Skip to Main Content
HBS Home
  • About
  • Academic Programs
  • Alumni
  • Faculty & Research
  • Baker Library
  • Giving
  • Harvard Business Review
  • Initiatives
  • News
  • Recruit
  • Map / Directions
Working Knowledge
Business Research for Business Leaders
  • Browse All Articles
  • Popular Articles
  • Cold Call Podcast
  • Managing the Future of Work Podcast
  • About Us
  • Book
  • Leadership
  • Marketing
  • Finance
  • Management
  • Entrepreneurship
  • All Topics...
  • Topics
    • COVID-19
    • Entrepreneurship
    • Finance
    • Gender
    • Globalization
    • Leadership
    • Management
    • Negotiation
    • Social Enterprise
    • Strategy
  • Sections
    • Book
    • Podcasts
    • HBS Case
    • In Practice
    • Lessons from the Classroom
    • Op-Ed
    • Research & Ideas
    • Research Event
    • Sharpening Your Skills
    • What Do You Think?
    • Working Paper Summaries
  • Browse All
    Green Businesses Are Incredibly Difficult to Make Profitable. Try It Anyway
    04 Feb 2019Book

    Green Businesses Are Incredibly Difficult to Make Profitable. Try It Anyway

    Making a business successful is a challenge in itself, but making a green business profitable is an even harder journey. For society's sake, entrepreneurs must be prepared to make that journey, says Geoffrey Jones.
    LinkedIn
    Email
    • Article
    • Book Excerpt
    Why is For-Profit Environmental Sustainability so Difficult?
    Interview by Dina Gerdeman

    Ambitious entrepreneurs in New Zealand were sure that the country, known for its pretty protected parklands, was the natural place to grow the organic food market in the 1990s and 2000s.

    But it turns out that the country’s farmers weren’t eager to grow organics, and supermarkets weren’t intent on stocking them, all because consumers weren’t keen on buying them. So while the organic food market was thriving in countries like the United States and Denmark, organic products represented only 1 percent of the grocery store market in New Zealand.

    The reason: The country’s “green and clean image,” as touted in the government’s tourism ads, gave people the impression that its existing food chain was already safe, says Geoffrey Jones, the Isidor Straus Professor of Business History at Harvard Business School, who wrote the recently released book Varieties of Green Business: Industries, Nations and Time.

    “However nice these new products are, what are you going to do about the fact that everyone thinks the country is already green, so they don’t need to buy organic food?” Jones says. “It’s a devil of a job to change the public’s perceptions.”

    This flopped push for environmentally responsible products is just one example of the challenges entrepreneurs face when attempting to get green businesses off the ground. Based on extensive interviews as well as historical archives from around the world, Jones’s book chronicles the patchy attempts at for-profit sustainability in a variety of industries across the globe—from organic wine and solar energy to waste management and Patagonia jackets. The book tells the tales of the lucky few who managed to succeed and the struggles of many frustrated folks who failed.

    One important lesson next-generation entrepreneurs can learn from these pioneers, says Jones, is that starting a green business is tough, costly, and risky, but innovators should go for it anyway.

    “Learning from other people’s failures is very important. An entrepreneur will see a green business working in one country and think it will work in another, and that’s absolutely not the case,” Jones says. “Yes, a green entrepreneur can change the world but it’s going to be extremely difficult, and they’re probably not going to get incredibly rich in the process. I hope that doesn’t put people off, but instead provides some sobering lessons for them, so they can carry on and save the planet.”

    Dina Gerdeman: Do you think it takes extra courage for entrepreneurs to venture into going green, given all of the hurdles they face, including competing against established businesses looking to maintain the status quo?

    Geoffrey Jones: Yes, it does take courage, but you have to look at the motivations of these entrepreneurs. In the case of organic wine, the pioneers were often not about simply making wine as a product; they had serious concerns about the health of the soil and the health of humanity. They tended to have a much wider vision. They didn’t really care [about potential obstacles] because they were highly mission-driven. I think that’s probably true for almost all of the characters in the book.

