followed by the catchphrase, “Don’t mess with Texas”.
As Chip and Dan Heath write in "Made to Stick”, a book about communicating ideas, the ads avoided the negatives of guilt and shame in favour of the positives of pride and group identity. Within a year, roadside litter had dropped by 29%; within five years, by 72%. The campaign had targeted a specific group with a message from “people-like-them” that they were willing to hear. Compare this with the prim admonitory vagueness of “Keep Britain Tidy”.
The worst lesson you could take from this would be to develop a massive global campaign with international celebrities saying, “Don’t mess with the planet!” But it’s possible to learn one thing about climate change from Texas’s highway litter. There is a problem (see IPCC reports and Stern Review) and there is a high level of public indifference. Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger, the authors of “The Death of Environmentalism”, recently wrote that, “Global warming remains a low-priority issue, hovering near the bottom of the Pew Centre for People and the Press’s top 20 priorities. By contrast, public concern about gasoline and energy prices has shifted dramatically.”
It’s no surprise that most people aren’t listening. Some years ago, NOP conducted a survey where they went out into the street and told people that they were going to mention a string of words and as soon as people heard each one they had to say whether their energy levels went up or down. The word “environment” was included in the list. “The horrible, horrible conclusion of this survey”, recalled Jonathan Porritt, “was that for the vast majority of people the mere mention of the word ‘environment’ sent their energy levels plummeting downwards.”
It seems obvious what to do. Drop “environment” and “sustainability” (dull and opaque as they are) and the prefix “eco” and the self-important references to “saving the planet”. And drop the cornering tone of voice too. Talk instead about “beauty”, “health”, “wealth”, “happiness”, “leisure”, “travel”, “friends”, “fun”, “sport”,“individuality”, “imagination”, “sex” and “self-esteem”. Since climate change is driven by per-head consumption, the way to mitigate it is simply to reimagine each of those values in ways that don’t depend on buying too much stuff. In short, choose your favourite colour—and then make it green.
In 2004 two Princeton academics, the physicist Robert Socolow and the ecologist Stephen Pacala, came up with 15 “wedges” for mitigating climate change. There were four separate strategies for efficiency, five for decarbonisation of power, four for decarbonisation of fuel and two strategies for forest and agricultural soils. The persuasive idea was that there’s no silver bullet, but plenty of silver buckshot.
Global warming ranks low in the top 20 priorities because messengers usually address general audiences. Better to break the target audience down into niches and develop strategies for each one. If young white Texan males are an identifiable group, so are golfers, and frequent flyers, hedge-fund managers, single mothers, gays, plumbers, interns, birdwatchers, Hispanics, hairdressers, teenagers, estate agents, lawyers, analysts, dentists, scouts, shop assistants, traffic wardens and—yes—football managers. (One delegate at a recent climate-change conference, hosted by Al Gore, was Sir Alex Ferguson.) Each of these groups will listen to people-like-them tell stories that acknowledge their own values and identity.
This is beginning to happen. The New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman has said the purpose of his new book “Hot, Flat and Crowded” is to change the meaning of green: “To redefine it as geo-political, geo-strategic, geo-economic, patriotic. Green is the new red, white and blue.” Pour money into scary advertising campaigns and you depress and disempower people. Spend that money on increasing the options that are available for leading low-carbon lives that are attractive and affordable. A climate-change minister needs to fight for playing fields, allotments and tougher laws to protect cyclists along with the teaching of music, dance, cooking and gardening in schools. It may well do more to have a copy of Jamie Oliver’s “Ministry of Food” in the school library than Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth”. Anything, in effect, that increases participation and self-sufficiency. As the architect Buckminster Fuller said, you don’t change things by fighting the existing reality, you change things by building a new model that makes the existing one obsolete.
Only there isn’t much time. “If there’s no action before 2012,” says Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Nobel peace-prize-winning IPCC, “that’s too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment.” That’s also the year of the London Olympics and the climax of the cultural Olympiad—a chance for the worlds of sport and the arts to imagine a future where people enjoy the highest human achievements without any sense of guilt or shame.
Picture credit: Steven Fernandez, carbonNYC (both via Flickr), Sam Barker
(Robert Butler is an ex-theatre critic of the Independent on Sunday. He blogs on the arts and the environment at the ashden directory. His last Going Green column was about the zero-carbon city of the future.)


Delicious
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Comments
Going Green: Making climate change hot
January 6, 2009 - 13:11 — Biofriendlyblog (not verified)Nice post and so very true!
