Politicians, multinationals, consumers – David Crosbie considers who should be taking responsibility for protecting the environment

A couple of stories in the news lately have reminded me of a question that we have previously asked consumers in our GfK Roper Reports Worldwide study – namely, who ought to be shouldering the responsibility for environmental issues.

First of all, the oil leakage in the Gulf of Mexico and the ongoing efforts to stem it are a stark reminder of the responsibilities faced by multinational corporations, particularly those dealing with chemicals or pollutants. When something goes wrong, the consequences can be dire, and citizens expect the company involved, in conjunction with government, to stop at nothing to put the damage right.    

Secondly, one of the most interesting stories from the UK’s recent general election – apart of course from the first hung parliament since 1974 and the first coalition government since World War II – was the election of the UK parliament’s first ever Green Party member in the form of Caroline Lucas. This, coupled with the fact that other parties published separate green manifestos, shows that the issue is increasingly important in voters’ decision making process.

 As I said, GfK Roper Reports Worldwide tackled the question of responsibility for the environment a couple of years ago by asking consumers around the world to name the one group they felt should take the lead on the issue of global climate change. Globally, 30% replied that this role should fall to national governments, more than double the next most common response (environmental groups) and way ahead of those who cited business and industry or individual citizens.

 Given the immense nature of the problem, one might have expected even more consumers to delegate the problem upwards and let government sort it out. However, at the same time a large proportion of consumers do tell us that they feel they ought to be doing something about the issue of the environment themselves, even if it’s something relatively small. It seems that global consumers are aware that dealing with the issue of the environment is not something that they can do solely by themselves, but they are willing to do their bit if they know that other stakeholders in business and government are doing their fair share as well.

 One thing’s for certain, it’s a topic that is becoming more and more important, and beyond political parties being judged on their green manifestos, companies are being judged on their policies too. This topic is one of many attitudinal and behavioural measures that feature in GfK Roper’s new Green Gauge Global product, which aims to advise companies on how they can best respond to the changing and complex attitudes of global consumers towards green. For more information, click here. 

David Crosbie (29) never identified himself with a ‘generation’, until now. What could have brought about this revelation?

By David Crosbie

Generational marketing has a long history in the US, but is not so prevalent in the UK, or indeed many other markets around the world. Instead, over here people tend to talk about age bands and socio-economic groups, with phrases such as “25-34 year old ABC1s” being bandied around by media sellers and marketers.

One reason for this is that Britain is still a class-obsessed society. As a Russian colleague once said to me when discussing social classifications, “in Russia we do not have anything like your Cockneys.” Another might be that, on the whole, Brits tend not to think about themselves as part of a cohort group born around the same time. I myself might occasionally muse that I am a ‘child of the Eighties’, or one of ‘Thatcher’s children’, but even that is only to excuse my penchant for the Human League and Eurythmics.

All that changed the other week, however, when I picked up a Sunday supplement (The Observer Magazine, 31 January 2010) and was confronted by a contemporary of mine claiming that he (and by inference me) was part of ‘The Lost Generation’. He argued that it is today’s twentysomethings who are paying the price for the excesses of the baby boom generation, with its free higher education, affordable housing and abundance of cheap credit. We, by contrast, have to contend with thousands of pounds of student debt, saving for deposits on extortionately priced housing and the mess that ensued when the credit bubble burst.

I have to say this is a view that resonated with me. At a time in my life when I should be thinking about going forth and multiplying, I’m worrying about student loan repayments, how to get on the housing ladder and how best to care for elderly relatives. These are of course all concerns that are shared with many consumers around the globe. But is it just a case of sour grapes on the part of a generation that is in fact not that badly off but likes a good moan?

Well interestingly, it’s not just people in their late twenties who are coming to recognise this issue. A leading light in the UK Conservative Party, which is widely tipped to win the country’s imminent elections, has just written a book entitled The Pinch, which explains how, “the baby boomers took their children’s future.” As well as being a baby boomer himself, the author, David Willetts, is viewed as being such a great thinker that he has earned the soubriquet, “Two Brains”.

At GfK Roper Consulting, we examine closely how evolving consumer concerns and needs manifest themselves in changing attitudes and behaviours, and generational and cohort breakdowns by market are key filters for our analyses. A major client study on global baby boomers we carried out last year shed new light on how this generation will differ from today’s over 65s as they enter retirement. I for one will be examining this year’s data carefully to see how my contemporaries around the world are feeling about the challenges we face. If only my question on attitudes to Eighties synth pop had made the final questionnaire…

Contact us