    In all cases, it was very difficult to build a business against incumbents, especially the ones who were highly subsidized by governments, like the fossil fuel industry. And because these incumbents have not traditionally cared for the environment, they could keep their prices lower. These pioneer entrepreneurs knew it would be difficult. But they didn’t like the status quo system, and they were driven by the desire to change it. If you look closely at their motivations, making money was often seen as a means to build businesses that would change the world. They went into business because they believed in it, not because they knew there was a consumer segment willing to pay for it.

    Gerdeman: It sounds like government buy-in is crucial to the success of many ventures, such as solar energy, is that right?

    Jones: Right, and the problem is that government intervention is not always consistent. Policies are always shifting. You see that clearly in the case of solar energy. Especially in the United States, you have this politicization of environmental issues, and as a result, repeated boom and bust cycles. Solar panels first appeared on the White House roof with Jimmy Carter, and then Ronald Reagan took them off because the government was supporting fossil fuels and nuclear, not solar. George W. Bush put a solar system in the White House grounds, but not on the roof. And then Barack Obama put the solar panels back on the roof. That’s very symbolic.

    "A green entrepreneur can change the world but it’s going to be extremely difficult, and they’re probably not going to get incredibly rich in the process."

    With energy, it’s capital intensive, and you need long-term investment horizons. I write about the example of this amazing guy who built a parabolic solar system in California in the 1980s, but he goes bankrupt after sudden changes in Californian tax regulations mess up his whole business model. To get good outcomes, you need to get governments, consumers, and businesses all on the same page, and they need to stay on that page. But that’s incredibly hard to achieve.

    If you look at China, firms are taking global leadership in renewable energy and some other sustainable industries because the government puts up the funds and is creating the market, and Chinese consumers are responding to that. There’s no reason why the environment should be a political issue in the United States, or elsewhere, and that has to get sorted out. Otherwise, we’re locked in this endless cycle where changes in the presidential administration mean huge changes in environmental policy. It’s not a right- or left-wing issue in Europe, and it’s certainly not in China. It’s just an issue that people recognize as important to address, and there are plenty of other issues they can argue about.

    Gerdeman: Do you think it’s still an uphill battle to sell green products to retailers—as was the case for the organic wine industry?

    Jones: It remains difficult to market organic wines in the United States, partly because of the difficult way the sector evolved with conflicting certification requirements and early experiments that produced suboptimal results. Another problem is that organic wines and other organic products tend to be more expensive than conventional products, and the willingness of consumers in the United States to pay for higher quality and environmentally friendly products and services is not very great, which differs somewhat from some European countries, especially Germany and Scandinavia.

    You can see from the example of Sweden, which has the highest consumption of organic wine, that came about explicitly because of the retail distribution of the wine. Sweden has a state-owned retail wine monopoly, which a few years ago decided to promote organic wine, and there was this huge increase in consumption. Today, Swedes drink $330 million of organic wine per year, over a fifth of total market. Sales of organic wine in the far larger American market are around $200 million. We saw the same story with organic food in Denmark. A large consumer cooperative dramatically cut prices, so people were willing to experiment with eating it, and consumption went up. So retailers do have a central role. But for the most part, they’re not willing to sell products at a huge loss. I interviewed the people running the cooperative in Denmark, and they said that today they probably couldn’t have made the decision to lower prices because they are now under much greater pressure to earn profits. But when they took their decisions in the late 1980s, they were driven by wider concerns for the environment, and they were willing to take a hit to short-term profitability.

    Sustainability costs money. It’s cheaper to use chemicals in foodstuffs, and not bother with sustainability. That’s the challenge for green businesses; their products and services are going to be more costly, and the gains are going to be more long-term than immediate. Big public companies can’t go very far down that path before someone says, “Your margin is slipping and your profitability is not where it should be.” We need to evolve a system in which the costs of environmental damage are fully incorporated in the calculations of profits and costs. Then sustainable products will lose their cost disadvantage.

    Gerdeman: Do you think we are getting to the point where the public is recognizing the problem, though, and is willing to support green businesses, for example, by paying more for organic vegetables or to support ecotourism in countries like Costa Rica?

