Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

The Truth Behind Wal-Mart's Green Makeover

By David Roberts, TomPaine.com. Posted August 16, 2006.


Should progressives embrace Wal-Mart's conversion, or is it merely another attempt at greenwashing in the name of profit?
Advertisement

Last October, Wal-Mart CEO H. Lee Scott Jr. gave a remarkable speech to his employees. He pledged to transform Wal-Mart -- the world's largest retailer, No. 2 on the Fortune 500 -- into a company that runs entirely on renewable energy and produces zero net waste.

It was an outrageously bold promise, and a bit disorienting.

Wal-Mart's green-tinted, come-to-Jesus moment presents political progressives with at least two dilemmas. First, do we believe Scott has taken the green gospel to heart? And second, does this mean its okay to cheer Wal-Mart?

All the talk in the progressive community these days is about building a broad, holistic movement to replace the desiccated collection of interest-group silos that is the post-Southern-realignment left. "Checklist liberalism," as one wag called it, is supposed to be on its way out.

Then along comes Wal-Mart, checking the "green" box, but conspicuously failing to check the "labor" box, and … well, what?

It's too early to tell for sure, but Wal-Mart's environmental initiatives do appear substantive. Scott's commitments go well beyond what would be necessary for a successful greenwashing campaign. (Hell, BP pulled one of those off with little more than a name change.)

The holy trinity of genuine business transformation is: 1) public goals and timetables, 2) buy-in at every level of the company, and c) transparent reporting.

Wal-Mart has hit two of the three: Scott announced specific goals, and by all accounts Wal-Mart associates are invigorated by the challenge and the sense of moral mission.

As for transparent reporting, time will tell, but with all the scrutiny the announcements have drawn, it would be extraordinarily difficult to back out quietly. The company has already set up more than a dozen "sustainable value networks," each focused on a particular area like packaging or facilities, each made up of Wal-Mart managers and outside educators, regulators, and environmentalists. A lot of people are involved who wouldn't hesitate to call foul if Wal-Mart stalled or backed out.

In close consultation with Amory Lovins' Rocky Mountain Institute, Scott pledged to double the efficiency of Wal-Mart's enormous truck fleet by 2015 and reduce greenhouse-gas emissions from its existing stores and warehouses by 20 percent over the same stretch. By 2008, Wal-Mart will have a store design that uses 30 percent less energy and produces 30 percent fewer GHG emissions, developed out of the experimental green stores in McKinney, Texas, and Aurora, Colorado. It will reduce solid waste from its stores and clubs by 25 percent in three years.

The company also plans to reduce overall packaging, move heavily into organic products (textiles and food), and even -- if you believe the chatter -- buy more local food.

Wal-Mart's notorious monopsony powers force suppliers to bend to its will or suffer. Normally this is a lamentable state of affairs, but if such power is wielded on behalf of the environment, the ramifications could be astounding. By Scott's own reckoning, 90 percent of Wal-Mart's environmental impact will come through influence on its supply chain.

For example, the company is ordering wild-caught seafood from fisheries certified by the Marine Stewardship Council. It's developing a sustainable certification system for gold. In areas where Wal-Mart is the biggest retailer -- and those are legion -- its demands could transform whole industries.

Influence will also pass forward into the enormous customer base. More than other greening companies like GE and Goldman Sachs, Wal-Mart has direct, personal relationships with millions and millions of ordinary Americans of every class and color. It can educate them about eco-friendly products and behaviors; indeed, in its ubiquity it cannot help but educate them. The company is also a cultural icon, the very emblem of Middle America. By embracing green thinking, Wal-Mart could drain it of its poisonous ideological connotations and enshrine it instead as common sense. Ecology could be removed from the culture wars.


Digg!

David Roberts is a staff writer at Grist Magazine.


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Alternot, do your math!
Posted by: CounterCorp on Aug 16, 2006 5:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Even slight overall adjustments to wages eliminate our thin profit margin," he said with frank resignation.

If that's true, how does Wal-Mart generate its enormous profits -- and sizable shareholder dividends -- on such allegedly thin profit margins? Are we to believe the company's own CEO when he makes claims that are demonstrably disproven by the profits that Wal-Mart is raking in, and the dividends it is paying out to wealthy and non-productive shareholders who add nothing to the company's bottom line?

If Wal-Mart is just scraping by as Scott claims, how is it that retailing rival CostCo -- with arguably less market and "monopsony power" than Wal-Mart -- is able to pay its employees higher wages and better benefits?

