The standard news from the business world is not always encouraging. Scandals seem to be more common than not and the current climate of Madoff’s and Exxon Mobil’s isn’t helping. But as we all know, honest businesses do exist, especially in the green sector and many of them are great examples of how to grow your business while staying true to social responsibility and environmental values.

One of these companies is Seventh Generation. The company describes themselves as “the world’s most trusted brand of authentic, safe, and environmentally-responsible products for a healthy home.” When you learn more about the company, it’s hard to argue with this claim. The company’s name and philosophy is derived from the Great Law of the Iroquois that states, “In our every deliberation, we must consider the impact of our decisions on the next seven generations.”

Transparency is the first sign that a company is genuinely invested in and concerned about their social responsibility and environmental impacts. If a company produces an annual social responsibility report (SRR) and sustainable report (SR) then you know they have at least taken the time to think about the issues. It does not guarantee they genuinely care about environmental issues, but it is generally a sign they are headed in the right direction.

Seventh Generation writes a yearly “Corporate Consciousness Report,” an in-depth and honest look into all of the activities of the company. The report outlines sales, giving, employees, carbon footprint, transportation-related GHG emissions, packaging, manufacturing partners, sourcing, product design, and green workplace. The report also provides a section at the beginning outlining the achievements (environmental or not) of the previous year. One of 2008’s biggest successes was Seventh Generation’s purchase of sustainable palm oil credits and participation in the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil. Palm oil is a major component in many of their most popular cleaning products.

So you are probably wondering, what is so great about Seventh Generation’s products?

According to their website, Seventh Generation name-brand products include non-chlorine bleached, 100% recycled paper towels, bathroom and facial tissues, and napkins; non-toxic, phosphate-free cleaning, dish and laundry products; plastic trash bags made from recycled plastic; chlorine-free baby diapers, training pants, and baby wipes; and chlorine-free feminine care products, including organic cotton tampons.

Unlike nearly all other companies in the cleaning products business, Seventh Generation discloses all of their ingredients and explains what each does on all the products they sell. There are no laws requiring them to do so, but they are working hard to turn those laws into reality by lobbying.

In the last couple of years, Seventh Generation has not only made their own business more sustainable, but assisted manufacturers in their supply chain. In 2008 they held Manufacturing Partner Sustainability Summit, one of the first of its kind, which helps businesses in their supply chain become more socially responsible and environmentally-friendly.

They also donate 10% of their pre-tax profits to non-profit community, environmental, health, and responsible business organizations working for positive change. This is a huge percentage compared to most other companies, even those in the green sector.

On top of all that, Seventh Generation also has a climate action plan, which the company says will reduce their GHG emissions by 80% by 2050 (normalized to sales). They adopted this before many countries had even considered it.

I have really only scratched the service of Seventh Generation’s commitment to sustainability and social responsibility, but it is clear that they are a model for businesses of all sizes. They are not perfect, but they are making progress and are genuinely concerned about their environmental and social impact. In 30 years, if I had to bet, Seventh Generation will be one of largest household products companies, beating out Clorox by a long shot.

The first time I heard of the phrase Cradle to Cradle (C2C) was when a friend told me take a bath with a book called Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things. The reason for the bath and the book at the same time? The book is printed on synthetic ‘paper,’ made from plastic resins and inorganic filters, and is designed to “look and feel like top quality paper while also being waterproof and rugged.” The book can be recycled in all areas where polypropylene (think yogurt containers) recycling is available and can be reused for a lifetime, barring any contact with fire or radioactive materials.

I quickly became intrigued with the book and plowed my way through it. The ideal behind Cradle to Cradle design is that of the design of the book: use, recycle, reuse. C2C is the anti-thesis of single-use throw away design that dominated American capitalism in the last half of the 20th century. It is a relatively new idea—simple in conception, difficult in reality—that is creating quite the buzz throughout the “green” industry.

The current buzz from C2C is the result of Michael Braungart and William McDonough, the authors of the previously mentioned book. Although others conceived of the idea before them, they are largely responsible for the recent popularization of the term. Their book is the first manifesto of the C2C movement and an excellent introduction to this revolutionary school of design.

Cradle-to-cradle products, as opposed to cradle-to-grave products, are designed and produced to be “perpetually circulated in a closed loop,” thus maximizing their value while simultaneously reducing damage to ecosystems. C2C seeks to eliminate “waste” altogether.

