“Does “eco” need to be more expensive?” This was a question raised to me recently by a small business owner. This owner in question is a young woman who has made a local, sustainably-created product to sell because it was better for the environment than the imported plastic souvenirs around her town. Her product was inexpensive to make, and she planned to sell it at a low price for a nominal profit. When she told her friends about her product (pictured above), they all responded that she should price it higher because eco-products are known to be more expensive.
What do you think?
I urged her to sell her product at her intended price. The benefits of a lower cost eco-product are:
- Likelihood to sell more, keeping project and employees moving forward
- Providing people with eco-alternatives and thereby increasing awareness
- And in this case, planting more seeds that will become flowers!
Conversely, the alternative of a higher price could place this simple product in a more premium category, not to mention provide more return for the manual effort required to create the product.
It’s an interesting discussion, but one that will likely be limited. As we see demand grow for eco-products, supporting technologies are growing too, so there is less development cost for each new eco-product. Plus, more options drive competition, which we know drives cost down too. So, a unique time! As new eco-products that aren’t expensive to create enter the market, how should the price be set? And how does this affect the products’ longevity?
Personally, I hope for lower costs, so that more eco-products are purchased and used by more people. Ideally, prices of eco-products would be based on the quality of the products themselves. Taking it a step further, adding fees to non-eco-friendly products, so, an alternative that harms our environment, is a more expensive option. Onward and upward!