Starbucks' Greenwashing

Abstract

This paper’s argument is that Starbucks’ beans are not so green. It argues that Starbucks is not really going green because it has some problems of quality. There are four reasons for this argument. The first is that Starbucks is not doing enough compared to what they claim, and the second is that the ingredients of Starbucks coffees do not conform to the OCA’s (the Organic Consumers Association) standard. The third reason is that the milk of Starbucks coffee has problems. Finally, the Starbucks’ workers’ income is illegally low.

Starbucks’ greenwashing

I drink Starbucks coffee almost every day; however, I heard some news that stated that Starbucks’ coffee is not good for our health. Therefore I was looking for some information about Starbucks’ quality problems on the Internet. Starbucks’ products issue is, “it has done little to keep genetically engineered ingredients out of its foods and beverages or to promote Fair Trade, shade-grown coffee” (Deen, 2002, para. 4). “Coffee plants naturally grow in the shade, under the cover of a diverse biosphere. But unless your coffee says ‘shade grown’ on the bag, it was probably grown in a field for easier harvesting and greater profit margins” (Deen, 2002, para. 5). Also, the milk has a problem; some scientist found the cows that Starbucks uses milk from which have been injected with rBGH. Then the milk contains bacteria, antibiotics and pus (Deen, 2002, para. 8). In these few days, Starbucks wants to win back customers, so they are providing 8 oz. of coffee for a dollar. So some high class people discuss whether Starbucks’ quality problems are coming again. Because millions of people in the world drink Starbucks’ coffee, if Starbucks’ coffee quality cannot live up to a standard, people’s health will not be guaranteed.

In “Greenwash” the author states “Greenwash (a portmanteau of green and whitewash) is a term that is used to describe the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practices of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service. The term Green sheen has similarly been used to describe organizations which attempt to appear that they are adopting practices beneficial to the environment” (n.d. para. 1). It is greenwashing when a company or organization spends more time and money trying to be “green” by advertising and marketing than by minimizing environmental impact. In “What is Greenwashing, and Why is it a Problem? “ the author states that “Greenwashing could result in consumer and regulator complacency. If one corporation in a particular company gets away with greenwashing, other corporations will follow suit, thereby creating an industry-wide illusion of environmental sustainability, rather than sustainability itself” (1992, para. 4). It’s whitewashing, but with a green brush. In “A brief history of greenwash” the author says that “This initial wave of greenwash was labeled by former Madison Avenue advertising executive Jerry Mander and others at the time as “ecopornography” Karliner, (2001, para. 2). These days, “Going green” has become a standard practice for Starbucks. However, is it really green enough? Starbucks makes environmental marketing claims that can be misleading. Therefore, we need some statement to solve these problems.

First, some related associations need to supervise the working process and the option of material. An association can cooperate with some professional testing organization in order to prove whether Starbucks’ material is green. They also need to test Starbucks’ products before they leave the factory. In “Testing product for quality” the author introduces that “ConsumerLab.com is a private testing organization that licenses a quality seal for products that pass testing. Some other initiatives are done by trade associations like the National Nutritional Foods Association (NNFA) and American Botanical Council (ABC)” (1999, para. 2). That would restrict the company so that they cannot choose the cheapest material which cannot guarantee the products’ quality. For example, if Starbucks selects the low-priced material these related associations must interfere with the working process so that Starbucks cannot produce the low quality goods. Therefore, once these related organization influences Starbucks’ working process and the option of material, their coffee’s quality would be much better than before.

Second, the government should make a new law in order to control the products’ quality. In “Product Quality Law of the People's Republic of China–2000” they write that “For the purposes of strengthening product quality supervision and control, raising the product quality level, clarifying the liability for product quality, protecting the legitimate rights and interests of consumers and safeguarding the socio-economic order, this Law is formulated” (2000, para. 1). After that the government should set up some pointed punishments that would limit the producer in order to improve the drinking products’ quality. In “Product Quality Law of the People's Republic of China–2000” they write that “Anyone who produces or sells a product failing to comply with the relevant national or sector standards for safeguarding the health and personal or property safety is ordered to stop the production or sale, is confiscated of the product illegally produced or sold and concurrently is imposed a fine equivalent to but less than three times of the value amount of the product illegally produced or sold; is confiscated of his illegal gains concurrently if any; is revoked his business license if the circumstance is serious; and is demanded for criminal responsibility according to law if a crime is constituted” (2000, para. 49). For example, once the government built a new law which stated that if a company produces one product that whose quality cannot be guaranteed, they would be punished by the government and they would be more heavily taxed. Therefore, to punish Starbucks severely would be good for Starbucks’ credit and their customers’ health.

