Green-market change is a challenge for companies and investors alike, but each group is acting on its own timeline - and (given our rapidly changing climate) the clock is ticking. Easily verified, widely agreed-upon standards for sustainability are quickest path to lasting change. With all the different programs currently in the marketplace, how do you decide which standard to go with? Here’s how I came up with an answer – and how you can, too. By Mary Hunt

---

I came to the sustainable-standard table for two reasons. First, after interviewing women for In Women We Trust, a book on how to marketing-to-women, I realized I could no longer be a part of the mass consumption machine. Their struggles were my struggles. Or maybe it was because I’m of Boomer age and have seen what has happened since the 60s. As a marketer, I was no better than a drug pusher.

My choice was to trash a 30-year career or look for a way to make my two realities work together. Besides working in the social media women’s market as I have for the last three years, I also spent ten years in media sales for Thomas Register of American Manufacturers (TR, now ThomasNet). It was my job to make sure that advertisers had all their certifications listed: Mil Specs, SPC, TQM, ISO 9000, CSA, and more. Why did they care, because competition always pushes companies to the highest level. It wasn’t the amount of certifications that was important to purchasers and engineers, but the level of achievement.

With that knowledge and knowing that we would blow past the “green-lite,” I Googled “sustainable products” to see which ones were already certified. If I was going to link to products they had to be products that were certified sustainable. 

That’s how I met Mike Italiano, the CEO of MTS, the nonprofit behind the SMaRT (Sustainable Material Rating Technology) sustainability standard. Within minutes of talking to Mike I knew what had to happen: I had to bring the women who were making over 80% of the consumer buying decisions to the sustainable standard world. To do the same thing, in short, that I did at TR - put buyers with sellers and let the standards shake out the quality issues.

It wasn’t a slam-dunk decision to back SMaRT. Ten years of advertising standards in TR left me leery of any standard or claim. I wasn’t about to push a standard onto my peers that didn’t cover all the things that we care about, nor would fall short in the manufacturing or investment worlds. The standard had to serve many groups - well.

I started at square one and asked Mike to list all the criteria that SMaRT addresses and why. He came back with 24 criteria broken into three sections, Pollution Reduction Minimums, Reporting and Labeling requirements, and Certification Process. With that list I then compared the top dozen standards that affected home furnishings on an Excel spreadsheet. I focused on furnishings because of a client I was advising and because the majority of our CO2 problems are tied to the building/furnishing world. Furnishings are also where women buyers meet sellers. Their decisions will make a difference.

The Excel chart gave me the answers I needed at a glance. It told me:

• Which standards supplied a workable matrix for comparison of climate risk factors? I always start at the end game. It’s pretty much a given that if we’re going from green to sustainable we'll have to prove it. Also, how can investment companies compare risk factors? We needed a matrix or score card that provides the product-to-product comparisons.


• Which standards were really “standards” created via ANSI guidelines and which were process templates created to sell consulting services? (See #1.) Investors, bankers, insurance companies, and governments need to compare numbers and they also need to know the matrix was developed on a consensus platform that’s democratic in nature. It reduces their risk and uncertainty. If I had to pick one standard, I wanted one that has the best chances for big money adoption.


• Which standards used ISO LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) practices and which ones used LCA “thinking.” ISO LCA requires evaluation of 12 environmental impacts over product’s entire lifecycle and pollution reductions from a LCA baseline. I didn’t want just climate change numbers, I wanted to see all water, Earth, and air pollution accounted for.


• Which ones looked at the triple bottom line of environment, economics and social equity? As a woman representing women, the environment and social equity is a deal breaker. I wanted a standard that would support the issues we care about. If it didn’t, women consumers wouldn’t/shouldn’t champion it. As someone working with the social media market, the standard had to be blogger proof - or as we say now - greenwash-proof.


• Which standards are third-party audited globally? I walked factory floors for ten years. If anyone knows how manufacturing will cut corners when no one is watching, it’s me.

I also looked at standards from a common sense point of view. If the clock on climate change is ticking, what are the issues that would hold back adoption?

• Is scalable? How fast can it be replicated? How accessible is it to everyone?
• Is the cost reasonable? Becoming certified is painful for manufacturer in both time and money.
• Is it all-or-nothing or can manufacturers ease into compliance? Having multiple steps solves that problem. Does it cover most products lines? This not only makes it easier for manufacturers but also the purchasing agents on the other side trying to figure out the mess and ultimately consumers as well.
• Which had the highest level of sustainability? That’s where industry always ends up.

In total I compared across all 24 criteria points - and SMaRT came out on top.

Since then I’ve put my full support behind the SMaRT Standard and am working to bring its qualities to the women’s market via BlogHer, BigGreenPurse, WECAI, GoodTube, Today’s Mama, The Motherhood.net, and many more women-to-women circles.

There are tons of standards, I’m not the manufacturer who has to match the criteria, but I am the person who has to live by their decision on both sides of the buyer/seller line.

The clock is ticking on climate change. The faster we put sustainable standards such as SMaRT in place, the faster we give consumers something to cheer. When consumers cheer and buy certified sustainable products, the world wins.

__________

Mary Hunt is the editor for SustainableProductsblog and also blogs at InWomenWeTrust. She believes in Purse String Theory, when women promote or buy sustainable products they can redirect the business climate while cooling down the global climate.