How to Make Green Living Mainstream: Closing the Green Gap
A lot of people say they care about the environment.
A lot fewer people make "green" choices in how they spend money.
The difference is known as the green gap.
Environmentalists are very frustrated that most people don't act on the looming threat of climate change.
But maybe they're part of the problem.
On Earth Day 1970 the most publicized speeches warned of the coming new ice age and a looming global famine.
Neither one happened.
Dire predictions of gloom and doom because of overpopulation have failed to materialize for more than two centuries.
Piling shifting climate predictions on top of them doesn't make them any more credible.
While 16% of the population heeds the climate change warnings, 66% of the population express support for the environment, but hold back.
Why? Partly because environmentalism has such a bad reputation among this majority.
"Green" seems to be the color of elitist scolds, of hippies with too much time on their hands, of fools that keep falling for the Boy Who Cried Wolf.
Environmentalism seems to be for "them" and not for "us.
" This political green gap feeds the lifestyle green gap.
After all, it makes green living seem to be a part of an alienating environmentalism, not normal American lifestyle.
There are plenty of other reasons why people ought to be more earth friendly.
And most people want to be.
But climate change rhetoric, with its strident equation of corporate profit with greed, seems to drown out other messages.
It seems obvious that motivating people to action for whatever reason ought to be more important than proving them wrong about climate change.
It seems obvious that most of us would respond better to encouragement than scolding.
People want lifestyle choices that are easy and convenient.
How about highlighting eco-friendly choices that are easy and convenient? People care about what's good for them, their families, and their immediate community.
How about pointing out immediate and practical benefits of going green more than the effects of climate change on an amorphous future or distant parts of the globe they'll never visit? People want good, dependable products at a good price.
Eco-friendly products often appear lesser quality and higher priced than conventional products.
Let's encourage the development of "green" products that are better and less expensive.
And advertising departments of those companies, push the quality and price above the greenness for a while.
Our environmental problems will not be solved as long as environmentalism appears to be merely a niche interest.
Environmental solutions require that eco-friendly behavior seem normal, mainstream.
Not just for "them," whoever "they" are, but for "us"-all of us.
That is what it takes to close the green gap.
A lot fewer people make "green" choices in how they spend money.
The difference is known as the green gap.
Environmentalists are very frustrated that most people don't act on the looming threat of climate change.
But maybe they're part of the problem.
On Earth Day 1970 the most publicized speeches warned of the coming new ice age and a looming global famine.
Neither one happened.
Dire predictions of gloom and doom because of overpopulation have failed to materialize for more than two centuries.
Piling shifting climate predictions on top of them doesn't make them any more credible.
While 16% of the population heeds the climate change warnings, 66% of the population express support for the environment, but hold back.
Why? Partly because environmentalism has such a bad reputation among this majority.
"Green" seems to be the color of elitist scolds, of hippies with too much time on their hands, of fools that keep falling for the Boy Who Cried Wolf.
Environmentalism seems to be for "them" and not for "us.
" This political green gap feeds the lifestyle green gap.
After all, it makes green living seem to be a part of an alienating environmentalism, not normal American lifestyle.
There are plenty of other reasons why people ought to be more earth friendly.
And most people want to be.
But climate change rhetoric, with its strident equation of corporate profit with greed, seems to drown out other messages.
It seems obvious that motivating people to action for whatever reason ought to be more important than proving them wrong about climate change.
It seems obvious that most of us would respond better to encouragement than scolding.
People want lifestyle choices that are easy and convenient.
How about highlighting eco-friendly choices that are easy and convenient? People care about what's good for them, their families, and their immediate community.
How about pointing out immediate and practical benefits of going green more than the effects of climate change on an amorphous future or distant parts of the globe they'll never visit? People want good, dependable products at a good price.
Eco-friendly products often appear lesser quality and higher priced than conventional products.
Let's encourage the development of "green" products that are better and less expensive.
And advertising departments of those companies, push the quality and price above the greenness for a while.
Our environmental problems will not be solved as long as environmentalism appears to be merely a niche interest.
Environmental solutions require that eco-friendly behavior seem normal, mainstream.
Not just for "them," whoever "they" are, but for "us"-all of us.
That is what it takes to close the green gap.