Finally, Starbucks should avoid the battle of business. In “Taking your eye off the competition” the author says that “During the busy start-up phase it can be easy to forget to set aside enough time to monitor the competition. However, it's essential that you are ready to respond to competitors in your market place and to new development” (n.d. para. 1). The commercial battle can influence the quality of products. The reorganization of quality and taste is basically what they are supposed to do. For example, if Starbucks wants to be the winner of this battle, they probably should reduce the price. Sometimes low price leads to poor quality. In “Are Low-Price, Poor-Quality Competitors Killing Your Business?” the author said that “The authors' comments echo sentiments occasionally expressed to us by other woodworkers who lost out on bids they deemed way too low to be profitable. The epitome of disgust vented our way has come from representatives of high-end architectural woodworking firms that were riled beyond belief after losing a high-profile job to a low-balling, snake-in-the-grass garage shop“ (2000, para. 3). So, some passive competition should be avoided.

Opponents of Starbucks say it is not really going green; that is because it has some problems of quality, Starbucks has to compete with its competitors to win back customers. However, this argument does not give a complete side of what Starbucks did. In fact, these benefits were well received by consumers and these methods should be provided to the customers in order to win the commercial competition. The truth is that the price reduction at Starbucks, even for one item, could make the customers happy and could be a positive activity. Jackie Gehlem, who said she visits Starbucks about twice a month, said, “It sounds good to me because I think Starbucks is too expensive” (Harris, 2008, para. 18). Furthermore, after Starbucks provides a low price, discount, and coupon, they can gain credit from customers. Credit is a necessary factor for a company; it can influence the image of a company so that Starbucks can win back their customers. Harris (2008), writes that after Starbucks brought Chairman Howard Schultz back, Starbucks shares jumped; this shows that the Chairman makes good decisions for his company. To conclude, providing the $1 cup of coffee and free refills are beneficial for both the consumers and Starbucks’ company.

In conclusion, nowadays the most important thing is human healthy; we need the green foods or drinks. Starbucks is the biggest company at producing coffee; we can not make it closed because coffee is a part of our daily life. So the only thing we have to do is make it better. Once Starbucks coffee becomes green, the other companies’ coffee will be as good as Starbucks, because it is the leader. Therefore, Starbucks must solve the quality problem in order to win back consumers. So, the Starbucks coffee’s working process and the option of material should be supervised by some related organization. Punishment should be given to the Starbucks by OCA (the Organic Consumers Association) or any interrelated organization. The reorganization of quality and taste is basically what they should do.

Reference

Christianson, R. (2000, May). Are Low-Price, Poor-Quality Competitors Killing Your Business? BNET. Retrieved April 25, 2008, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3156/is_6_105/ai_n25029417

Deen, S. (2002, March 25). USA: Starbucks Beans Not So Green. Valley Advocate. Retrieved Mar. 24, 2008, from http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=2170&printsafe=1

Davis. (1992). What is Greenwashing, and Why is it a Problem. Business Ethics. Retrieved April 25, 2008, from http://www.businessethics.ca/greenwashing/

Greenwash. (n.d.). Wikipedia. Retrieved April 25, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwash

Harris, C. (2008, Jan 24). Starbucks–for a buck. SEATTLEPI. Retrieved Mar 28, 2008, from http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/348521_sbux24.html

Karliner, J. (,2001, March 22). A Brief History of Greenwash. CorpWatch. Retrieved April 25, 2008, from http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=243

Product Quality Law of the People's Republic of China. (2000). LEHMAN. Retrieved April 25, 2008, from http://www.lehmanlaw.com/resource-centre/laws-and-regulations/consumer-protection/product-quality-law-of-the-peoples-republic-of-china-2000.html

Sage. (2007). Greenwashing. Business Ethics. Retrieved April 25, 2008, from http://www.businessethics.ca/greenwashing/

Testing products for quality. (1999, Jan). supplement quality. Retrieved April 25, 2008, from http://www.supplementquality.com/stdregs/testing.html