    Jones: In some ways, I think it’s certainly an easier sell than 30 years ago. We’re surrounded by images of melting ice caps and other evidence of environmental challenges, like extreme weather events. But willingness to pay still varies enormously between countries. In some countries, like Germany and Sweden, there has been a great deal more willingness to pay for things considered green than in the United States. The American consumer is highly price sensitive. And in some respects, that problem is getting worse because of the nature of how people purchase things. E-commerce, for example, has introduced a new price sensitivity with the ability for people to research and compare prices. People book vacations to ecotourist locations like Costa Rica online on the basis of price rather than any specific green metric.

    The other aspect that’s important: There’s enormous consumer confusion about what green and sustainable really means. We live in this situation where there’s numerous sustainability claims and certification schemes, there are multiple organic standards floating around, and the term “green” is being used in all sorts of different ways. There’s growing acceptance that it’s become another piece of marketing hype. The use of the word “natural” is completely unregulated, for example. Increasingly, a business has to say something about being green and sustainable these days, but the words are used in such a vague way that they do not mean anything. So even the most concerned person may not be willing to pay for some products because they’re not really sure what it means. That’s a huge problem.

    Gerdeman: You note in the book that there is no “comforting linear or upward trajectory” in the story of green businesses. But do you feel optimistic at all about where businesses are heading in terms of being more environmentally conscious?

    Jones: One takeaway is optimistic. Almost all of the people in this book came up with very sound ecological ideas against the odds and usually without government support. And today, many of the ideas of these pioneers are taken for granted. The idea of getting energy from the sun was invented by these crazy people, but it’s now mainstream. For me, that’s cause for optimism, in that green entrepreneurs are able to look outside the box and the accepted norms and deliver wholly new ways of thinking about things.

    "I’m quite optimistic that business has the capabilities to find solutions and to innovate, but I’m not optimistic about the solutions being accepted."

    It also makes one think about what success means. Conventionally, we think success is a growth in the scale of a business, but that probably isn’t a success in these industries. Ecotourism in Costa Rica grew by these pioneering people who really thought tourism could save the planet, rather than further run it down, but they’re so successful in creating an image for Costa Rica that it now has this massive problem with its tourist numbers because of the carbon emissions from flights, and heavy road traffic. With the example of Patagonia (which famously took out an ad in The New York Times on Black Friday in 2011 to say “Don’t Buy This Jacket,”) in mind, true success is getting people to buy or consume less, rather than having them consume or buy more. But even Patagonia’s campaign actually boosted sales. So we’re nowhere near that point of convincing consumers to buy less.

    So am I optimistic? I’m quite optimistic that business has the capabilities to find solutions and to innovate, but I’m not optimistic about the solutions being accepted. Ultimately, these solutions depend on a lot of people putting their dollars where companies are green and also changing their lifestyles. We’ve seen the report that we risk a three-degree rise in Earth temperature by the end of this century. It’s no secret that if we use public transport or walk or cycle to work, we're contributing far less to carbon emissions than if we drive automobiles. But not many people are willing to make the change. We seem to be sleepwalking into a really bad situation. It’s one of those things that if you bring it up at the dinner table, people don’t like to talk about it. We need to wake up to the fact that we’ve all got to take responsibility. It’s why so many of these entrepreneurs had trouble building their businesses. It’s the dilemma of our time, really.

    Gerdeman: Are there any simple steps you think most businesses can take to become greener, things they’re not doing today that they could be doing?

    Jones: The best thing they could do is think about the issue. I think most don’t. Or they think they have to have an annoying sustainability report to write because people expect it, which has to imagine all the good things the company is doing and avoid mentioning all the bad. There are simple steps. You can change your lighting (in the office) if you want. You can do something about excessive packaging. You can certainly reduce water consumption. All of those things would be somewhat useful. But we’re at a state now with our natural environment where we need much more radical things than that in order to make big progress. Businesses have got to take it far more seriously, which starts with internalizing that the problem is real and threatening and can’t be left to others to solve.

