ECO-MARKETING AND ECO-LABELLING: DOES IT ENSURE ...

D.Grundey 171 ISSN 1648-4460
Researching Customer loyalty in LHIiuania
4. Analysis of Mini Case Studies in Eco-Marketing and Eco-Labelling: Germany and
Lithuania
4.1 The Impact of the "Blue AngeV'for Paints - a Mini Case Study
One of the first Blue Angel product categories developed was for acrylic and 'highsolid'
paints (these are the kinds of paint used for woodwork and metalvvork). The product
selection criteria for this category limited the proportion of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) to 10 percent for acrylic paints and 15 percent for high-solid paints. The first acrylic
paint to display a Blue Angel was introduced by Glasiirit in 1982; in 1987 eco-labelled paints
represented approximately 16 percent of the total market for solvent-based paints in (West)
Germany (ENDS, 1989); and by 1995 this figure had risen to just under 25 percent (telephone
interview with Jerry Hodge, director, ICI paints).
In 1990, the German government claimed that the Blue Angel for paints had reduced
VOC emissions by 40,000 tons (OECD, 1991, p. 30). However, the environmental benefits
resulfing from this reducfion should be viewed in light of the following.
First, any benefit (private or public) which has arisen from the shift towards low-VOC
paints did not come without a cost. The paints which have a Blue Angel are more expensive to
produce, which implies that scarce resources have been utilised in the producfion of these
paints that might have been utilized more efficiently elsewhere.
Second, an alternative set of eco-label criteria might have had a similar impact at a
lower cost.
Third, it is possible that low-VOC paints would have come onto the market even
without the eco-label. (Such paints might, for example, have been adverfised simply as 'lowsolvent',
with the puфorted health benefits, rather than the environmental benefits, given
emphasis.)
Fourth, according to a report on eco-labels carried out by Environmental Data
Services (ENDS, 1989, p. 23), 'Acrylic paints which carry the Blue Angel do not perform as
well as more traditional products.' Indeed, the report ascribes the poor sales of eco-labelled
paint in the professional market to this poor performance, noting that 'what counts for the
professional decorator are aspects of product quality such as ease of application, colour and
durability, and "environment-friendliness" ranks low on this Hst of purchasing criteria.' Poor
performance may also lead to a need for more coatings, hence more overall consumption to
accomplish a given task. More use per task may undo any puфortcd environmental benefits
measured on a product weight or volume basis.
Fifth, since no cco-labcl was applied to emulsion paints (which arc by far the largest
sector of the paint market), it is possible that some consumers bought cco-labclled acrylic
paints for use on walls and ceilings because they thought that such paints would have a lower
environmental impact. In fact, emulsion paints typically have much lower concentrations of
VOCs than even the ceo-labcllcd acrylic paints, so such purchasing habits would have been
perverse indeed (ENDS 202, November 1989, p. 26).
Finally, it is possible that some of the demand for low-solvent paint was the result of
concern over the direct health impacts (rafiicr than the environmental impacts) of solventbased
paints. Clcady, any reduction in emissions of VOCs which resulted from the use of
low-VOC paint purchased primarily for its perceived health benefits should not be counted as
a consequence of the cco-labcl, but rather as a byproduct of health-conscious paint purchases.
rWlN.mniMATlOKS IN nVSIMiSS a-liCONOMICS, \'o\. 8, No 1 (16), 2009