• Consumers want to help others avoid a bad experience while supporting environmentally-friendly products
• Consumers don’t overlook green product failures, but are more forgiving
• The findings demonstrate how best to market ‘green’ products and compensate consumers

In recent years, many companies have been accused of ‘greenwashing’; a type of marketing used to appeal to consumers who care about being more sustainable.

A company may suggest or insinuate minimising environmental impact is important to them, while simultaneously engaging in behaviours harmful to the environment: McDonalds’ paper straws being non-recyclable when first introduced or “100% recyclable” plastic bottles ending up as a prominent source of litter on beaches. Aside of doing little to protect the planet, this also comes with another risk, for if a company is thought to have engaged in greenwashing, this can drastically affect their sales.

And that’s not the only way companies feign environmental care.

A related term, ‘greenlighting’, involves highlighting one eco-friendly feature of a product to distract from its overall negative environmental impact. For example, a fizzy drink boasting “recyclable packaging” while contributing immensely to carbon emissions through production and transportation.

Or ‘greenshifting’, where companies pass the responsibility to act in an eco-friendly way on to consumers.

“Everyone should recycle more!” “Put your plastics in the right bin!” “Turn off the lights and use less water!” Blaming consumers for pollution and waste despite 80% of global carbon emissions from 2016-2022 being produced by only 57 companies. Large corporations are burning fossil fuels on an industrial scale, but some messaging would have you think accelerated climate change and an increasing global temperature is due to us not sorting our recycling properly.

Of course, despite some companies engaging in greenwashing and related behaviours, many ‘green’ products will be genuine alternatives that are better for the environment than their conventional, non-sustainable counterparts.

And consumers will happily pay for these products, even if the price tag is bigger.

The gains to be made from going green

As concerns surrounding climate change increase, this has led to a rise in the production and sale of green products, and an increased desire to be sustainable shared by businesses and customers. A 2020 McKinsey survey found more than 60% of respondents would happily pay more for a product with sustainable packaging. And PwC’s 2024 Voice of the Consumers survey found people are willing to spend almost 10% more on average for sustainably produced or sourced goods. 

Findings such as this represents a societal shift towards sustainability and a change in consumer behaviour, prompting businesses to make genuine efforts to go green rather than sticking to surface-level fixes.

But creating truly sustainable products, aside from requiring investment, also often requires taking new approaches; using new materials or means of production for example. And, regardless of how sustainable or environmentally-friendly a product is (or appears to be), product failures can still happen.

Considering the increased want for green products, is there any difference in how consumers respond to green product failures?

This was the basis of research conducted by Dr Anshu Suri from UCD Michael Smurfit Graduate Business School, alongside Dr Ali Tezer from HEC Montréal and Dr Matthew Philp from Ted Rogers School of Management.

Across an empirical field analysis and eight controlled experiments, the researchers investigated what happens when green products, such as plant-based cleaning products or umbrellas made from recycled materials, fail or don’t live up to expectations.

This included analysing consumer ratings on Amazon, consumer willingness to write negative reviews and consumer preference for refunds over replacements, amongst other measures.

The findings suggest that consumers face a conflict: they want to help others avoid a bad experience while also supporting environmentally-friendly products. This conflict leads to consumers reacting less negatively to the failure of green products than conventional ones.

Greenguarding

To add a new ‘green’ concept to your vocabulary, the researchers refer to this as the ‘Greenguard Effect’.

“Consumers don’t overlook shortcomings of green products, but they are more forgiving, perceiving their restraint from negative feedback as a form of support for the environment,” says Dr Suri. “By not reacting negatively to green product failures, consumers believe they are being more prosocial, as negative reaction may harm the success of a product that benefits the environment and society.”

But companies aren’t let off the hook entirely. The researchers also identified a number of factors that would negate the greenguard effect, including:

• Consumers not being environmentally-conscious
• The negative experience not affecting the product’s primary function
• The motivation to help others by sharing negative product experiences being made salient
• The environmental benefits of a green product being an unintended consequence

This final factor harkens back to the importance of avoiding greenwashing. Consumers don’t necessarily want an item that is accidentally green or an item that pretends to be green. The greenguard effect will only protect companies from harsh failure reviews if the product is deliberately designed to benefit the environment.

Getting green action right…

For companies less inclined to invest in making their products environmentally-friendly, this research makes clear the potential benefits of doing so. By incorporating environmentally-friendly attributes into product design, companies can mitigate negative consumer reactions in the event of product failures.

Additionally, companies could decide to allocate more resources towards managing product failures of their conventional products since they are more susceptible to negative responses. Brands could also put measures in place to remind consumers of the green attributes of their products. This way, if consumers attempt to complain following a product failure, they would be reminded of the product’s environmental benefits and potentially lessen negative reactions.

It is also demonstrated that consumers who experience a green product failure are more likely to give the brand a second chance by preferring a product replacement over a cash refund, or a gift card for the brand rather than for a competitor.

These findings are important for informing customer service strategies on how to compensate consumers. For example, if an environmentally-friendly product fails, consumers might be more open to receiving a product replacement or store credit, retaining consumers’ loyalty and custom. However, if the failed product was conventional rather than green, consumers might prefer a cash refund; arguably more expensive as a form of reimbursement.

This offers critical insight for marketers and companies involved in green product manufacturing and marketing, influencing future marketing strategies and product development.

So, why bother with greenwashing or greenshifting? Producing a genuinely green product doesn’t just benefit the planet, but consumers and companies too.

By, Kyle Grizzell

Interested in this topic? You might also like this…