Environmental appeals do not seem to feature prominently in Nigerian advertising. I am also not too sure that any Nigerian advertising Code pays critical attention to the environment (if at all). Hugh Rank (govst.edu) is clearly hard on advertising, which he claims encourages consumption, waste, and a throw-away mentality thereby contributing to the destruction of the earth and its natural resources. How is advertising able to do all that!



There are no at the moment no federal laws which govern what a seller can say about a product. However, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has issued Guides for the use of Environmental Marketing Claims with the aim of preventing the false or misleading use of environmental terms in product advertising and marketing and reducing consumer confusion. According to Jackie Giuliano, a professor of Environmental Studies based in California, the guidelines have no legal backing while compliance is strictly voluntary.

Green marketing may be regarded as the responsive actions taken by many companies to environmental concerns, e.g. introducing environmentally oriented products and undertaking aggressive marketing communications programmes to promote these products (Terence Shimp 2000). Three types of green advertising appeals, according to Shimp, are those that: (1) address a relationship between a product/service and the biophysical environment; (2) promote a green lifestyle without highlighting a product or service and; (3) present a corporate image of environmental responsibility.

The history of the last century shows that regulation is necessary to protect consumers and competitors from fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair practices that some businesses indulge in (Shimp). According to Hugh Rank, major oil and chemical polluters lure ad agencies and public relations firms to create campaigns which tend to build a good public image by emphasizing their “good" and by downplaying their “bad." For example Greenpeace International released an article in 1992 entitled “Biodegradability Scam" in which it stated that Mobil Corporation devoted huge sums of money to market an “environmental message."

Besides ecological harm, oil development can also cause economic damage. In Nigeria for example, oil spillage has hurt, and in some cases, destroyed, activity in other economic sectors. Production in the Gulf of Mexico actually crippled the tourist trade while commercial fishermen lost fish as well as fishing grounds (Greenpeace International 1992).

According to Shimp, only 15% of all green claims are true, 15% are outright false, and the remainder falls into a gray area. Consumers are therefore becoming increasingly skeptical and discouraged by exploitative techniques that fail to deliver on environmental safety promises. A content analysis of green TV commercials and magazine done at the time Shimp wrote showed that most green ads refer to the environmental implications of the advertised brand or company in very general terms without specifically identifying the environmental benefits of the advertised product or the exact environmental actions the company had taken to reduce the problems.

Some of the assumptions we make about environmental advertising claims include the following: (a) Recycled (b) Ozone friendly (c) Biodegradable (d) Phosphate free (e) Organic (f) Fat free (g) Non-toxic (h) Cruelty free.

The importance of the environmental problem requires that marketing communicators strive to ensure that green claims are credible, realistic, and believable. To help companies in knowing what environmental claims can and cannot be communicated in ads, on packages, etc, the FTC came up with guides for environmental marketing claims.

The four general principles that apply to all environmental marketing claims which the guides outline are: 1. Qualifications and disclosures should be sufficiently clear and prominent to prevent deception; 2. Claims should make clear whether they apply to the product, the package, or a component of either; 3. Claims should not overstate an environmental attribute or benefit, either expressly or by implication; 4. Comparative claims should be presented in a manner that makes the basis for the comparison sufficiently clear to avoid consumer deception.

It is also interesting that a task force of attorneys-general from 10 states in the United States developed a set of recommendations for environmental marketers which provides guidelines for labeling, packaging, and advertising products on the basis of environmental attributes.

The four general recommendations are: 1. Make the claims specific, e.g. “environmentally friendly," is meaningless; 2. Have claims reflect current disposal options, e.g. it is misleading for a company to make environmental claims that its products are degradable, biodegradable, or photodegradable because paper and plastic products do not degrade when buried; 3. Make the claims substantive, e.g. a non-substantive claim is a company promoting its polystyrene foam cups as “preserving our trees and forest"; 4. Make supportable claims, e.g. Agfa-Gevert Group says it uses environmental topics as a marketing tool only if it can be shown that there is really an environmental benefit that can be verified by the HQ’s environmental department (Agfa 1995-2003).

Can we in Nigeria begin to insist that environmental effects of products be clearly described in their marketing communications messages? Should our advertising continue to be silent about green implications of products and services? According to Shimp, “because many countries outside North America and Western Europe have far greater environmental problems, it may be that the opportunity for responsive green marketing is stronger in these countries than in highly advanced economics."

A lot of foreign products find their way to Nigeria where they occupy shelves in supermarkets. It is either most of the products are not advertised here, or if they do get advertised, nothing is said about the environmental claims on their labels; yet their disposal affects the environment one way or the other. Even the products manufactured locally follow the same direction. Do we not have the equivalent of the FTC here? Do we not have an Environmental Protection Agency in this country? I do know that we have self and statutory regulatory bodies in our advertising industry; why can we not have these bodies collaborate on green marketing? We should brace up for the challenges posed by advertising to our environment and make conscious efforts to regulate green marketing in all its aspects and ramifications.