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
Comments
Hide the following 6 comments
Who cares?
15.12.2009 16:22
Beside I do re-use them as liners for my kitchen bin so it's not like they're not being put to a secondary use. If I didn't get polybags from the supermarket I'd have buy the black bin liners so in essence my dependence on oil would not be cut at all.
All the green nonsense focusing on bags is ridiculous, the vast majority are biodegradeable these days anyway, so what's the worry?
Jeremy Clarkson
oi
15.12.2009 17:36
paul merton
and.....
15.12.2009 20:02
anon
@ Merton
15.12.2009 20:03
If you haven't got anything useful to say, perhaps you should follow your own advice and piss off yourself Mr Merton?
I like the user posting under the name of Jeremy Clarkson (I assume not the real one), use the free bags for bin liners. It saves me having to purchase black bin liners and the vast majority of the time as pointed our in Clarkson's post they are indeed bio-degradable these days. Is it not common sense that if I don't get carriers from Tesco/Asda/Sainsburys I'm simply going to have to purchase the black bin liners instead? By banning carrier bags you don't actually achieve anything. It's a hollow victory and one that seeks to distract the green movement from the real issues at hand such as massive deforestation for palm oil, and other such bigger green issues.
Rather than resorting to crying like a baby, perhaps you could offer constructive criticism or has indy degenerated to the point of being an intellectual void?
Just visiting
*
15.12.2009 22:11
A sizeable proportion are now degradable. very, very few are BIOdegradable.
{A}
Bin bags
16.12.2009 10:38
degradable just means the bag breaks up into tiny pellets of plastic. This is obviously better that hanging around whole but it still pollutes and can cause problems for creatures that ingest it.
biodegradable means it breaks down into things like water and carbon dioxide which don't pollute. Of course the CO2 isn't good for climate change, but that's another issue...
I must admit I sometimes get freebie bags from the shops to use as bin bags too. Maybe we should have paper bin bags instead. But then we need to chop down loads of trees. Hmm. Maybe recycled paper then. Ultimately the problem is there are too many of us on the planet so we need to stop breeding so much.
Overall though I think it's a good thing that supermarkets are cutting down on bags. It raises awareness and I'm sure most people who took them just binned them and didn't reuse them.
anon2