WASTE PREVENTION FORUM ARCHIVE   BACK TO ARCHIVE INDEX

18 Nov 02 - junk mail; Europe; Olympics; refillables; seaweed ** WASTE PREVENTION FORUM ** -- A project of the National Waste Prevention Coalition -------- Forum archive: http://www.reuses.com/nwpcarchive -------------------- From the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse website, and the website of DoubleClick, an international direct marketing company: CONSUMERS CAN USE E-MAIL TO OPT OUT OF CATALOG MARKETING DATABASE When you buy something from a mail order catalog, your transaction is likely to be reported to Abacus, a division of DoubleClick, which compiles a cooperative database of catalog and publishing companies' customers. Your name is then sold to other mail order companies who contact you with their catalogs and offers. This explains why you are likely to receive several unsolicited catalogs after ordering from a mail order company. To opt-out of the Abacus database, send an e-mail to: optout ( A T ) abacus-direct ( D O T ) com Include your full name (including any middle initial) and your current address (and previous address if you have been at your current address fewer than six months). You can also send a letter or postcard with the same information to: Abacus, P.O. Box 1478, Broomfield, CO 80038. For more information, see the Abacus Catalog Opt-Out web page at: http://www.doubleclick.com/us/corporate/privacy/privacy/catalog-opt-out.asp It appears that people who sign up for the Direct Marketing Association (DMA) Mail Preference Service will automatically be included on the Abacus opt-out list. However, people registered for the DMA list may also wish to register for the Abacus list, as an additional safeguard. Information on the DMA Mail Preference Service is at: http://www.dmaconsumers.org/cgi/offmailinglistdave -------------------- Excerpted from an article by Nora Krug in the 11/18/02 New York Times: DIRECT MAIL FROM NON-PROFITS: HOW IT BREEDS AND MULTIPLIES IN YOUR MAILBOX According to the U.S. Postal Service, some 14 billion pieces of mail (out of a total of 200 billion mailings) were sent at the non-profit rate in 2001. If they were evenly divided among America's 105 million households, they would represent a big pile on the doorstep. But the mailings are actually far more concentrated, reflecting what non-profit experts and executives say is a fact of fund-raising life: When it comes to letters, the more charities you give to, the more you get. How that happens is simple: If you make a donation, you can expect to receive 4 to 12 letters a year from the group you gave to, thanking you and asking for more. More important, your name goes out on a list to be bought and exchanged by other groups, which may send solicitation mail at the same pace, hoping that you will extend your charitable proclivities their way. Respond to one of those letters and the process starts all over again. While the bulk of the mail goes to potential donors, current donors are often on the receiving end of two mail campaigns at a time - one to remind them to renew and another to update them on special projects (another way to get them to renew). The frequency of renewal mailings "depends on when they gave their last gift," said Lane Brooks, director of development and marketing at Public Citizen, a consumer watchdog group, which itself sends thousands of solicitation letters. "If they haven't renewed, we will keep asking them to renew." But even if someone has just given, many organizations send other, more subtle reminders, like a certificate of appreciation, a member card, an umbrella, note cards. The purpose of these mailings is "loyalty building," explained Judi Urquhart, a senior vice president at Newport Creative Communications, a direct-market consulting company. "A lot of people like to feel they are a part of the organization." That feeling of engagement is important to giving, said Roger Craver, chairman of Craver, Mathews, Smith & Company, a direct-marketing consulting organization. "Donors who are involved," he said, "give at twice the rate as donors who aren't involved." So an initial mailing might include a petition, a card to send to a victim, a thank-you note to send to an activist. For example, mailings by Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) to its members, which can total as many as 12 solicitations a year, are often tied to a seasonal event that involves drinking and driving, like prom night, July 4 or St. Patrick's Day. In addition to requesting donations, these letters ask that members help raise awareness by calling on law enforcement to set up sobriety checkpoints or to tie red ribbons (provided in a MADD mailing) on their cars. Many groups see direct mail as an educational as well as a fund-raising tool. "We really believe that the amount of mail we have sent over the years has had an effect on the public," said Dean Wilkerson, the national executive director of MADD. Producing the deluge of direct mail can be a hefty investment for non-profits, often requiring a team of consultants. Marketing and creative consultation can run about $1,000 to $30,000 a month, depending on how large and frequent the mailings. Buying one-time use of names through a list manager can cost $65 to $85 for 1,000 names. Easter Seals, a large charity, says it invests about $12 million in direct mail a year, which brings in about $38 million, or about a quarter of the money it raises. In 2001, MADD spent about $8 million in direct mail, bringing in about $15 million of its total revenue of $52 million. But the return on the initial investment is generally low. A campaign to acquire new donors is considered successful if the response rate is 