The language of C2C design can be complex, but understanding only a few terms will give you a basic understanding of the philosophy. Braungart and McDonough split up all materials into two categories: technical and biological nutrients. A biological nutrient is “a biodegradable material posing no immediate or eventual hazard to living systems that can be used for human purposes and can safely return to the environment to feed environmental processes,” while a technical nutrient is “a material that remains in a closed-loop system of manufacture, reuse, and recovery (the technical metabolism), maintaining its value through many product life cycles.”

In an ideal world, Braungart and McDonough would like to see products solely designed by C2C protocols and entirely composed of either biological or technical nutrients. This would ensure a truly sustainable economy, one that not only reduces resource use in the present, but also guarantees those resources’ health in the future.

Unfortunately this ideal world does not exist and probably never will, but Braungart and McDonough have conceived a ‘C2C Certification’ that rates nearly any type of human product: consumer items, buildings, cities, social systems, and more. Although the certification system was initially slow in gaining traction, entire cities in China could become certified in the near future.

According to Braungart and McDonough’s company website, C2C certification “provides a company with a means to tangibly, credibly measure achievement in environmentally-intelligent design and helps customers purchase and specify products that are pursuing a broader definition of quality… This means using environmentally safe and healthy materials; design for material reutilization, such as recycling or composting; the use of renewable energy and energy efficiency; efficient use of water, and maximum water quality associated with production; and instituting strategies for social responsibility.”

Hundreds of products have become C2C-certified and more are in the process. To learn more about certification, check out the site, which gives an overview of the certification process and the requirements to become certified.

C2C design is incredibly important as the United States and the world transitions into a clean energy and green economy. Simply reducing consumption and building renewable energy projects is not enough because it is not genuinely sustainable for the future. Concentrating on creating processes and products that do away with consumption altogether is what C2C is about and that is the model the new economy needs.

When I was a young child, I used to put a certain small 45 rpm Sesame Street record on my Fisher Price record player.  The record had Kermit the Frog repeatedly singing, “It’s Not Easy Bein’ Green.”  Today, as a mature, suit-and-tie-wearing frog, working in a marketing department of a large corporation, Kermit would easily refine his identity-conflict tune to “It’s Not Easy Marketing Green.”

According to the American Marketing Association, “Green Marketing” is defined as the development and marketing of products designed to minimize negative effects on the physical environment or to enhance its quality.  However, applying a concrete definition to such a slippery concept, which has taken many forms and shapes over the years, has proven to be anything but simple or manageable.  And, as you have seen on our Source and Resource site thus far, green marketing can include a variety of activities in diverse areas.

In general, a company’s green strategies has involved any of the following: 1) improving efficiencies in the production process, 2) changes in advertising style, and/or 3) taking greater account of a firm’s wastefulness of the earth’s resources, pollution and its release of toxins into the atmosphere.

Ever since Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reports first emerged in the late 1980s alongside a company’s annual financial reports, firms’ environmental considerations have manifested in various (some may say ‘nebulous’) commitments, promises, and proclamations.  Some half-hearted, some gracefully fulfilled.  Such actions have ranged from recycling waste in industrial processes to a company exclusively using recycled paper; from a firm’s increased efficiency in the utilization of energy and materials, to improved logistics management for cutting down transportation emissions; and, even from transforming plastic waste into pencils, to donating employees’ used eyeglasses to a program called Vision Aid Overseas.

As we have all witnessed, consumer and corporate environmental consciousness has dramatically elevated in recent years.  Related news, events, and proposed legislation seem to emerge and change at warp speed.  More apparent causes and effects of global climate change, depleting fisheries, deforestation, and the current energy and impending water crises have all caused people to reassess what they put in their cupboards, dishwashers, and gas tanks, along with what they do with such things once they’ve been used.

Because of this intensified environmental awareness, it has become increasingly important how a firm deals with such global challenges.  Or, one might argue, it may be even more crucial how a firm is viewed in approaching such issues.  In this manner, CSR environmental behavior and “cleantech” investments have become essential to a company’s core operations, regardless of the sector in which the company operates.  That is, companies are not only sensing the rising accountability demands of shareholders, the public, and governmental bodies, but also the opportunities involved in a “green products” market estimated at US$209 billion.

