|
我们想调查的非营利组织是绿色和平组织。绿色和平组织有一个明智的愿景：拥有一个更美好的世界，需要个人和集体行动的勇气来为更好的世界做出改变。本文旨在批判性调查绿色营销所使用的营销策略如何影响其他利益相关者，进而给新西兰的中小型企业在营销策略的使用方面提供了见解。本文的范围是北极保护和禁止转运。其局限性在于，绿色和平组织仅利用市场营销策略促使其他公司不做任何事情，但仍不确定企业可以采用相同的营销策略来增加利润和资产。
Introduction 简介
The non-profit organization which we would like to investigate is Greenpeace Organization. Greenpeace has a wise vision of having a better world in which bravery of individuals and collective actions are needed to make changes for the better world. This paper aims at critically investigating how marketing strategies used by Greenpeace influence other stakeholders, in turn giving insights to the small and medium businesses in New Zealand on the use of marketing strategies. The scope of this paper is on arctic protection and ban on transhipment. The limitations are that Greenpeace only used the marketing strategies to urge other companies not to do something, it is still not sure that the same marketing strategies can be used in companies to increase profits and assets.
Body Paragraphs
Arctic Protection
With Greenpeace’s efforts, expansion of cod fishing in the previously-frozen Northern Barents Sea has been stopped since Greenpeace has successfully made an agreement with global brands, including Icelandic Seachill, Young’s Seafood, Iglo, Tesco, McDonald’s, Espersen, Karat, Russian fishing giant, Fiskebat and the Norwegian Fishing Vessel Owners Association to stop importing seafood from cod fishing in the Northern Barents Sea (Greenpeace, 2016).
This agreement initiated by Greenpeace has marked the first limitation in the seafood industry in industrial fishing in the Arctic. Greenpeace has done investigations on how the Arctic sea ice has been affected by extensive cod fishing. The report also shown that global food retailers and brands bought cod from the Northern Barents Sea leading to serious Arctic destruction (Greenpeace, 2016). In return, Greenpeace has made an agreement with the global brands deterring them from buying cod from the Barents Sea. This prevents further extensive Arctic destruction.
According to Myers, Greyser, and Massy (1979), one difficulty in research is that the knowledge use produced by research has stressed on the two-communities theory that the knowledge producers, that is, the researchers hold different values and interests from the users of knowledge, who are the policy makers. We can see that Greenpeace has succeeded in transferring their values and interests with the support of their research results to persuade the global brands to give up buying cod from the Barents Sea. Translation of research is a very important step in leading to action implications (Rein, 1976) and actualization of the action implications (Weiss and Bucuvalas, 1980).The negotiation and action taken by Greenpeace can be a good example for the small and medium businesses in New Zealand in the way that Greenpeace has made good use of research findings in their negotiation. Market research is a very crucial technique in negotiation. Once businessmen can get the sources of consumer interests, information of the input products, and the positive and negative effects of certain consumption ways, they can easily made use of the findings to set their goals in the market and find investments to enlarge their businesses.
Ban on Transshipment
Transshipment is a shifty practice committed by companies in their supply chains. It is a practice which allows fishing boats to offload the products to other vessels at sea and keep on non-stop fishing for years or months at one time. Therefore, transshipment is often associated with various problems, including smuggling of shark fins, illegal fishing and human rights abuse. It also allows pirate fishing boats to launder their fish and mix the fish with the legal fish without inspection on the port (Greenpeace, 2017).
Global Fishing Watch reported for the first time the huge scale of transshipment. They found out that there were thousands of transshipment within just one year (Greenpeace, 2017).
The inhumane treatment of fishermen is under concern. Their situation is horrific in the way that they are actually trapped on the boats for over one year at one time and cannot be escaped from it. Many of them were trafficked from Myanmar and Cambodia (Greenpeace, 2017). There are many problems on board, such as murder of co-workers who are sick and who dare to complain, sexual abuse, 20 hour workdays, sleep deprivation and beatings. It was reported that a number of fishermen were forced to have bait to survive and several of them died from beri beri later (Greenpeace, 2017).
With Greenpeace’s efforts, more and more governments, NGOs and companies start recognising the dangers and problems of transhipment at sea. Challenges to track seafood back to the source becomes a main concern. Big companies, like Nestlé and Mars, showed the leadership by re-inspecting their supply chains. Greenpeace is now calling on companies to solve the problems of unchecked transshipment at sea (Greenpeace, 2017). Thai Union, a supplier for both Nestlé and Mars, has not clean up its supply chain as Nestlé and Mars. Greenpeace wants to make use of Nestlé and Mars’s leadership to lead the industry and give pressure on Thai Union to re-inspect its own supply chain and tackle the problems of transshipment.
A full ban on transshipment has been committed by Nestlé in its supply chains. Mars has stopped using transshipped products if fishing source cannot be fully addressed by the seafood suppliers. Greenpeace is now urging Thai Union to take the charge for the whole industry so as to create a more labour friendly working environment for the seafood workers by ending transshipment (Greenpeace, 2017).
We can see from the above case that Greenpeace has tried hard to make use of the retailers to change the suppliers. It seems that it is easier to persuade retailers to make a change since retailers strive hard to develop consumer-orientated store environments so as to do everything to favour the consumers. (Moore, Bruce, Birtwistle, 2007). By the same logic, it is assumed that Thai Union will be changed since its consumer, Mars and Nestlé, have taken the step to change. We can see the relationship that the customers are who can initiate the change. Therefore, customers actually take the lead in every industries. Products should suit customers’ tastes so as to increase profits and assets of the companies.
Conclusion 结论
The findings mean that we have to do market research and find out what the customers need since customers are the leaders of the market. The purpose of the report has been fulfilled in a way that we can find marketing insights from Greenpeace’s actions. Sources from Greenpeace and academic references have been provided for clear justification.
|
 |
|||
| 网站地图 |