    Postscript
    From Varieties of Green Business: Industries, Nations and Time
    By Geoffrey Jones

    This book has shown the deep and varied historical origins of endeavors to create for-profit businesses which were more sustainable and responsible than the prevailing norms. There is no comforting linear or upward trajectory in the story. Rather it is one of a patchy and uneven diffusion of a belief that a greener, more sustainable business was needed, and was achievable. The uncertainties even over the very definition of sustainability and green business have been demonstrated in previous chapters. This is not a reason to dismiss the whole concept, but instead to address its complexity. Sustainability is a path whose ultimate ending cannot be precisely defined. The goal must not simply be for organic carrots or organic wines (or other green products) to capture the global market, but for companies and business systems as a whole to evolve in a sustainable fashion in all activities. The variety of mishaps and wrong paths taken evident here are not signs of failure, but rather represent the costs of discovering a new form of capitalism which addresses, rather than exacerbates, the environmental challenges and scietal inequalities of the world.

    The constraints, trade-offs and legitimacy challenges faced by the business leaders who have gone on this journey stand out. The problem was seldom one of identifying the challenge and proposing a solution, but rather of getting the solutions accepted and diffused. Collectively the individuals in this book, often motivated by philosophical and religious beliefs and sometimes by seeing products and services elsewhere which they wanted to emulate, offered alternatives to conventional norms, created new product categories and pioneered new technologies. Shibusawa and Bajaj articulated ideas of stakeholder capitalism and shared value as solutions to the sustainability challenges of their times, yet the concept never became mainstream. It is now the subject of renewed debates among management scholars and others today. Pioneering methods of recycling developed in wealthy cities in Germany in the early twentieth century, but most of the pioneering projects eventually stumbled, only to be picked up by later generations. Even today landfills, rather than recycling and recovery, remain the norm even in affluent countries such as the United States and Britain, let alone in emerging markets. A large parabolic solar energy system was functioning in Egypt by World War I, only for the technology to be put aside for decades. Today the potential for solar to provide energy for the developing world is again being widely discussed.

    The challenge in developing more sustainable businesses was that however compelling the entrepreneurial vision, appropriate support from policy makers, and, especially, from individual consumers was necessary to progress far. Yet in waste management, energy, agriculture and other industries, governments were historically more interested in cost than the natural environment, and they were typically captured by conventional incumbents who could invariably provide goods and services cheaper than sustainable challengers because they did not account for environmental and societal externalities. Even as popular concerns about environmental sustainability grew, the willingness to pay a premium for sustainability by individual consumers was limited. As the trend toward buying vacations online emerged with the worldwide web in the 1990s, ecotourism businesses in Costa Rica learned that price rather than environmental sustainability drove consumer choice. Because sustainability involves systems-thinking, a profound and holistic mindset change seemed necessary—the kind envisaged by Rudolf Steiner and Arne Naess, or even reaching back to ancient religious and philosophical traditions such as Jainism and Confucianism.</p>

    "Even as popular concerns about environmental sustainability grew, the willingness to pay a premium for sustainability by individual consumers was limited."

    Outcomes were varied between countries and categories because contexts varied so much. The prospects of the early solar energy industry were heavily dependent on the prices and availability of fossil fuel. It could only progress against fossil fuels when the latter were scarce, as in rural Denmark or Egypt before 1914, or when experts predicted future scarcities, as with the solar house movement in postwar America. New Zealand organic retailers battled against the context of the country’s green and clean image. The Costa Rican ecotourism industry was able to grow in part because of the context of a country with political stability and an emergent national park system, quite unlike its Central American neighbors. The organic wine market in Sweden could eventually grow in part because there was a state-owned alcohol monopoly which resolved to promote the category.

    Mobility and innovation offered paths out of constraints. Like the solar pioneer Frank Shuman, who started in Philadelphia and ended up in Egypt, entrepreneurs could and did move locations. Although the price of fossil fuels was an exogenous constraint for entrepreneurial solar cell businesses, the price differential was reduced by the technological innovations of Elliot Berman, Joseph Lindmeyer and Peter Varadi. Innovation in organic wine-growing could and did greatly reduce the perceived quality gap between organic and conventional wines.

