Positive buying

Positive buying means favoring ethical products, be they fair trade, cruelty free, organic, recycled, reused, or produced locally. This option is arguably the most important since it directly supports progressive companies. [edit] Standards and labels

A number of standards and labels have been introduced to induce positive buying, such as: Equal Exchange Fairtrade Social Accountability 8000 organic food Local food Organic Trade Association Green America Seal of Approval Shade-grown coffee kosher (religious standard) halal (religious standard) No Pork No Lard (semi-religious standard) vegan free-range poultry grass fed beef union-made dolphin safe fish

recycled/recycleable FSC-certified sustainably sourced wood MSC-certified sustainably sourced seafood Product Red Rainforest Alliance certified Made in USA B corporation

Along with disclosure of ingredients, some mandatory labelling of origins of clothing or food is required in all developed nations. This practice has been extended in some developing nations, e.g., where every item carries the name, phone number and fax number of the factory where it was made so a buyer can inspect its conditions. And, more importantly, to prove that the item was not made by "prison labor", use of which to produce export goods is banned in most developed nations. Such labels have also been used for boycotts, as when the merchandise mark Made in Germany was introduced in 1887.

These labels serve as tokens of some reliable validation process, some instructional capital, much as does a brand name or a nation's flag. They also signal some social capital, or trust, in some community of auditors that must follow those instructions to validate those labels.

Some companies in the United States, though currently not required to reduce their carbon footprint, are doing so voluntarily by changing their energy use practices, as well as by directly funding (through carbon offsets), businesses that are already sustainableor are developing or improving green technologies for the future.

In 2009, Atlanta's Virginia-Highland became the first Carbon-Neutral Zone in the United States. Seventeen merchants of Atlanta's Virginia-Highland allowed their carbon footprint to be audited. Now, they are partnered with the Valley Wood Carbon Sequestration Projectthousands of acres of forest in rural Georgiathrough the Chicago Climate Exchange.[4][5] The businesses involved in the partnership display the Verus Carbon Neutral seal in each storefront and posted a sign prominently declaring the area's Carbon Neutral status.

Over time, some theorists suggest, the amount of social capital or trust invested in nation-states (or "flags") will continue to decrease, and that placed in corporations (or "brands") will increase. This can only be offset by retrenched national sovereignty to reinforce shared national standards in tax, trade, and tariff laws, and by placing the trust in civil society in such "moral labels". These arguments have been a major focus of the anti-globalization movement, which includes many broader arguments against the amoral nature of markets as such. However, the economic school of Public Choice Theory pioneered by James M. Buchanan has offered counter-arguments based on economic demonstration to this theory of 'amoral markets' versus 'moral governments'.

Areas of concern

Ethical Consumer, the alternative consumer organisation, collects and categorises information of more than 30.000 companies according to their performance in five main areas, composing the Ethiscore: Environment: Environmental Reporting, Nuclear Power, Climate Change, Pollution & Toxics, Habitats & Resources People: Human Rights, Workers' Rights, Supply Chain Policy, Irresponsible Marketing, Armaments Animals: Animal Testing, Factory Farming, Other Animal Rights Politics: Political Activity, Boycott Call, Genetic Engineering, Anti-Social Finance, Company Ethos Product Sustainability: Organic, Fair trade, Positive Environmental Features, Other Sustainability.[6]

Boycott

Moral boycott is the practice of avoiding or boycotting products which a consumer believes to be associated with unethical behavior.

An individual can choose to boycott a product. Alternatively, the decision may be the application of criteria reflective of a morality (or, in the terminology of ethics, a theory of value) to any purchasing decisions.

Related concepts Conscious consuming

Conscious Consuming is a social movement that based around increased awareness of the impact of purchasing decisions on the environment and the consumers health and life in general. It is also concerned with the effects of media and advertising on consumers. Many aspects of Conscious Consuming have been practiced throughout the world but not in a cohesive form.

As a result of organizations such as Adbusters and the Center for a New American Dream, the Conscious Consuming movement began in Boston in the summer of 2003 when a group of people gathered together and planned an alternative gift fair, "Gift It Up!" In the fall of 2004, another group of Bostonians formed a group named "Conscious Consuming" and began meeting to discuss a broad range of topics, from the environmental impact of consumption to the effect of media and advertising. The memberships quickly overlapped and in 2005, the groups merged into Conscious Consuming.

Conscious consuming has its roots in voluntary simplicity, in which people re-evaluate their work-life balance in order to spend more of their time and money on the things that matter to them. As people work less, there is more time for connecting with family and friends, volunteerism, hobbies, and community service. A natural off-shoot of working less is spending less. Instead of spending time and money shopping, people engaging in voluntary simplicity buy less. They get goods using web sites like craigslist, trade with friends, make do with what they have, or hit yard sales. When they do purchase something new, the decision to buy is made consciously. A would-be shopper asks, "Is this item made in line with my values? Am I supporting the local economy? Are the people who produce this item treated and compensated fairly? Is this item built to last?" As a result of these questions, conscious consumers find themselves supporting organic agriculture, fair-trade and sweat-shop free products, and local and independent businesses.

Conscientious consumption

The consumer rationalizes unnecessary and even unwanted consumption by saying that "it's for a good cause".[16] As a result, the consumer buys pink ribbons during National Breast Cancer Awareness Month, green products to support the environment, candy and popcorn from school children, greeting cards and gift wrap from charities, and many other, often unwanted objects. The consumer avoids considering whether the price offered is fair, whether a small cash donation would be more effective

with far less work, or even whether selling the item is consistent with the ostensible mission, such as when sports teams sell candy.

Some of these efforts are based on concept brands: the consumer is buying an association with women's health or environmental concerns as much as he is buying a tangible product.[16]

Alternative giving
Main article: Alternative giving

In response to an increasing demand for ethical consumerism surrounding gift giving occasions, charities have promoted an alternative gift market, in which charitable contributions are made on behalf of the gift "recipient". The "recipient" receives a card explaining the selected gift, while the actual gift item (frequently agricultural supplies or domestic animals) is sent to a family in a poor community.

A New Ethics of Consumption What cradle to cradle offers us is a new ethics of consumption. We can try to be less bad but, as Mr. McDonough asks, "why not set out, right from the start, to create products and industrial systems that have only positive, regenerative impacts on the world? Why fine-tune a damaging system when we can create a world of commerce that we can celebrate and

unabashedly applaud?" Imagine walking into a store, and choosing products solely on their cost and functionality, rather than their environmental or social impacts. Imagine every car in a dealership is clean, quiet, efficient, and designed to be disassembled at the end of its life. Imagine a world in which landfills no longer exist, corporations make money while replenishing, cleansing and protecting natural resources, and consumers express their ethics with every purchase.

Such a world is not a fantasy, and will soon become a necessity. We just need the right policies and behavioral changes in place to incentivize designers to design with full lifecycles in mind and consumers to be conscious of what they do with everything from fridges to

paper to batteries. For instance, companies could be made responsible for their products at the end of their life, forcing them to either cover the cost of safely discarding them or, if they are smart, to design them to be easily taken apart and made into new products. But that alone isn't enough. What we really need is a revolution in how we think about designing, manufacturing, selling, buying, consuming, using and discarding consumer goods.

The recent animated film Wall-E, about an Earth that has been overcome by garbage, is haunting because if one visits any landfill or slum today, one will see a landscape transformed by the excrement of our consumer society. The typical response to consumerism is either to accept it or to attempt to avoid it. Yet

there is no reason why consumerism has to be bad. Unfortunately, we'll have to see a new ethics of design and policy making before we can see a new ethics of consumption.