New BSI green DM standard 'won't recommend use of recycled paper'

by Noelle McElhatton, Marketing Direct 08-Dec-08, 10:00

LONDON - The BSI standard for sustainable direct marketing, to be published later this month, has backed away from its initial recommendation of using recycled paper and instead will advocate use of FSC-certified paper, on the grounds that recycled paper is less eco-friendly.

The shift in emphasis to FSC paper is one of a number of changes made to the draft PAS 20:20 set of guidelines, first issued in June, after consultation with hundreds of stakeholder organisations.

The standard, which is backed by Royal Mail, the Direct Marketing Association, Acxiom and client organization ISBA, is a major plank in the DM industry's efforts to ensure it achieves its 2009 recycling target. The target of 55% recycling of paper DM was agreed with Defra in 2003.

Another change to the draft standard is that marketers must include a message to consumers urging them to recycle the communication.

Robert Keitch, the DMA's director of media channel development, said the changes would make the standard "more practical". He added: "While PAS 20:20 has been fundamentally changed in a number of areas it has fulfilled its first criteria - providing clarity on sustainable direct marketing. We wanted to provide a route that was both practical and a greater blend of commercial reality with environmental understanding. The standard has been written from the point of view of getting marketers in and giving them something to work towards."

The DM industry's efforts to achieve its 55% recycled target will be assessed in September 2009. A sample of local authorities and households will be selected to have their waste bins examined, to determine the proportion of paper DM that has been binned rather than recycled.

"The paper specification has changed [since the first draft released in June] because it was clear from the investigation [we did] that there are definite environmental benefits to using FSC paper in DM. FSC fine grade papers are made using a chemical process and so are a net energy supplier, whereas recycled paper uses a mechanical process, making it a user of energy."

The standard will be unveiled in a regional roadshow covering the major centres of DM client, agency and supplier activity.

Comments

Max Harrington - 08/12/2008

Interesting that the BSi have decided not to support the general public's view of what is green. The public haven't a clue what FSC means. As for the claim FSC is better than recycled, many professionals would disagree. They say it uses chemical processes - that's not green. Trees have to be cut down, processed, transported \(often from outside the UK). How is that greener? The idea that FSC doesn't use energy is tosh. Sounds like the FSC lobby has the ear of the BSi. Does the BSi know what defines a greener product? Or did they pick their own. Have experts been consulted? I think the BSi are out of touch. Thanks very much but I think I'll stick to recycled paper because my customers believe it's the greener option.

danny doogan - 09/12/2008

Either this article or the BSI's take on recycled paper is completely inaccurate! Some points to consider: - The environmental issue concerning landfill is the key reason as to why recycled paper is a better environmental option than FSC paper \(which assumed to refer to virgin fibre based papers in this article). It is important to know that FSC certified papers include virgin fibre papers, part recycled papers and fully recycled papers! Virgin fibre paper pulp is made from a combination of both mechanical and chemical processes – trees have to be harvested, transported and then ground down to pulp prior to the paper manufacturing process. FSC \(Forest Stewardship Council) and PEFC are as equally valuable in the promotion of sustainable forest management. Paper, whether recycled or not, is a fully renewable, sustainable and recyclable resource.

Chris Arnold - 09/12/2008

In the process of currently writing a book on Ethical Marketing I've been looking at this very area. The fact that I have seem to suggest that when you consider the broader ethical issue - energy, CO2, water, chemicals, waste, transport, etc there really isn’t a one’s better than another. If you decide it’s all about water then recycled is better as it uses less. If it’s about energy, FSC wins. But it’s all marginal. The consumer needs a informed choice and I wonder just how well informed the BSi are? While the public don’t really get CO2, have little idea what ‘sustainability’ really means (unless they are a college lecturer or BA in environmental studies) what they do get is water. Water is going to be a major ethical issue in 2009 and those that use less will be more ethical, even more so than energy.

Christina Wood - 09/12/2008

As a DM printer, it is interesting to note the lack of education out there. While paper does use trees, its production does consume energy and too often, waste paper ends up in landfill sites, it is also one of the few truly renewable and recyclable raw materials we have. The general public need to be educated on the 'greener' option. NAPM has launched the 'Two Sides' initiative which dispells some of the myths about paper and the environment.