The very article that the author cites to bolster his case that letting Wal-Mart dictate environmental standards to its suppliers shows that Wal-Mart has grown to the point that it controls a staggering percentage of the U.S. economy, and yet he's willing to repeat unchallenged Scott's assertion that raising his employees wages "even slight[ly]" would "eliminate" Wal-Mart's profit margin.

That's not journalism -- that's stenography. If Wal-Mart CEO Roberts is not ashamed to make such obviously false assertions, Alternot should be ashamed to print them.

This whole article is based on the nonsensical premise that the very size and market power that will supposedly enable Wal-Mart to deliver on all of its (dubious) environmental promises somehow cannot similarly be brought to bear on the other malign aspects of its thoroughly exploitative and unsustainable business practices.

The author ping pongs between chastising Wal-Mart and praising it, noting its long history of anti-social activities and somehow finding in them reasons to tout what can only be described as signs of a severe corporate bipolar disorder, and alternately blaming and absolving Wal-Mart for being at least partially responsible for the corporate culture that the author claims they lack the power to change.

In the end, it's difficult to figure out whose claims are more schizophrenic -- Wal-Mart's or Alternot's ...

www.countercorp.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Partner and push.
Posted by: Caro on Aug 16, 2006 8:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good idea. We'll get a lot more done as practical progressives than by insisting on impossibilities.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wal-mart goes green? I'm a bit skeptical...
Posted by: undomiel42 on Aug 16, 2006 1:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My mother has worked at Wal-mart for 22 years, so I feel like I know how they work--if this green thing doesn't work out well for them, they will stop doing it, regardless of any bad press they may receive. After all, their customers cared more about the low prices and convenience of having everything in one store than they did about the environmental impacts Wal-mart has before the initiative was announced, and so I don't think Wal-mart will see a massive drop-off in sales if they back out of this.

They've gone back on their word before. In 2004 they started an initiative (that employees know about, but I don't think it was reported widely in the mainstream press) that was supposed to show what leaders they were in good employment practices. They restructured pay scales, giving some employees raises, and promised not to institute wage caps so that those people who worked well and hard would be able to get a raise for as long as they were employed at Wal-mart. However, this year (at the end of the evaluation cycle, no less) they announced that they have in fact put wage caps in place, and so my mother, after 22 years of loyal and hardworking service to Wal-mart, will not be getting a raise ever again--and she is still over 15 years away from retirement. (Unless of course she goes back up into the horribly abusive middle management positions--but last time she had one of those they wouldn't let her go visit her sister who had just been diagnosed with cancer).

I guess my point is that this would be a good thing if they actually did it, but I'm not holding my breath.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

China walmart
Posted by: zorro on Aug 16, 2006 9:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here in China, Walmart workers have been allowed to build labor unions. I don't know exactly what this means, and maybe I am wrong, but I donot think the labor union even exists in America anymore, not really. For all the 'bad press' european socialism, and so-called communism get, for alll the negative conotations directed toward China inn the US, at least they have the ability to negotiate wages and benefits. In America we are all wage-slaves--pure and simple. And despite, the well-said comments above, the author does sound reasonable in his argument, he does say 'for the moment.' Our job, the Walmart employee job is to step up the pressure, and just maybe, maybe, Walmart will eventually co-operate. One thing is tru--if Walmart becomes an ecological, sustainable model, it will set a good example for the rest of the voracious conglomerates. Walmart and America are synomonous. If America changed its world policies, using its tremendous power, we could transform the world for the better. This was the original idea behind the UN, the UN that America has traditionally underminned.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ruthclarice
Posted by: ruthclarice on Aug 18, 2006 7:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ok....sounds good. But I didn't read anything about Wal-mart's contribution to urban sprawl and lack of concern about gobbling up thousands of acres per year for new super centers, while closing others, demanding that they have a say in who may or may not take over the old sites, before economic boards can use the old property. We have many decaying neighborhoods in our area where regular Wal-marts were closed down, remain vacant, while farmland further out is made into a huge super center parking lot and water retention ponds.

Land management needs a big emphasis from Wal-Mart, and maybe even helping sustain the lives of small hardware shops, clothing shops, downtown businesses, all contributing to new city-core ghosttowns because of the likes of Wal-Mart.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Always Low Wages. Always.
Posted by: antiapathy on Aug 23, 2006 2:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't be fooled, the race to the bottom continues unabated. This greenwash is just that--an exterior veneer to make their customer base feel all gooshy inside. They still destroy communities and treat their employees like crap, and they will continue to succeed as long as American consumers remain apathetic toward the plight of their employees.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]