Wal-Mart's Green Makeover in TomPaine.com
by Collin Dunn, Corvallis, OR, USA on 08. 9.06
While we're well aware that Wal-Mart isn't perfect, we think they should be recognized for the good, green things they're incorporating into their business practices. TreeHugger buddy and fellow green blogger (at Gristmill) Dave Roberts has an op-ed on TomPaine.com today with a similar point. While the whole thing is worth reading, his argument essentially boils down to this (posted in Gristmill):
So, for progressives to say, "sorry, you get no thanks from me until you green and improve labor standards" is to reject the good in favor of the perfect. Businesses exist to make money. We want to convince them that being green can help them make money. Defending the rights of workers has traditionally been the role of government; that's what progressives exist to fight for. I'm all for pressuring Wal-Mart to become more of an advocate for worker-friendly public policy -- their help in the fight for universal health care would be immeasurable -- but it just seems short-sighted to me to reject the positive steps they're making.
If you don't believe us that Wal-Mart should be patted on the back and encouraged to continue, believe Dave. Read the TomPaine.com piece, and if you're still not convinced, read Dave's wrap-up of the story. ::TomPaine.com via ::Gristmill
« Sustainable Style Foundation Announces 2006 Awards |
A House for an Ecologist : AIA Competition Winners »
While I agree that its great that Wal-mart is going "green" in some ways, their new organics push is frightening. I am worried about how this will affect the organic market...will they force organic farmers to lower their prices so Wal-mart can sell organic for cheap? Will farmers take shortcuts in producing organic foods in order to be able to accept Wal-mart's pricing?
Also, the people that shop at Wal-mart might feel like they are doing something good by buying organics at Wal-mart; but really they are still supporting a company that does its best to keep its employees in poverty and keep its suppliers from making any money on their product.
It is becoming very hard to untangle the threads of choice and effect. Vegan drivers are forced to use petroleum based plastics in place of animal based leather. The net gain is very difficult to assess. Does Walmart deserve applause? No. Recognition? Perhaps. Walmart adopted some cost saving changes that happen to be based on green technologies and practice. The rest is just talk. Maybe Ford motors tainted my perspective, but I've seen too many speeches without subsequent action to accord them any value. But,you are right about one thing. We must not overlook steps taken in the right direction. Honest and fair commendation must be used as readily as criticism. This movement must celebrate it's victories. It only encourages additional change. Is Walmart the best example? No, but it is a very large one. Great op-ed.
David - i'd have to say i agree with you although i do give WalMart a pat on the back for raising employee wages. i wrote a post on TreeHugger a few months back about WalMart going organic (http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/05/walmart_is_goin_1.php). i've been seeing the commericals running on TV and it's just scary to me what may happen to all of our local farmers who work so hard.
i do however agree that big companies will help us to target and educate people that don't know much about the environment. i'm just not sure that "going organic" is the answer for WalMart. there are certainly other steps the company can take (such as building all of their tons of enormous stores out of sustainable materials).
Actually, building all of their sites with sustainable design is a pretty good idea. And Wal-Mart is already starting to do just this. Recently Wal-Mart put a Green Roof on one of its stores in Chicago. Hopefully they'll keep doing this again and again, everywhere they go.
Kara- glad I am not the only one that thinks that this could actually be a BAD thing that Wal-mart is going organic. It frightens me that organic farmers will be forced to somehow get their prices down, thus resulting in a change in the way organic foods are grown.
If Wal-mart can force all their suppliers to accept less money for their goods, I wonder will happen to our food?
You are correct in that Wal-mart and its employees and patrons would be better served by more sustainable building practices and solar energy. At least then if someone HAS to shop at Wal-mart, one could still get an $8.00 refridgerator while shopping under a green roof.
Sorry, I'm an aging cynic who's seen this happen many times before: Giant conglomerate undergoes religious convesion to boost stock price and postpone inevitable decline of business model. More here:
http://daily-green.blogspot.com/2006/08/wal-mart-file-gets-fatter.html
I hardly think the people who belong to co-ops or shop at farmer's markets--or Fresh'n'Wild for that matter--will suddenly start shopping at Wal-Mart just because they're doing organics now. It's not like you're going to switch, is it?
Wal-Mart isn't going to take business away from traditional organic suppliers any more that it steals customers from Pottery Barn or Williams-Sonoma. What it will do is bring organics to markets that currently have limited access to them: the urban poor, and sprawl-dwellers who live miles from the nearest small shop or farmer's market. Moreover, it will provide a welcome 'in' for the vast army of people who think organic is better, but couldn't be bothered to do anything about it.
Another thing about the suppliers: Wal-Mart will need suppliers who can deliver large quantities of standardized produce, quickly. They have no interest in the small guy-- they'll continue to go with the same big industrial operations and just lean on them to use less/fewer chemicals. And that's got to be a good thing.
Let's not confuse the issues here: whatever it is you hate about Wal-Mart has nothing to do with the organics bit. Maybe you're just afraid of not hating them any more.
Who cares, buying local is better than buying organic anyway. UNless it's local organic.
Wal-Mart is an easy target to hate because of their size and power in the marketplace. However, the bottom line is this:
When Wal-Mart implements a "green" practice, the results are HUGE.
Wal-Mart implementing just one "green" practice on a corporate wide basis has a greater positive impact to our environment than 1 million people implementing 10 "green " practices.
Enviros should be encouraging and supporting Wal-Mart's initiatives instead of continually whining about what more needs to be done.
Permanent change occurs in small portions practiced often until the changed behavior becomes the standard. This takes time, dedication, energy, leadership and resources. On the scale of Wal-Mart, the task (mission) is beyond most of our abilities to comprehend.
has anyone seen the documentary "WalMart: The High Cost of Low Prices." a real eye-opener.
One of the difficulties in being a liberal is that I am passionate about many different (and related) issues: fair labor, environmental protection, quality products, public health, etc. So, too, are most of the posters and readers at TH. Where the difficulty lies is in our desire to achieve good on all these fronts: we want Wal-Mart and its ilk to offer a living wage, decent benefits, sustainable infrastructure, organic and/or local produce, etc. etc.
Well we are not going to achieve that utopia now, or ever, honestly. So how about we pick one issue, work it like Dave McLaughlin at Chiquita until it becomes status quo. Then on to the next issue. I'd love to see TH pick a focus - LEED certification for example, sorry Lloyd - and track THer efforts to encourage LEED construction techniques in our communities and businesses. Perhaps a side-blog to share tactics and successes? Get us all on the same page, using the same tools and building momentum on one green practice.