Broad strokes don't always get the intended results that targeted marketing can achieve.
paradigm shift through education
January 7, 2009 - 19:26 — David Strand (not verified)As an advertising guy I can relate to the importance of getting through with meaningful, personalized communication as opposed to the hammer of fear and threats. This is an important time to move "green" beyond a fad. Fads fade, and this one has to seep into our popular thinking. I believe the local level is prime territory for true change to be nurtured, and education is key. In my community I'm trying to combine modern education with economic development. The thread of this idea is here: www.newburyportu.com . And there's more to come as we've recently received a grant from our city to take another step. Join the group if you are keen.
Here's to the green, or not-so-green, but sexy future of my neighborhood.
Dave Strand
Newburyport, Mass.
Only one part of the story
January 20, 2009 - 12:16 — Visitor (not verified)I think there is a step that is missing in this whole story. There doesn't seem to be the options for people that want to make the changes. I would like to recycle, but the facilities are not available to me. I would like to drive a more effiecient vehicle, but they are more expensive and small for a family of five with a dog. With recent stories of recycled glass being dumped into the landfill because there isn't any money in recycling it. Or, the recycling companies can't make any profit out of collecting paper and cardboard so they aren't picking it up any more. THe last one I heard was of the compact flourecent lightbulbs that are harmful to people because of the energy levels they emit.
I think some of these issues need to be resolved before people have the option of "Going Green". If it is too hard, hauling recycleables more than an hour to the nearest depot, people won't do it. If it is too costly people won't do it. And if you make them feel bad about their choices, people won't do it. I think this article makes a great point and a great movement can follow this, but soem of the other parts need to be adressed as well.
habits take time
February 18, 2009 - 22:12 — office-girl (not verified)On the individual level it's really a matter of forming environmentally friendly habits: pick up your trash, recycle, turn off lights/computers/aircon, buy items with less packaging, take your own bags to the store, walk - don't drive - to your neighbor's house, and so on. The problem is that habits take time to form even after the individual decides they want to form them.
So if we honestly only have two years left to make a difference then something needs to be done to get people on the road to deciding to form these habits now.
The individual can't close down nuclear power stations or stop the pumping of toxic chemical waste into rivers so the average person tends to ignore issues they have no power over. And most people are honestly either too busy or lazy to be willing to go out of their way to learn/do anything new or that costs them anything right now.
I agree that it needs to be a "positive movement" and I also agree with the commenter above that eco-friendly practices need to be encouraged at the wallet level. More local governments need to provide grants and incentives for households who want to install solar panels or buy electric cars, for those who car share or choose to bike to work. If there is a real tangible benefit NOW to going green people will be more likely to take the step in the right direction.
Great campaign
February 26, 2009 - 11:53 — Traveller (not verified)A very good idea to see it as an advertising campaign, companies spend vast amounts of money and brain power to target their audiences, so using the same marketing tactics to highlight global warming and what it means to each and every one of us could be very successful.
Of course its in all our interests to keep our planet clean, but that's sometimes easier said than done.
Going green is sexy
April 19, 2009 - 18:24 — Visitor (not verified)I think that as time passes contrary to the article author going green will become sexy. Although he may be correct that going green is currently not sexy. A sexy green forum is http://www.greenforum.com where a lot of green talk is occurring especially relation to going green.
I agree wholeheartedly with
October 23, 2009 - 13:39 — Office Freak (not verified)I agree wholeheartedly with this article. Environmentalism breeds nothing but indifference in the US, however since GW Bush has left the White house there has been a shift in attitudes in the US.
Why would US citizens have been concerned about climate change when the government wasn't taking it seriously.
Hopefully at the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December global governments can move forward on the environment and secure some real progress on cutting emissions.
I agree wholeheartedly with
October 23, 2009 - 13:40 — Office Freak (not verified)I agree wholeheartedly with this article. Environmentalism breeds nothing but indifference in the US, however since GW Bush has left the White house there has been a shift in attitudes in the US.
Why would US citizens have been concerned about climate change when the government wasn't taking it seriously.
Hopefully at the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December global governments can move forward on the environment and secure some real progress on cutting emissions.
yeah i also agree on what
November 23, 2009 - 21:47 — replacement car parts (not verified)yeah i also agree on what office-girl said.. the car industry should build and develop more electric/hybrid vehicles to have a better environment..
Post new comment