NEW REPORT exposes advertising’s role in driving climate & ecological breakdown
Each year, Black Friday signals the start of the festive season. Big brands lure consumers with apparently time-limited deals (although research suggests they often aren’t good value). Originally a U.S. phenomenon stemming from the shopping chaos after Thanksgiving, it has now spread globally, driven by a deluge of advertising Black Friday has become synonymous with materialism and overconsumption.
Now, the Badvertising campaign has commissioned a new report, published to coincide with Black Friday, led by Prof Tim Kasser, a world-leading expert on consumer culture, materialism and human behaviour. The report Advertising’s role in climate and ecological degradation provides a picture of the scientific research on the links between advertising and our climate and ecological crises. It looks into the evidence on the connections between advertising, materialism and the “work and spend” cycle and how adverts for two illustrative, specific high-carbon products - beef and tobacco - contributed to their increased consumption. Looking at emerging evidence on SUVs and aviation, It also strongly suggests that such links will be found for the advertising of many other products, services and experiences too.
Where do our materialistic desires come from?
There are many different interpretations of materialism across the social sciences. Here the report refers to the “priority that individuals place on values and goals to be wealthy, to have many possessions, and to obtain the status and appealing image that often come with wealth and possessions.” The environment in which we evolve drives us to prioritise these materialistic values over others, such as by modelling behaviours we see in our peers or by internalising messages picked up in the media such as from advertising on TV.
Materialism not only only affects our wellbeing - with reported negative impacts on our relationships with others as well as our academic and work outcomes. But it also indirectly contributes to environmental harm. Many studies show that people with materialistic values tend to care increasingly less about the environment and therefore would be less likely to support green policies and measures, recycle, use sustainable means of transport, and so on.
Work more to consume more
By luring us into wanting to purchase more products, advertising essentially shapes how we spend our time. If we place higher value on spending money on consumer products rather than spending quality time with our loved ones, it is likely that we will give a greater importance to work and end up putting in longer working hours, to earn more to buy more. This is what is referred to as the “work and spend cycle”.
Many studies illustrate the negative effects of long working hours on the environment. Working longer hours to buy more ‘stuff’ has a direct environmental cost resulting from greater greenhouse gas emissions and other negative ecological impacts (the so-called scale effect). Indirectly, working longer hours is also ecologically problematic as it steals from people the time to engage in more sustainable behaviours (the so-called composition effect), such as growing your own food, cooking from scratch or cycling to work.
Two major environmental “baddies”
The impact of beef consumption on the planet is increasingly well-known, as it emits large amounts of carbon dioxide and contributes to other negative environmental impacts, such as biodiversity loss, freshwater depletion and so on. Lesser known is the impact of tobacco production and consumption on the environment. Indeed, tobacco farming is associated with deforestation, chemical pollution of water and soils, greenhouse gas and other noxious emissions. Smoking itself is also particularly bad for the planet with regards to the unnecessary waste it creates.
Besides their ecologically damaging effects, these two products have in common that they have both been successfully promoted by the advertising industry. Studies have shown that adverts for beef and tobacco helped to increase their consumption significantly.
What about airlines and cars?
The report reveals links between advertising and ecological impact with regard to specific behaviours and products, where an evidence base already exists. But, it argues, there are several other activities and products with a large ecological footprint for which a similar association could be found. This is the case for airline flights and SUVs. Two preliminary studies are establishing a link between advertising for these products and their ecological impact. With regards to SUVs, the Purpose Disruptors, a collective of professionals from the advertising industry, devised a simple metric to calculate the amount of carbon emissions attributed to an advertising campaign by the carmaker Audi. They found that between 2015-2017, the campaign was responsible for over 5 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent emissions, which amounts to 1.3 coal power stations run consistently for a year. Another German study into a sample of around 1000 individuals found that exposure to flight advertisements - online and social media - increased the participants’ willingness to fly.
By reviewing and consolidating the scientific evidence there is between advertising and its ecological impacts, this report supports the calls made by the Badvertising campaign for new controls on the advertising industry and for an end to adverts fuelling the climate and ecological emergency putting bans in place for high carbon products and services.