Abstract
The Body Shop is famous for its unique policies. At the
beginning, people praised its "environmental friendly" policy
highly. People regarded the Body Shop as a great representative
of "green business," and they also admired Anita Roddick very
much. But these days many kinds of media try to expose the real
side of the Body Shop. Now it has become a good target of gossip.
Is the Body Shop honest or dishonest? Is it possible to run such
a company as the Body Shop, caring about the environment and
other social issues?
Introduction
If you look up "green business" in a dictionary, you will find
that the words are not given. It Is a kind of newly coined word
among environmentalists. What does it mean? Its meaning is
similar to "socially responsible business," for example, the
company which has to do well both in social contribution (like
saving nature, making a deal with Third World countries to help
them get along on their own and so forth) and making a profit.
Although the Body Shop, the British cosmetic company, is said to
be the representative of green business, as a matter of fact, it
is difficult to stay pure and still make a profit. In other
words, perfect green business is impossible. In this research
paper, I will focus on the Body Shop and investigate how they
have developed and succeeded as so-called "socially responsible"
business. I will also look into the reality of the Body Shop.
History and Politics of the Body
Shop
The Body Shop was established in Brighton, which is on
England's south coast, in 1976 by Anita Roddick. Roddick started
her business with 25 kinds of products in five diff6rent sizes of
bottles that were able to be refilled. This way of selling the
products gained popularity, and now the Body Shop has more than
1,200 branches in 45 countries (my translation, "What is The Body
Shop?").
Their aim is to make the world a better place to live by
returning more than they get to society. They believe that just
to pursue profit without having principles must be avoided. Their
management principles are environmental protection, consideration
for human rights and civil rights, movements against animal
testing in cosmetic trade, fair trade and so on. Their most
famous policy is that all of their products are "natural" and
"100 percent pure." That made a smash hit and played a very
important role in development. In this way, the Body Shop became
big and has been called a symbol of green business. We cannot
overlook what Roddick writes in her book called Body and Soul.
She writes, "When I started the business, I decided that I will
never tell a lie" (my translation, Roddick 18).
The Actual Circumstances of the Body
Shop
The reality is different. Even though the Body Shop tries to
avoid the problems, they have to admit that it is impossible. In
the leaflet "About Animal Testing" which the Body Shop gives out
at the checkout counter, it asserts that they do not test their
products or ingredients on animals. It also declares that they do
not entrust testing to other enterprises, either. They say this
is true and they will not test on animals in the future. Their
movements against animal testing are:
- They aim at products' safety by using ingredients, which have
not been tested on animals, but on human beings. (The Body Shop's
postcard reads, "We make products for people tested by
people.")
- They request cancellation of animal testing to their
suppliers. They also ask suppliers to hand in confirmations twice
a year to make sure that those cosmetic ingredients have not been
tested on animals within the past five years. If those
ingredients are not up to the standard, they would not accept
them.
Despite these allegations, in 1989, they changed the labels on
their products from NOT TESTED ON ANIMALS to AGAINST ANIMAL
TESTING (Kaufman-Rosen 54). It is impossible to avoid all
ingredients never tested on animals. For example, in 199 1, they
got Vitamin E acetate from Hoffman LaRoche for use in their
sunscreen line (Entine 26). According to their internal memo
dated May 19, 1992, the purchasing manager confessed that 46.5
percent of its ingredients had been tested on animals, which is
up from 34 percent the previous year (Entine 26).
In the Body Shop leaflet "What Is Natural," it emphasizes "We
can not and should not be grouped together with the myriad of
other companies crying 'natural' because, as you probably know,
we're not like other companies." Though, natural cosmetics expert
Zia Wesley-Hosford noted Body Shop's wide use of artificial
colors, fragrances, synthetic preservatives, and other
petrochemicals (Entine 25). Emmy-award-winning journalist Jon
Entine also affirmed that some of the Body Shop's 'natural'
products contains cheap, petrochemical laden ingredients (Clark
14).
It seems that there are some problems in controlling products'
quality. According to Scott Takach, who was the number two
manager in quality control at the Body Shop, the problem arose in
1993 when they first violated Good Manufacturing Practice
standards by skipping the required test on the bulk containers
(Entine 26). They just sent one bottle to a lab for testing, and
before they got the result, they had already sent their products
to distribution centers. Then, two centers sent them to stores.
The result of the tests were far below the standards. One test
lab manager said, "You get that kind of reading from swabbing a
toilet bowl" (Entine 26).
