Change is difficult but is it precisely what we need if we are to succeed in addressing the climate crisis, ecological degradation and biodiversity loss. Superficial changes will not suffice, what we need is a cultural change and shame can play an important role. Marketers use emotional appeals to sell us things we do not need, so it is reasonable to assume that the same appeals could, be used to encourage us to stop buying things we do not need.
A recent study asked if shame could affect more responsible buying decisions. The researchers concluded that low-intensity guilt and shame-appeals in green advertisements do not encourage consumers to make significantly more green purchasing decisions. However, the researchers concede that further research is needed to determine whether an advertisement with more intense emotional appeals would work as a driver of sustainable consumption.
Despite the results of this study, there are there is reason to believe that this approach actually works. Flight-shaming is a growing environmental movement that is reducing the airline industries carbon footprint by reducing air travel. This is having a measurable impact and putting pressure on commercial air carriers pushing to increase efficiency and purchase carbon offsets.
Airline industry emissions are unique in the sense that they are compounded by the fact that they are released high in the atmosphere which exacerbates their deleterious impact. According to a recent study by the International Council on Clean Transportation, airplane emissions are increasing much faster than forecast. Air travel is growing and by 2037 it is expected to double to around 8.2 billion flights annually by 2037. The UN predicts aircraft fuel consumption will more than double by 2045. Global air traffic is currently contributes 2.5 percent of global greenhouse gases.
We need alternatives to traditional air travel. In the next couple of decades we may have cleaner travel options like electric commercial aviation. Airships can be almost carbon free and while they may be ideal for some forms of freight shipping they are too slow to be a viable method of mass passenger travel.
Flight shaming is reducing air travel in some places. Flight shame started in Sweden in 2017 to describe the discomfort environmentally conscious people feel about commercial air travel. Flygskam was coined when the Swedish singer Staffan Lingberg pledged to give up flying. The hashtag #jagstannarpåmarken (which translates as #stayontheground) came into use around the same time.
As reported by the BBC, Sweden has seen a 4 percent drop in the number of people flying via its airports and domestic air travel was down 9 percent. A number of people have taken the challenge of traveling without flying. More than 22,500 people have signed a pledge to go flight-free in 2020. The CEO of SAS, one of Scandinavia's largest carriers, says that that the number of passengers are declining because of flight shaming. While air travel is declining, Sweden's rail travel increased by at least 1.5 million tickets in 2019 compared to 2018.
According to the Guardian, surveys show a 21 percent reduction in air travel in Germany, France, the UK and the US. The editorial concludes that, "flight shame, along with movements to restrict other carbon-intensive forms of consumption, is still a force for good."
As reviewed in a CTV article, airliners are feeling the pressure of flight-shaming "It does seem like a switch has flipped," says airline expert Seth Kaplan. "For a while, there was this very incremental recognition of the urgency (of climate change), and then over the past year or so all this has really gotten into the spotlight -- aided by Greta Thunberg." Greta is an internationally renowned climate activist who has spoken out about the carbon toll of air travel. She prefers to travel by electric car or train. Most recently she took a sailboat to cross the Atlantic.
The shame based approach has been used effectively by Greenpeace to target companies. This is part of a strategy they call "market-based campaigning". They identify problem areas, they follow the supply chain, repeatedly warn and offer alternatives and if the desired response is not forthcoming they roll out a clear multipronged media campaign. The Business Insider describes what happens next as follows:
"What seems to happen, inevitably, is the multinational company, eager to remove the stigma from its signature brand, promises to ensure that its products are sustainable and begins cancelling contracts with any third-party suppliers who fail to guarantee compliance. In order to retain the multinational’s lucrative business, the largest suppliers fall into line. Before long, as the cascade effect grows, they begin eyeing their wayward rivals, companies that are still operating in flagrant violation of the new rules and undercutting them with other customers. Eventually, broad new industry protocols are adopted to level the playing field."
Shaming in defense of environmental issues works, but it works best if consumers value the natural world. Therefore the first step is to educate consumers about environmental issues. We should not be above using shame if it can help us to change our perilous trajectory.
Related
Emotion is the Key to Communicating Sustainability and Climate Messaging
The Art of Effective Science-Based Climate Communications
Sustainability as Both Sexy and Spiritual
The Pearl in the Oyster - Leveraging the Climate Crisis for Human and Planetary Health
Why We Need a New Climate Change Narrative
Overcoming Obstacles in the Creation of New Climate Narratives
Forging a New Climate Change Narrative: Addressing 5 Psychological Realities
What Beef Producers Can Teach us About Communicating Sustainability
A Marketing Guide to Selling Sustainability
No comments:
Post a Comment