The Greenpeace campaign is a global movement aimed at addressing issues of environmental damages. The discussion focuses on merits of Greenpeace public relations by assessing the damages caused to P&G corporate image. Furthermore, how the maturation of social media affected such campaigns. Furthermore, it provides an analysis of whether Greenpeace or P&G is acting appropriately or not. It will also predict on the possible safety measures to be undertaken by the two organizations in the protection of the environment. According to Greenpeace, the P&G corporate image does to concur well with expectations of the public. However, the P&G counters this expectation by leveraging on stiff competition to counter emotions of the consumers. The Greenpeace movement has an impact on the deteriorating tropical rain forests. The campaign depicts a negative image on the companies that use palm oil since they endanger the existence of the rain forests. The campaign sensitizes the public about environmental effects of consuming palm oil products. There has been massive destruction of rain forests in Indonesia. The campaign emphasizes on the quality of our forests since it is a home for wildlife. Production of palm oil results to the destruction, forest fires and displacement (Wolf, 319). The campaign emphasizes on the importance of everyone in the fight against forest destruction. Every individual has the power to protect the environment. It also attracts the global population in the movement against massive forest destruction. The public relationship means used by Greenpeace indicates a direct relationship between the production of shampoo and extinction of endangered tigers in the Indonesian forests. The clearance of rainforest has an effect on climate change in the world. It emphasizes on the need of P & G to suspend trade with companies involved in the growth of palm oil (Wolf, 322). The P & G should contribute to the environment by insisting on the purchase of palm oil that is free of forest cover destruction. This has been the message by Greenpeace since 2007. The aggressive campaign is based on the reasoning that other palm oil consumers have cleaned their supply chains. These include; Nestle and Unilever. The Greenpeace movement damages the reputation of the P & G in the global market. This has an impact on the consumer perception about the product. The campaign stresses that P & G uses irresponsible palm oil suppliers. Furthermore, there is breach of the security since the protesters invades the P & G offices. The protesters acted more of a terrorist attack. Secondly, the movement physically damaged the offices which have an impact on the business finances. The attack has caused alarm to both the business and the national government since the protesting persons acted in a terrorist way. This is a security breach on the part of the business. A social media campaign has matured in the last few years. This has caused a stable move with which information is taken in the public domain. For example, Green peace has negatively displayed P & G image in the public, yet people continue to use their products. The ease with which individuals work on the information in the social media is slow. Secondly, the social media indicates that Procter & Gamble does not guarantee on whether the product is forest friendly or not. The P & G policies to the suppliers do not guarantee on either palm oil is free from forest destruction (Wolf, 323). The media campaign design has changed in the last few years. The P & G Company agrees on the effects of deforestation and indicates that it acts on the allegation of its suppliers. The company works on the environment sustainability through sourcing palm oil from credible sources. Furthermore, the company is part of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil production. The company also works on the use of renewable resources and more so on recycling the waste products. Through this, the environmental impact will be reduced. The Greenpeace is not acting appropriately to the P & G. Firstly; there are other palm oil processing industries in the country which are not being called upon in the campaign against Indonesia forests. Secondly, the protesters invade the P&G industry in a terrorist manner rather than addressing the responsible authority. Furthermore, the campaign has severely tarnished the corporate image of the P&G which affects its market stability. Thus, the sales of their product decrease (Laurance, 379). The battle between the two titans needs to be addressed from a wider dimension. Firstly, the Indonesia plantation sector has the responsibility of making genuine contribution to the country forest cover. This will protect the future of people and wildlife. The global climate will also be affected positively. The Greenpeace advises the local communities to follow responsible agricultural practices which respect social and economic rights. It also advises P&G to insist on the supply of palm oil that is free of forest destruction (Laurance, 379). The Greenpeace, however, insists that legislation would be the best policy to protect forests. This is done by reviewing the existing permits and implementing the land use policy in the planning agenda. For example, a two-year moratorium on permits in primary forests was introduced in 2011. However, this had no much impact since most forests was legally protected with no threat of immediate destruction. There is also a need to enhance policies of resolving social conflicts concerned with land use.The Greenpeace is acting inappropriately since many companies use palm oil as a raw material. However, the source of palm oil comes from different companies with varying rates of forest destruction. Thus, it is impossible to assess on the rate of destruction of the forests. Furthermore, there is no relationship between the forest destruction rate and P&G production rate of Shampoo products (Laurance, 379). There has been varied effort to promote the use of sustainable palm oil. The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) provides for such effects. The roundtable consists of traders, consumers, banks and non-governmental organizations. The campaign aims to sensitize the public and it members on the importance of sustainability. The question of greenhouse gas emissions is also an aim of this organization. The government also needs to develop a coherent plan with a focus to landscape development. The development will provide for both the public and private environmental initiatives. Also, there is a need to enforce to ensure that palm plantations are cultivated on low carbon land (Laurance, 378).
A national register is created for all types of logging. This includes, selective logging. This will work out when there is a transparent process in the monitoring mechanism. Furthermore, they should consider empowering local communities on the need to remain accountable to the forest destruction. On the other hand, citizens can swap low carbon with high carbon lands. This will work in the presence of clear land policies.
Laurance, William F., et al. "Improving the Performance of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil for Nature Conservation." Conservation Biology 24.2 (2010): 377-381. Academic Search Premier.
Wolf, Julia. "The Relationship between Sustainable Supply Chain Management, Stakeholder Pressure and Corporate Sustainability Performance." Journal of Business Ethics 119.3 (2014): 317-328.