“Cashing In On Green Jewelry?” This Is The Wrong Message
I just returned from a four day Business and Consciousness conference where some of the most visionary leaders in the business world, from Steven Covey to Bill Strickland, spoke about how we can transform our relationship to economy, ecology and community. Yet the conference also faced the issue around sustainability, global warming and the fragmentation of our most trusted institutions..
The heart of the problem is, I believe, how we do business, this notion of “cashing in.” Business views all of life through the lenses of how much money can be made. The result is that our entire resource and community base is merely a commodity in our resource to cash to trash economy.
Posts like this, by Deidre Woollard, is an example that reinforces this perspective by reducing the”ethical” movement in the jewelry sector to merely an economic opportunity of “cashing in.”
Read this and you’ll see what I mean:
“Popular jewelry designer Rhonda Faber Green’s name alone makers her a natural for “green” merchandise. Cashing in on the trend for eco-friendly merchandise, the “Green for Green” collection is two necklaces and a lapel pin, is made from recycled metals.”
http://www.luxist.com/2008/01/29/rhonda-faber-green-goes-green/
Everyone who runs a business has to focus on marketing to draw community support. But for those agents of change, the circle of people I work with who are trying to break a consensus trance, it is not about cashing in on the green movement.
This is about hundreds of species dying every year. It is about the polar caps melting and the strong possibility that Florida and Manhattan will be under water within fifty years. It is about polar bears dying and mountain glaciers drying. It is about massive displacement and migrations and wars over water and the degradation of our eco system that will make life miserable at best for billions of people.
These imperatives require new business models that are based a connectedness that roots us to all our relations.
Once we align ourselves to these values, we can talk about a marketing plan. One such plan is my FRE system, www.celticjewelry.com which is about restoring trust, once again, between the people (not consumers, PEOPLE) and the business world by honestly letting them know what the impacts of their decision making is.
I cannot stop the ice caps from melting. But I can be honest, accurate and know what is important in my work on behalf of the next seven generations. You have this power, too.
4 Responses to ““Cashing In On Green Jewelry?” This Is The Wrong Message”
Discussion Area - Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I’ve mentioned this before.. But Green is the new Green.. For the last few years, since about the time Al Gore’s movie came out, becoming a “green” company meant making more of the green stuff..
I think that it is possible to walk the line between the two greens.. I’m sure that it will be harder for some than for others, but sticking the “Green” label on anything these days makes it sell better.. It’s just the way it is.. Too many people are easily swayed by a logo and a slogan to expect them to actually dig in to an issue and really think..
On behalf of Rhonda Faber Green Designs, some clarification is in order.
RFGD is not ‘cashing in’ on our “Green for Green™”Collection. Proceeds go to the Alliance for Climate Protection. http://www.wecansolveit.org/
Rhonda Faber Green aspires to bring awareness to a greater cause with this collection, not “Cash in” as the aforementioned quote leads the reader to believe. What marketing staff would ever use the term “Cash in” when describing a charitable cause???
Any questions or concerns can be emailed to info@rfgdesigns.com
Thank you.
My post is really a response to Deidre Woollard’s comment, not Rhonda Faber Green. My apologies.
I should have dug deeper before I posted and researched her work and included that information in this original post.
I have offered Rhonder Faber an opportunity to post more about what she is doing on this blog.
I spent some time trying to research this myself, yesterday.
Unfortunately I can find no corroborating literature in support of Rhonda Faber’s position.
I do not doubt that what she’s is doing is true, but in the interest of transparency, it would help to dispel this type of misunderstanding and miscommunication if it was prominent and easy to locate on her website. Just a suggestion.