Sustainability Marketing - A Mixed Record of Effectiveness

(This is the second of three posts dealing with the use of environmental claims in marketing communications. In my first post, I described the current political backlash against some ESG-related policies, but I also noted that public support for protecting the environment remains widespread, according to recent research. This post discusses why environmental claims in marketing haven't worked as well as some research findings suggest they should.)

The current political backlash against ESG-inspired policies and programs is prompting many marketing leaders to question the wisdom of including environmental claims in their marketing campaigns.

Beyond the political risk, marketers must also determine whether the use of environmental messaging will improve marketing performance and drive revenue growth. On this issue, the available evidence paints a mixed picture.

Sustainability Marketing Is Working . . .

The Sustainable Market Share Index(TM)[1] (the "CSB Index") produced by the NYU Stern Center for Sustainable Business provides compelling evidence that marketing products as sustainable results in substantial market share growth.

The CSB Index is based on sales data from Circana for 36 categories of consumer packaged goods (CPG) products (excluding alcohol and tobacco). Collectively, these 36 product categories accounted for approximately 40% of the total US CPG market in sales from 2013 - 2024.

The 2024 edition of the CSB Index found that:

• Products marketed as sustainable held a 23.8% market share of the total US CPG market, up 2.6 percentage points from 2023, and the market share of sustainable products has increased 9.2 percentage points since 2013.

• Products marketed as sustainable achieved a 5-year compound annual growth rate of 12.4% vs. a CAGR of 6.8% for the overall US CPG market.

• Products marketed as sustainable were responsible for 41% of the growth of the total US CPG market for the period of 2013 - 2024.

While the CSB Index only tracks data for selected CPG categories, it nevertheless suggests that using environmental/sustainability claims in marketing can drive significant market share growth.

But a Substantial "Say-Do" Gap Exists

David Ogilvy, the legendary advertising executive and founder of Ogilvy & Mather, once said:  "The trouble with market research is that people don't think how they feel, they don't say what they think, and they don't do what they say."

Many of the surveys addressing public support for environmental sustainability demonstrate that Ogilvy's famous quip is at least partly true because they reveal a substantial say-do gap. A say-do gap refers to the disconnect that often exists between the views and intentions that people express in surveys and polls and their actual behaviors.

As I noted earlier, recent surveys have consistently shown that public support for actions aimed at protecting the environment and improving sustainability is widespread, and similar findings have been appearing in surveys for most of the past two decades.

However, numerous surveys have also revealed a substantial say-do gap between people's stated views and attitudes about sustainability and their actual buying behaviors. For example:

• In a 2024 survey of more than 3,000 US and Canadian adults conducted by Ipsos on behalf of Public Inc., 76% of the respondents described themselves as "conscious consumers," but only 38% of the respondents' actual purchases were made with consideration for social, ethical, or environmental factors.

• In a 2025 survey of more than 5,000 consumers in Australia, New Zealand, France, Germany, the UK, and the US by Blue Yonder, 78% of the respondents said sustainability considerations are somewhat or very important when shopping, but only 29% had switched their brand loyalty to companies they perceived as exhibiting more sustainable practices.

The say-do gap is not a recent development. It's been appearing in survey findings for at least the past 15 years. For example, in a 2010 survey by Cone Communications (described in this Forbes article), 80% of the respondents said they were likely to switch brands to one that supports a cause, although only 41% said they and purchased a product in the previous year because it was associated with a social or environmental cause.

Causes of the Say-Do Gap

The sustainability say-do gap can be attributed to several factors.

Social Desirability Bias

First, some surveys may have overstated public support for sustainability, at least to some extent, because of the social desirability bias. 

This bias refers to the tendency of survey respondents to answer survey questions in the manner they believe will be viewed favorably by others rather than the way they actually think or feel.

So, when a survey asks participants whether sustainability is important to them when making purchase decisions, some respondents are likely to perceive that "yes" is the "right" answer.

Failing to Capture Relative Importance

Many surveys also fail to capture the importance of sustainability in relation to other factors that influence purchase decisions. For example, a survey respondent may truthfully say sustainability considerations are important when making a purchase decision, when the reality is that sustainability is less important to the respondent than factors such as product quality, cost, and convenience.

This phenomenon is evident in the findings of a survey of 1,000 US consumers conducted by McKinsey & Company in March of this year.

The McKinsey survey asked participants to rate the importance they ascribe to seven factors when making purchase decisions. As the following table shows, 72% of the respondents said perception of quality is extremely or very important, and 70% said the same for price. However, only 33% of the respondents rated environmental impact as extremely or very important.