Along the years, many corporate executives acquired newfound headaches attempting to navigate through the ever-shifting Green landscape.  Sometimes, it would seem as if all good deeds went punished, or, at best, unrecognized, and all “regular” activities were hyper-scrutinized.  Yet, nearly all will tell you that such experiences were tremendous learning opportunities and that it is quite important for companies to stay active, involved and persist in the green marketplace.  Unlike the first environmental movements of the 1970s and 1980s, this Green Marketing movement is a core business paradigm that is here to stay.  And, as executives are quickly learning, businesses not only need patience, but also much guidance along the way.

In addition to what Greg has been doing with critical updates on resources and news on sustainable, green business practices, this column provides the latest innovative approaches to green business strategies and corporate environmental marketing.  This will include a greater background understanding of the issues, theories, and policies involved, as well as insight from leading experts of where the green marketing movement has been, what it has learned, why, and where it is today.  We will explore how firms are overcoming the green marketing challenges and where they are seeking and finding new opportunities; how they are positioning themselves and where they are investing. We will search for answers to the key question, “How do firms embrace the holistic approach to green marketing that, although initially seems quite daunting and elusive, could provide a wealth of innovative and environmentally sustainable opportunities?”

For most environmentalists, ‘greenwashing’ conjures up images of huge corporations like Exxon Mobil and GE that seem more than happy to tout their supposed “green” achievements in commercials and advertisements. Their attempts to convince the public that they are environmentally-friendly is an obvious joke to anyone who reads beyond the superficial smatterings. What is more common, however, are minor cases of greenwashing, many intentional, many not, by companies large and small who have not taken the time to educate themselves about the intricacies of green marketing. The resources to do this are not easy to find… until now.

Business for Social Responsibility and Futerra Sustainability Communications recently released, “Understanding and Preventing Greenwashing: A Business Guide,” a report that seeks to help businesses avoid greenwashing in their own practices. While trust of “business” around the world remains near an all-time low, as the report states, interest in environmental or “green” products continues to rise. “From a business standpoint,” the report says, “demand for environmentally sensitive products is growing, but communicating accurately and credibly is becoming more challenging.”

The report explains the complexity of the problem:

[T]he consequences of getting it wrong and being seen as purporting a fraud—or, “greenwashing,” a term now in the lexicon of most industries—are growing. Whether real or perceived, when consumers see greenwashing, they are likely to punish companies with less sales. When NGOs see it, they are motivated to drive negative campaigns and press. And when regulators see it, they can determine that an environmental claim is a “deceptive practice” and fine companies… Ultimately, greenwash is a barrier to developing a sustainable economy.

The report details three types of greenwash: misguided, greenwash noise, and unsubstantiated. Misguided greenwash characterizes those companies that made a genuine and substantial effort to improve the “environmental performance” of their products, but failed to effectively communicate those achievements to the public. These companies’ messages generally make sweeping generalizations that are unattractive to consumers; they need to focus on marketing that includes accurate and specific data about the environmental impact of their products.

Unsubstantiated greenwash generally includes those companies who seem to be genuinely invested in making their products more environmentally sustainable, but are only superficial in doing so. The report claims that these companies’ greenwash will eventually be discovered by educated consumers, but how long until that happens remains to be seen.

Companies’ who are characterized in the “greenwash noise” category are farthest from ideal. These companies claim they are green, but have little or no data to back up their claims.

The goal for all companies is to achieve “Effective Environmental Communications.” These companies “are improving the environmental and social performance of their products… aligning these efforts throughout various functions within the company… [and] are able to communicate their efforts so that consumers clearly understand the impacts and other businesses look to these companies for leadership.”

The report also includes 10 helpful signs of greenwash.

1. fluffy language
2. green product vs. dirty company
3. suggestive pictures
4. irrelevant claims
5. best in class
6. just not credible
7.  jargon
8. imaginary friends
9. no proofs
10. out-right lying

If any of your companies products exhibit these qualities, you might be in trouble. To avoid these consequences, the 40-page report lists three suggestions to ensure trustworthy marketing of “green” products:

Impact: Make Sure It’s Real – Ensuring that the environmental impact of your product is aligned with what you tell consumers.

Alignment: Build Support Internally and Externally – Alignment involves just that, making sure that all levels of your company are on the same level of awareness about your products’ environmental impact.

Communication: Communicate it Accurately – This is often the most difficult aspect of the process. Ensuring that your product is attractively and accurately marketed and communicated to the public.

Near the end of the report is a checklist that makes it easy for any size of business to do a self-evaluation of their “green” practices and marketing.