Research undertaken at the University of Manchester has concluded that loyalty bonuses are a more effective way of motivating customers to re-use plastic bags than to charge for them. However, the independence of this research has been thrown into doubt, raising questions over the £25 million donation received from Tesco by the Sustainable Consumption Institute.
The research indicates that financial incentives are less effective than loyalty rewards in motivating individuals to re-use carrier bags and reduce unrecyclable waste. These results add to a growing body of similar evidence contrary to what many economists had previously thought.
However, the report, which was presented to the Royal Society in November, has come under fire after it emerged that contributors included Tesco executives, who were not referenced as having links to the company.
Professor Mohan Munasinghe, the report’s lead author, also admitted to The Times that discussion of another study by the Irish Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, which was referenced but came to contrary conclusions, was underdeveloped.
“It would have been much fairer to give the complete set of figures so people can come to their own conclusions,” he said. “I accept the point that the conclusion has been somewhat overstated.”
Concerns had, however, been raised by students and academics at the university when Tesco initially stumped up £25 million for the Sustainable Consumption Institute (SCI) in 2007. Opponents protested against the deal which they deemed to contain a fundamental conflict of interest between the funder, whose environmental and social impacts had been under close scrutiny by campaigners, and the direction the SCI would take. In particular they cited the fact that Tesco CEO, Sir Terry Leahy, was at the time chancellor of the university.
Critics of the findings are keen to point out the supermarket chain’s influence in other areas. Helen Rimmer of Friends of the Earth (an organisation that is part of Tescopoly) argues that “the misleading claims over Tesco’s free carrier bag policy is not the only time they have manipulated research – in August they were rapped by the advertising watchdog for claiming there was local support for a new store when the majority of the community had said they were against it”.
Ms Rimmer feels that not only is the independence of the the study questionable, but that it forms part of a wider strategy to give Tesco a more ‘green’ image.
“Tesco’s funding of the Sustainable Consumption Institute gives them a green veneer, but look beneath the greenwash and the way that Tesco does its business remains the same – trampling over farmers and local communities to make ever-greater profits,” she said.
Both Tesco and the Sustainable Consumption Institute have strongly denied the supermarket’s involvement swayed the findings in any way.
Concerns over Tesco’s influential power stretches far beyond the academic world, with many communities trying to oppose plans for superstores in parts of Manchester in recent months (see recent MULE stories here, here, and here).
http://manchestermule.com/article/university-research-findings-called-into-question-over-tesco-funding
However, the report, which was presented to the Royal Society in November, has come under fire after it emerged that contributors included Tesco executives, who were not referenced as having links to the company.
Professor Mohan Munasinghe, the report’s lead author, also admitted to The Times that discussion of another study by the Irish Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, which was referenced but came to contrary conclusions, was underdeveloped.
“It would have been much fairer to give the complete set of figures so people can come to their own conclusions,” he said. “I accept the point that the conclusion has been somewhat overstated.”
Concerns had, however, been raised by students and academics at the university when Tesco initially stumped up £25 million for the Sustainable Consumption Institute (SCI) in 2007. Opponents protested against the deal which they deemed to contain a fundamental conflict of interest between the funder, whose environmental and social impacts had been under close scrutiny by campaigners, and the direction the SCI would take. In particular they cited the fact that Tesco CEO, Sir Terry Leahy, was at the time chancellor of the university.
Critics of the findings are keen to point out the supermarket chain’s influence in other areas. Helen Rimmer of Friends of the Earth (an organisation that is part of Tescopoly) argues that “the misleading claims over Tesco’s free carrier bag policy is not the only time they have manipulated research – in August they were rapped by the advertising watchdog for claiming there was local support for a new store when the majority of the community had said they were against it”.
Ms Rimmer feels that not only is the independence of the the study questionable, but that it forms part of a wider strategy to give Tesco a more ‘green’ image.
“Tesco’s funding of the Sustainable Consumption Institute gives them a green veneer, but look beneath the greenwash and the way that Tesco does its business remains the same – trampling over farmers and local communities to make ever-greater profits,” she said.
Both Tesco and the Sustainable Consumption Institute have strongly denied the supermarket’s involvement swayed the findings in any way.
Concerns over Tesco’s influential power stretches far beyond the academic world, with many communities trying to oppose plans for superstores in parts of Manchester in recent months (see recent MULE stories here, here, and here).
http://manchestermule.com/article/university-research-findings-called-into-question-over-tesco-funding
e-mail:
Homepage:
Comments
Display the following 6 comments