NACDS developing environmental policy guidelines

Drug Store News, August 20, 1990 by Al Heller

NACDS developing environmental policy guidelines

As this paper hits the street, the NACDS Distribution Committee will have just adjourned its meeting on environmental issues, as it seeks to develop progressive and meaningful guidelines for the chain drug industry.

NACDS has been moving steadily in this direction during 1990. Environmental concerns headed a list of hot issues at the trade group's first distribution conference this past winter. The committee's sense of urgency led to a well-attended session on solid waste management delivered by Tom Rattray, associate director-corporate packaging development at Procter & Gamble.

At the spring annual meeting, the NACDS/Peter Hart Survey, Changes and Challenges in the World of Drug Store Shopping for the 1990s, showed significant consumer willingness to buy products that are environmentally safe, even if it means higher prices or returnable containers.

Then at Marketplace, speaker after speaker said that sound environmental management is more than an ethical issue; it is good business because consumers are becoming vocal in demanding it. No longer a vague notion expressed by extremists, the wellness of the Earth is becoming a hands-on effort.

People across the country are involved in recycling and sorting their household garbage. Their interest is piqued, they know better management is possible, and many are willing to put their money where their mouths are on this issue.

As consumer involvement increases, people are raising their knowledge base. The environmental beat on daily newspapers has become a hot ticket as an opinion shaper on a sizzling topic. And it is increasingly common to see environmental sections sprouting in bookstores.

This all adds up to mounting pressures on retailers and suppliers, who are highly visible garbage producers in the eyes of the public.

Smaller, lighter packages may well go hand-in-hand with concentrated products and environmentally safe ingredients in the '90s. But retailers and suppliers need to analyze the possible impacts on product protection and market shares, as well as the economies of less shipping expense and less space on the shelf.

These are complex issues, and careless leaps of faith could prove costly. It may be noble to save the Earth and assume an "environmentally responsible" position for consumers who are taking note, but chains must also be certain that steps they take will help preserve and grow their business.

I applaud the chains that have gone through the rigors and begun to set policies, Thrifty and Pay Less NW among them. The methodical approach taken by NACDS is also intelligent. From its start, the distribution committee has included such chains as Eckerd, Thrift, Genovese and Supermarkets General and suppliers Chesebrough-Pond's, Eveready, P&G, Revlon and Burroughs Wellcome.

These suppliers are experienced in servicing food chains, which are more under-the-gun on environmental issues than any other trade class. To learn from their earlier joint efforts and cherrypick solutions that can work makes sense.

Perhaps NACDS may never have to be as aggressive as the Food Marketing Institute in environmental lobbying, simply because of the different nature of the business. As NACDS develops its thoughts, it could look to the impressive efforts of FMI for some additional ideas.

By approving a solid waste policy statement for its members last year, and surveying food chains on their solid waste management practices as a follow-up, FMI has legitimized and mainstreamed environmental concerns for that trade. Food store operators nationwide see the green revolution as a permanent part of the business landscape. Drug store operators would serve themselves well by adopting a similar perspective.