1 percent; most campaigns generate less. An average first-time donation is about $10. "Essentially we and most charities actually are losing money on the overall effort," said Christopher Cleghorn, executive vice president of direct and interactive marketing at Easter Seals. "We are having to spend 125 cents to raise a dollar," he said. So why do charities bother with direct mail? "It is still a staple in recruiting new donors," said Eugene R. Tempel, executive director of the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University. "Even at this efficiency," he said, "the expense will be defrayed as the person makes repeat gifts or larger gifts over time." Still, flooding mailboxes with solicitations is not in anyone's best interest, experts say. "When people don't want to get mail, you don't want to send them," said Nancy Purcell, a list broker with Names in the News. "It's like flushing money down the toilet." But determining who will give is fundamentally tied to who will respond, and the only way to establish that is by sending, and sending again. Simply not responding is not likely to help you empty your mailbox. There are other stopgaps, like sending in your donation with a request for no further mailings and not to sell your name, registering with the Direct Marketing Association (DMA) Mail Preference Service, and avoiding mail-order buying. But "mailing lists are constantly being created from all kinds of sources," said Bennett Weiner, chief operating officer at the Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance, a charity watchdog. "Before you know it you are on another list." To stay in the DMA database, you must send a renewal notice every five years. As a result, the list has remained steady at about 4.1 million, said Cynthia Duffney, a DMA spokeswoman. For some, trying to get off the lists is more trouble than it is worth. Joan Soule, a 75-year-old accountant in Concord, Mass., said she tried it for years, "but it hasn't ever really worked." It never really got to the right person," she said. "I gave up and I just use the wastebasket now." -------------------- Excerpted from an 11/15/02 article on the Environmental Data Services' "Environment Daily" European news service website (forwarded by David Stitzhal): EUROPEAN UNION (EU) WASTE PREVENTION TARGETS FLOATED The European Commission will next year make initial proposals towards establishing European Union-wide waste prevention targets, a senior environment directorate official announced at an industry conference in Brussels November 14. David Grant Lawrence, head of the department responsible for waste and resources policy, said a policy paper on prevention targets would be published separately from three other proposals also due next year: a thematic strategy on recycling, one on sustainable resource management and a white paper on integrated product policy. The aim was to "put objectives on what we're trying to do in waste prevention," he said in an address to the annual conference of sustainable resource management lobby group Assurre. He declined to elaborate on whether the targets would be binding or voluntary, nor whether they would be quantitative or qualitative. The EU's new sixth environmental action programme devotes a large section to waste prevention, including a rare instance of quantitative, albeit non-binding, EU policy targets. These aim to reduce both the final disposal of all waste and the generation of hazardous waste by 20 percent to 2010 and 50 percent to 2050. But next year's Commission work programme makes no reference to a separate initiative on prevention targets; for this reason, the announcement took delegates by surprise. One told Environment Daily that industry was generally skeptical of the value of setting waste prevention targets, but that they could work as part of a wider drive programme aiming at more sustainable resource use. Despite giving few further details of the directorate's thinking, Lawrence did say that targets for hazardous waste prevention were likely to be qualitative rather than quantitative. He added that proposed EU rules requiring member states to harmonize waste statistics reporting would create a "knowledge base on which to fix targets." Note: A copy of "Environment 2010: Our Future, Our Choice - The Sixth Environment Action Programme of the European Community 2001-2010," which is referred to above, is online (in various languages) at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/newprg/index.htm --------------------- From Dwight Mercer, waste diversion program, City of Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada: During the Salt Lake City Olympics last winter, the official website provided an Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan (about 25 pages) for the Olympics. I think it was in PDF format. It was a comprehensive, concise and straightforward document. Unfortunately, since the part of the website that included this document is down, I can find no link to it. A search engine search of several related sites has not worked. Does anyone have an electronic copy of this document they could forward to me? E-mail: dmercer ( A T ) cityregina ( D O T ) com --------------------- Link to the "Reduce, Reuse, Refill" website promoting refillable beverage containers, from the Institute for Local Self-Reliance: http://www.grrn.org/beverage/refillables/index.html -------------------- Link to a 10/16/02 article by Helen Pearson on the Nature magazine website, about a type of seaweed that could be used as a natural alternative to polystyrene for fast-food packaging (first seen in the WasteCap Wisconsin Bulletin): http://www.nature.com/nsu/021014/021014-4.html - end -