‘Beyond Petroleum’ Pays Off For BP

January 15, 2008

Email this story Print this post Add your comments

For seven years, British Petroleum has invested heavily in its “Beyond Petroleum” campaign which has been praised by business press and awards shows but criticized by skeptics as greenwashing. The success of the ongoing campaign has compelled Adweek to ask if advertising, as much as action, can change public perception.Though BP was the first oil company to acknowledge a link between energy use and global warming, the company lost its green credibility when it abruptly withdrew from the Global Climate Coalition, Adweek writes. So in 2000, after a 1998-merger with Amoco, BPAmoco invested heavily in its “Beyond Petroleum” campaign to reintroduce itself as a socially conscious company. That campaign, notes this article, was quite polarizing.

But it also seemed to work. Sales from 2004 to 2005 rose from $192 billion to $240 billion then to $266 billion in 2006. Moreover, a Landor Associates survey of consumers found that 21% of them thought BP was the greenest of oil companies, followed by Shell at 15% and Chevron at 13%. The campaign also won a 2007 gold Effie from the American Marketing Association. BP said that from 2000-2007, its brand awareness went from 4 percent to 67 percent.

But is the company greener? Critics claim BP has simply co-opted green language to distract the public, but even they admit to the ad campaign’s effectiveness. “BP is running a greenwashing campaign,” said John Stauber, founder of the Center for Media and Democracy, “and from a sales and marketing perspective, it is brilliant. They’ve positioned themselves where everyone wants to be today, especially oil companies.”

However, last November, a PFC Energy study claimed that in the area of climate change and reducing its greenhouse gases, “BP has indeed been more proactive than [competitors].” And BP was last year’s most accountable company according to Accountability Rating. Earlier in the year, BP had had a controversial showdown with officials in Chicago over the dumping of toxic waste and was fined heavily for environmental regulation violations.

Email this story Print this post Add your comments

Advertisers

Make sustainability part of your strategy.

Get equipped at the SAP Sustainability Resource Center. >>

EFFECTIVELY MANAGE WATER COMPLIANCE

Understand how increased enforcement may affect your company. Find out more >>

EPA mandatory emissions reporting starts Jan 1st

CSA Standards can help your organization get ready for compliance. Find out how. >>

Join the Discussion

Reader Comments

Adweek needs to be more careful with its research. BP would not have lost any green credentials when leaving the Global Climate Coalition. On the contrary this group was one of the foremost detractors of the IPCC and the science around climate change. BP enhanced it’s position by leaving the group, which eventually folded. Here is an extract from Wikipedia…The Global Climate Coalition was a group of mainly United States businesses opposing immediate action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The group formed in 1989 as a response to several reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. A major scientific report on the severity of global warming by the IPCC in 2001 led to large-scale membership loss.[citation needed] Since 2002 the GCC has been dormant, or in its own words, “deactivated”.

Sarah Severn | January 23rd, 2008