Effectiveness of Environmental Messaging

The size of the sustainability say-do gap is also affected by how effectively marketers communicate the environmental benefits of their product or service. The persistence of a large sustainability say-do gap indicates that marketers need to make their environmental claims and messaging more persuasive.

In my next post, I'll describe the four attributes that make sustainability claims more compelling for potential buyers.

[1] - Sustainable Market Share Index is a trademark of the NYU Stern Center for Sustainable Business

Top image courtesy of Sheri via Flickr (CC).

Making Sustainability Marketing Work - Part 1

(The political backlash against ESG and other aspects of so-called "woke capitalism" is creating a conundrum for some marketers. On one hand, the backlash is real, and marketers would rather not attract the attention of anti-ESG partisans. On the other hand, recent research continues to show that a majority of people are concerned about the environment and generally support actions aimed at improving sustainability. In this post, I'll discuss the current state of support and opposition to ESG, and in my next post, I'll describe how marketers can make sustainability messaging more effective.)

The ESG Backlash is Real . . .

The political backlash against ESG, the practice of using environmental, social and governance factors to assess a company's performance and impact on society, is undeniable.

• Earlier this year, President Trump issued an executive order requiring federal agencies to shut down diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, and end DEI performance requirements for federal contractors and grant recipients.

• At least 21 US states have enacted anti-ESG laws in some form.

• Several high-profile US companies - including Meta, Walmart, Target, McDonald's, Ford, Citi, Harley Davidson, and Tractor Supply - have scaled back or otherwise modified their ESG policies.

While various versions of "corporate social responsibility" have existed for decades, the modern ESG construct entered the business mainstream following the publication of an influential 2004 UN report titled "Who Cares Wins."

In the following decade, numerous research studies were published showing that sizable majorities of consumers and business buyers were placing great importance on the environmental and social track record of companies when making purchase decisions.

As a result, some marketing leaders became enamored with "purpose marketing" and began incorporating environmental and social claims and themes into their marketing campaigns.

It's not surprising that the current political environment is causing many marketing leaders to question the wisdom of using ESG-related messaging in their campaigns.

While a healthy dose of caution is warranted, most companies should not abandon ESG-related messaging altogether. That's because not all ESG-related marketing messages are equally polarizing.

But It's Not Universal

ESG is an umbrella concept that covers a wide range of issues and initiatives, and public attitudes toward those issues and initiatives vary greatly. So far, the most intense public opposition to ESG has tended to focus on social initiatives such as DEI.

In contrast, several recent research surveys have shown that most people are concerned about environmental issues and want to buy products and services that are environmentally sustainable. One of the more recent and most robust surveys I've reviewed is the "2025 Conscious Consumer Report" by Public Inc. (the "Public Inc. Survey").

The Public Inc. Survey

The Public Inc. Survey was an online survey of more than 3,000 adults (ages 18+) in the United States and Canada conducted by Ipsos on behalf of Public Inc. The survey was conducted July 11-24, 2004 among a nationally representative sample of 1.510 US adults and 1,508 Canadian adults. Survey data was weighted by age, gender and region using the latest available census data for each country.

The report states that the precision of the survey was measured using a credibility interval and that the survey is accurate (overall) to within +/- 2.0 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

The results of the Public Inc. Survey reveal broad interest in environmental issues and widespread support for sustainability.

• 76% of US respondents agreed that climate change poses a serious threat

• 70% of US respondents said that companies should be doing more in terms of sustainability and ethical best practices

• 79% of US respondents believe that being purposeful in how they spend their money is one of the best ways to motivate companies to change

• 68% of all respondents agreed that sustainable products improve the health and well-being of their children and family

• 65% of all respondents agreed that sustainable products improve their own lives

• 58% of all respondents said they would pay more for products and services that are ethical and sustainable

Perhaps most important, fully three-quarters of the respondents identified themselves as environmentally conscious consumers.

At first glance, these survey findings suggest that using sustainability claims in marketing should be an easy decision. Unfortunately, however, these findings don't tell the whole story.

First, it's important to recognize that these findings may overstate the breadth (or at least the intensity) of public support for sustainability. And second, other findings in the Public Inc. Survey suggest that the sustainability claims marketers have been using have not been all that effective at driving increased sales of sustainable products and services.

I'll address these issues in my next post, and I'll describe four attributes that will make sustainability claims more effective at driving revenue growth.

Image courtesy of medicalofficecareers.com via Flickr (CC).