Environmental Effects of Online Returns
Summary: Packages from online product returns accounted for 5 billion pounds of landfill waste in the United States last year and the processes through which products were returned caused 15 million tons of carbon to be emitted into the atmosphere. These negative environmental effects of, accompanied by an increased rate of online shopping returns (studies have found that more lenient return policies lead to increased sale rates), could fuel the global climate catastrophe even more. Proposed solutions to this include bans on free returns, carbon-emissions labeling, and possibilities of refunds without returns.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-11-13/those-amazon-returns-they-re-killing-the-environment
Response: This article brings into perspective how relatively minuscule aspects of a much larger and more environmentally concerning system (our current commercialized production system) can have far-reaching effects themselves. This article irritates me a bit, however. I think I've talked about how the responsibility for environmental change is put on the consumers, while the culprits of incredibly destructive deeds go unnoticed. This article is a prime example of that, as seen by the solutions proposed in it. All of the solutions have to do with reducing returns on the consumer side, rather than reducing waste of products (the main reason refunds without returns was mentioned). Some of the solutions are even utterly anti-consumer (the first idea the author mentions is a ban on returns). Instead of putting the blame and consequences on the consumers, why not look at the corporations who have contributed most to the changes in the environment we are seeing.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-11-13/those-amazon-returns-they-re-killing-the-environment
Response: This article brings into perspective how relatively minuscule aspects of a much larger and more environmentally concerning system (our current commercialized production system) can have far-reaching effects themselves. This article irritates me a bit, however. I think I've talked about how the responsibility for environmental change is put on the consumers, while the culprits of incredibly destructive deeds go unnoticed. This article is a prime example of that, as seen by the solutions proposed in it. All of the solutions have to do with reducing returns on the consumer side, rather than reducing waste of products (the main reason refunds without returns was mentioned). Some of the solutions are even utterly anti-consumer (the first idea the author mentions is a ban on returns). Instead of putting the blame and consequences on the consumers, why not look at the corporations who have contributed most to the changes in the environment we are seeing.
I agree with you Mr Carter. The corporations should be the ones being held responsible. The corporations are ones who are offering the product so in return they should be responsible for the environmental impact of the packages that are returned.
ReplyDelete