Earlier this week, BBB National Programs released the results of a research study it commissioned, which looked into how consumers interpret various types of environmental marketing claims.  The study, conducted by researchers at the University of British Columbia, concluded that more transparent and specific messaging about environmental benefits can help consumers make more accurate assumptions about a company's environmental impact and do so without harming brand perception. 

Here are the key takeaways from the study: 

• Broad, unqualified green claims may prompt consumers to infer environmental benefits that were never stated.  When companies make general environmental benefit claims, "consumers may assume a company engages in additional environmentally responsible practices that were never mentioned.  This ‘halo effect’ can lead to potentially inaccurate perceptions of a company's overall environmental performance. 
• Qualified green claims can help consumers make more accurate judgments about a company's environmental practices.  By being more specific, “consumers are better able to distinguish between the environmental attributes that are present and those that are not.” 
• Qualified claims do not diminish brand appeal.  In other words, when brands qualify their green claims, it doesn't “reduce how positively consumers view a brand.” 

BBB National Programs' timing couldn't have been more perfect, as Climate Week NYC kicks off next week.  In fact, the International Advertising Association and the Global Advertising Lawyers Alliance are hosting a program as part of climate week – and one of our featured speakers will be Phyllis Marcus, the director of the National Advertising Division, who will be talking about the NAD's work in this area, including this ground-breaking research.