Question

In 2015, representatives of 196 countries got together in Paris, to pass an agreement to address the effects of climate change. This Paris Agreement is an agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), dealing with greenhouse-gas-emissions mitigation, adaptation, and finance, signed in 2016. 13% of all green-house gas emissions and environmental pollution comes from plastics, and single-use plastics (SUPs) make up 40% of all plastic use. These 'use once and throw away' plastics are used as packaging containers for everything, from beverage bottles (e.g Coca Cola and bottled water), to food products (energy bars, chips and cookies, packaged foods, packaged fresh fruit/vegetables), to clothing (shrink-wrap and garment bags for new clothes).

Patagonia is a well-respected, socially-aware company that is committed to reducing its environmental footprint. It has done so with many innovative materials in its clothing. However, among consumers, there is a large 'attitude vs. behavior' gap. While 66% of consumers say they are willing to pay more for environmentally responsible brands, only 1-5% actually buy greener products. This case focuses on single-use plastics in particular, and Patagonia's efforts to create better packaging.

The Question: give me 3 reasons with factual proof why Patagonia should choose to spend its money on Government Lobbying and Consumer Education is better than spending its money on R&D to innovate on packaging.

Answer 1

Reasons to choose Patagonia to spend money on Government Lobbying and consumer education will be explained in the following section.

Reason 1: Reduce the gap in consumer attitude vs. consumer behavior

Government lobbying and consumer education have more potential to reduce the gap of attitude vs. behavior than investment in research development in the packaging sector. In this context, it should be remembered that to solve the problem from the root, it’s important to educate consumers otherwise it will be difficult to solve the climate change issue.

Reason 2: Decrease in cost

Spending money on R&D to innovate on packaging will increase the cost of Patagonia which ultimately increases the price of the products that ultimately decrease profit of the organization by decreasing consumer level of the company

Reason 3: helping society by reducing the burden on the Government

Due to the Paris climate agreement, the government has invested a huge amount of money. In addition, helping Government lobbying will not only reduce the Government burden but will also reduce the burden of consumers as money comes to the government from consumers through the system of tax.

For the above three reasons, it can be concluded that Patagonia should choose to spend its money on Government Lobbying and Consumer Education is better than spending its money on R&D to innovate on packaging.