The Trap of Green Consumerism | Civil Eats

The Trap of Green Consumerism

I often get asked whether I think fair trade is a bad idea, and my response is usually “it’s much better to buy fair trade than to buy unfair trade — but if you care about farmers, ask them what they want.” In general, I’m not favorably inclined toward green consumerism.

The notion that somehow we can transform the world by shopping is a debilitating one, and it’s one that George Monbiot has recently done a fine job of skewering. In his latest, he references a piece in the journal Nature in which it appears that consumers who buy green goods feel that their purchases allow them to behave in ways that are environmentally far worse. The researchers call it ‘the licensing effect.’

I couldn’t find the study Monbiot mentioned, but I did find a study by the same authors at the University of Toronto, in which they say, yes, people behave like assholes after they buy their recycled toilet paper, but they also behave better if merely exposed to green messages.

So what is it about ‘green’ goods that turns us into jerks? It’s the act of purchasing them. This isn’t to argue that we shouldn’t have goods produced with less cruelty, exploitation, resource-waste and culture-destruction. It’s just that branding them with a feel-good label actually corrodes the benefits of sustainable manufacturing.

What’s the way out of this? Easy. Fight to make sure all goods need to be produced in this way: in other words, make the label redundant.

Not only will we have better consumer goods, but we’ll also be worse consumers. And that’s a good thing. So much of the food movement is driven by a ‘look to the label’ approach. And, again, don’t get me wrong. I want to know where the food comes from, and that it’s sustainable, local, produced without exploitation of labor or the environment. What I’m saying is that the label, ultimately, is one of the worst ways of doing this. Because what this latest research demonstrates is that buying green is a way of turning guilt into a commodity.

After filling up a trolley with ‘green’ goods, consumers can gag the nagging voices concerned that it’s unbridled consumerism itself that lies at the heart of environmental destruction. After throwing a few coins in the direction of the sirens of sustainability, people can behave worse than before, their ears plugged by having bought green goods. (In the Toronto experiment, primed with the virtue of green consumerism, people felt readier to lie, cheat and steal.)

We’ll bring the news to you.

Get the weekly Civil Eats newsletter, delivered to your inbox.

But exposure to ‘green’ products without purchasing them serves to make us more aware of one another, and more inclined to be generous. Again, the Toronto experiment showed that people who were merely exposed to green messaging gave a third more money away in a dictator game than those who weren’t exposed.

In other words, there are conditions under which we can be more altruistic, more generous, and more aware. But those conditions are killed by the act of purchase, of engaging with the world and its problems as if those problems were commodities, rather than political challenges that will be solved not by shopping, but by civic engagement.

Originally Published on Stuffed and Starved

Today’s food system is complex.

Invest in nonprofit journalism that tells the whole story.

Raj Patel is an activist, academic and author of Stuffed and Starved and The Value of Nothing. You can follow him on Twitter. Read more >

Like the story?
Join the conversation.

  1. Well Raj, you are right that consumption for the sake of consumption is a bad thing, but expecting people to not buy things is unrealistic for a number of reasons. Cultural expectations dicate wardrobe requirements, something anyone who likes staying employed would do well to pay attention to. Food requirements, particularly getting a balanced diet, requires producing waste. I cook the vast majority of my meals myself and I still produce trash every day. We can't be no impact and live in a major american city, its just not practical. Until the infrastructure supporting our consumption is no impact, we will all be guilty.
  2. Bill McCann
    Thank you for the wonderful observations. The other night I went to see the movie: Food Inc, with someone who always seems so aware of "going green". In a little bit of talking afterword with the person that I saw the move with, this person noted that one of the farmers in the movie[Joe Salitan] just ruined it for her by drinking out of a paper cup at a beautiful family picnic.
    We all make choices every day, but if we get carried away with some kind of green purity ritual, we will miss what it means to really live our lives as we should. I am not sure what causes this sort of thinking, but I suspect that is is just one more form of consumerism coming around to bite us self ritious folks in the butt.
    Thanks again.
  3. Amerigo
    Never trust anyone in a Smart Car.
    (Just kidding)
    Seriously, it is hard to follow what labels mean anymore. Certified natural, sustainable, humane, dolphin-safe, fair-trade, IPM, GAP (good agricultural practices); and does anyone actually trust USDA organic? I'd rather know the farmer than know the label.

    And, btw, stuffed and starved was a great read, I'm looking forward to the Value of Nothing (great title).

More from




Alaska’s Climate-Driven Fisheries Collapse Is Devastating Indigenous Communities

An Alaskan king crab trap and fishing vessel.

Farmers March for Urgent Climate Action in DC

The Rally for Resilience marches to the U.S. Capitol building. Signs at the front read

How the Long Shadow of Racism at USDA Impacts Black Farmers in Arkansas—and Beyond

Arkansas farmer Clem Edmonds sits on his riding mower in Cotton Plant, Arkansas. (Photo by Wesley Brown)

After Centuries of Exploitation, Will Indigenous Communities in Biodiversity Hotspots Finally Get Their Due?

Sailing in a wooden boat on the Amazon river in Peru. An indigenous girl sitting on the front of the boat whilst sailing down the river.