    As sustainability is about systems, most progress was made through joint efforts and co-creation. In Germany, the early advances in waste management were the result of the invention of innovative systems combined with municipal legal ordinances that made the new endeavors, such as dust-free collection, profitable. Lobbying by organic farmers and others persuaded the Danish government to create an official label for organic food, which created a virtuous circle of future market growth. Meanwhile pioneering organic farmers and winemakers, ecotourism ventures, and companies such as Patagonia engaged actively with consumers to promote the mindset change which was so important to driving sustainability forward.

    The journey to sustainability was challenging to businesses because it involved making choices about which activities should be prioritized and what needed to be left until viable solutions had been found. It has thus proved easier to define responsible and sustainable business by what it was not, rather than what it was. Businesses were faced by many awkward choices: deciding how many sulfites could be used in organic wines before they were not organic, or whether using water repellents in garments was the better choice for sustainability as it might reduce demand for new garments. In some cases, choices tipped over to full-scale greenwashing and the blurring of the whole concept of sustainability. Proponents of sustainable finance were clear that it meant providing an alternative to a conventional financial system which paid little regard to avoiding environmental degradation or helping disadvantaged social and ethnic groups, and which resulted in periodic massive financial crises. There was agreement among exponents that such an alternative finance needed to be more ethical, but not explicitly what ethics entailed or how trade-offs could be handled.

    The complexities and trade-offs involved in seeking to make capitalism greener and more sustainable led to the decision of Doug and Kristine McDivitt Tompkins to leave business altogether, and focus on protecting, reforesting and rewilding huge areas of Argentina and Chile. This remarkable episode created, over two decades, a role model which national governments have now emulated, generating a virtuous circle of environmental gains, including saving whole species from extinction. The story signals the potential opportunity for entrepreneurial capabilities and vision to be applied to pursuing sustainability beyond business. Within business, the lesson of history is that making business sustainable is a hard journey with a lot of uncertainties and many variations, but it is a journey that is possible, and it is certainly one that is needed.

    Republished with permission of Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd from: Geoffrey Jones (2018), Varieties of Green Business: Industries, Nations and Time, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, 252–55.

    Post A Comment
    In order to be published, comments must be on-topic and civil in tone, with no name calling or personal attacks. Your comment may be edited for clarity and length.
      Trending
        • 13 Dec 2021
        • Research & Ideas

        The Unlikely Upside of Mergers: More Diverse Management Teams

        • 14 Mar 2023
        • In Practice

        What Does the Failure of Silicon Valley Bank Say About the State of Finance?

        • 16 Mar 2023
        • Research & Ideas

        Why Business Travel Still Matters in a Zoom World

        • 14 Dec 2021
        • Op-Ed

        To Change Your Company's Culture, Don't Start by Trying to Change the Culture

        • 25 Feb 2019
        • Research & Ideas

        How Gender Stereotypes Kill a Woman’s Self-Confidence

    Geoffrey G. Jones
    Geoffrey G. Jones
    Isidor Straus Professor of Business History
    Contact
    Send an email
    → More Articles
    Find Related Articles
    • Environmental Sustainability
    • Energy Conservation
    • Renewable Energy
    • Business History
    • Technological Innovation
    • Leadership
    • Risk and Uncertainty
    • Weather and Climate Change
    • Social Issues
    • Green Technology
    • Energy

    Sign up for our weekly newsletter

    Interested in improving your business? Learn about fresh research and ideas from Harvard Business School faculty.
    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
    ǁ
    Campus Map
    Harvard Business School Working Knowledge
    Baker Library | Bloomberg Center
    Soldiers Field
    Boston, MA 02163
    Email: Editor-in-Chief
    →Map & Directions
    →More Contact Information
    • Make a Gift
    • Site Map
    • Jobs
    • Harvard University
    • Trademarks
    • Policies
    • Accessibility
    • Digital Accessibility
    Copyright © President & Fellows of Harvard College