It is true that "recycling" costs more than "producing new
things." When you shop at the Body Shop, you would be asked, "Do
you need a shopping bag or just put a tape?" By asking each
customer, they try to reduce the amount of shopping bags they
use. On the shopping bags, some words are printed. It reads
something like, "Please do not throw this bag away," "Please use
as many times as possible." You can tell from the poster, which
the Body Shop printed, that they are eager to reduce the waste of
resources. It writes, "REUSE - When you reuse a bottle, you
reduce waste by eliminating the need for new packaging. REFILL -
You save 20p on every bottle you refill at The Body Shop Refill
Bar. RECYCLE - Return any clean, empty containers from The Body
Shop to us and we will recycle them" (Roddick 1). As you see,
recycling, too, is the important job of the Body Shop. However,
David Brook, who resigned in 1992 as head of the Body Shop's U.S.
environmental department and is now a lawyer with the New Jersey
Attorney General's office, points out that they had never
recycled as many as they intimate (Entine 26).
There is one more environmental problem. The Body Shop
discharged non-biodegradable product. Michael Wyne, executive
director of the Hanover Sewerage Authority in New Jersey,
mentions, "I do not think they could have discharged quantities
that large by accident and even if it was an accident, they were
required by law to report it, which they did not" (Entine 26). A
source of pollution must not be discharged by green business
company, but the actual life is harder to live than the ideal
one.
The "Trade, Not Aid project" is the main tactic for them
recently. What they call "Trade Not Aid project" is to help Third
World countries 'primary producers by not just giving
contributions, but by making a deal with them continually. They
say that when they consider this project, they survey and study
the way of making products and that of collecting ingredients
that would not destroy environment nor exploit local workers (my
translation, "TRADE NOT AID"). In accordance with Richard Adams,
executive director of the U.K. research organization New
Consumer, they figured out that the company's Trade Not Aid
information clarified far less than one percent of its
ingredients (Entine 27).
It seems that the Body Shop is a chunk of lies. There is no
need to wonder whether green business is possible or not. In the
world of business, perfect green business is impossible. The
publications of the Body Shop observe as if they are faithful to
what they have said, but the angelic image has been lost forever
now.
Conclusion
As described above, the perfect green business is impossible.
The company is always in an either-or situation: making a profit
or doing socially responsible business. It has to compromise all
the time because "stay pure (socially responsible) and still make
a profit" is too good to be true.
If the Body Shop does not proclaim that they are absolutely
pure, it would not be singled out for criticism. In the present
situation, it is natural for them to be called a fraud. It is
imperfect however, I believe the Body Shop tries to care about
the social condition more than other companies. Some might say
that it is just a gimmick. I do not know if everything that the
Body Shop tells us is true; however, I want to believe them. Then
what can we do as customers? We have to ask the Body Shop to tell
the truth of what they are doing. The Body Shop must be more
honest and open to public about what they think, what they do,
and what they want us to do. If so, the relationship between them
and us customers will be tighter and the Body Shop supporters
will increase. I understand they pride themselves on being a
symbol of green business, but honesty is the best policy. If they
keep on trying to become green business company little by little,
some day they will be a real symbol of green business.
by Noriko Suzuki
Works Citied
Brock, Pope. "Anita Roddick: Life is short, and the restless
mind behind the Body Shop is determined to take no time-outs."
People Weekly. May 10, 1993: 101-06.
Chatzky, Jean Shennan. "Changing the world." Forbes.
Mar. 2, 1992: 83-4.
Clark, Maureen. "Socially Responsible Business Brawl." The
Progressive. March, 1995: 14.
Ekins, Paul. The Gaia Atlas of Green Economics.
London: Anchor Books, 1992.
Elmer-Dewitt, Philip. "Anita the Agitator." TIME.
Jan. 25, 1993: 42-4.
Entine, Jon. "Shattered Image." Business Ethics.
Sep./Oct. 1994: 23-8.
Jacob, Rahul. "What Sellling Will Be Like in the'90s."
Fortune. Jan. 13, 1992: 45-46.
Kaufman-Rosen, Leslie. "Being Cruel to Be Kind."
Newsweek. Nov. 7, 1994: 54-58.
Roddick, Anita. Body and Soul. Trans. Satoshi Sugita.
Tokyo: The Japan Times, 1992.
Zinn, Laura. "Whales, Human Rights, Rain Forests--And The
Heady Smell of Profits." Business Week. July 15, 1991:
96-97.
