TP3_White_Paper_The_environmental_impact_of_advertising_within_a_retail_store.pdf

The Environmental Impact Of Advertising Within A Retail Store ™
The Environmental Impact Of
Advertising Within A Retail Store
May 29, 2020
1
Measuring and analyzing indirect GHG Emissions from in-store POS retail
advertising at a leading retailer
1. About the Capstone Research Project
1.1. Introduction
Australia does not seem to be on track to meet the Paris Agreement requirementsto keep global warming below
2°C (March, 2019).While sectors such as energy, transport and construction are largely responsible for these
emissions, little is known of the environmental impacts of the advertising industry, particularly in retailing, both of
which are rapidly growing sectors with billions of dollars in annual spending (Pash, 2019; Mitchel, 2019).Moreover,
the National Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Reductions Scheme in Australiarequires companiesto report
Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions only, leaving out Scope 3, whichtypically constitutes more than 70% of total
emissions (Huang et al., 2019). Even if some companies do report Scope 3, it has a very narrow scope (Patchell,
2018). Thus the actual extent of emissions from investment heavy industries isbarely known, and as Peter
Druckerfamously asserted, the problem is that one cannot manage what is not measured (Prusak, 2010).
This report describes a Capstone Research Project that was undertaken to help address the abovementioned
problem. The report begins with the project’s aim, detailed methodology, deliverables and longer term outcomes,
including implications for the client, the economy, society and the environment;and contributions to critical bodies
of knowledge. The latter half of the report underscoreskey challenges, research highlights and the impact of the
project on the workplace and the researcher.

1.2. Project Aim and Task
Recognizing that only 500 large Multinational Corporations (MNCs) can remarkably reduce global carbon emissions
,the project was about measuring and raising awareness regarding the extent of indirect emissions from the
advertising function of a large Australian MNC (UNCTAD, 2011).
More specifically, the aim was to measure and informthe retailer about the actual extent of annual
emissions resulting from in-store Point of Sales (POS) advertising in two Retailer stores in Sydney.
The project applied mixed research methods to: determine the research scope and design; apply Gaia’s
CO2Counter tool and the ECE tool (https://ece.ielab-aus.info/IndustrialEcology/) to measure and analyze carbon
emissions; and support quantitative findings with qualitative insights(Terrell, 2011).
1.3. The Organization
The project was undertaken with the guidance of Gaia Partnerships, a consulting firm specializing in supply chain
emissions measurement, reporting and offsetting since 2008. Also assisting with suitable research partners and
general marketing advise was TrinityP3, a world leading marketing consultancy. Gaia’s scalable methodology and
CO2Counter tool enable the real time monitoring of Scope 3 emissions, so as to better inform carbon efficiency and
sustainability decisions for MNCs.
2

3
2. Research Process, Outputs and Outcome
2.1. Description of Research Process
Figure 1: Process and Timeline
Step 1a: Sustainability Questions for Retailer
Research commenced with an open-ended (Annex 1 for responses) questionnaire targeted at sustainability leads
at Retailer, to understand the sustainability thinking around marketing; the reasons behind their interest in the
project;and their Scope 3 emissions measurement boundaries.

4
Figure 2: Sustainability Questions for Retailer
Step 1b: Emissions Calculation Flowchart
According to Gaia, emissions occur during: (a) Design and manufacturing of advertising content/medium; (b)
Consumption of the medium such as in-store digital display; and (c) Disposal: of materials used, print or electronic.
An emissions map following the above pathways was created and at each stage the nature of data required and the
corresponding Emissions Factors (EFs) were identified. This was to provide a holistic picture of where emissions
occur, how they can be measured and what is needed for a data inventory.

5
Figure 3: Emissions Pathways

6
Step 2: Retailer Store Visits
The next step comprised visitsto two Retailer Stores to collect data – Retailer selected Parramatta Westfield as
a large outlet and George Street as a flagship digital outlet. The following primary data types (Annex 2) were
collected to complete a Data Inventory Template so as to facilitate emissions calculations.
Figure 4: Basic Information from Store Visits
Step 3: Data Inventory Template
A comprehensive data inventory template was then created for both stores using parameters above and additional
parameters later obtained from Retailer (power usage; panels disposed/year; paper weight/quantities; internet
usage and data size). Overleaf is a snapshot (Annex 3) of the data inventory template from Parramatta Westfield:
Figure 5: Data Inventory Template

7
Step 4: Assumptions and Formulae
Given the extent of information available from Retailer and a research method that was not perhaps purely
scientific, the following major assumptions were made, followed by the formulae used:
Table 1: Major Assumptions
Table 2: Emissions Calculation Formulae

8
Step 5: Calculating and Validating Emissions
Emissions from each step of the pathways(Annex 4)were calculatedusing available data and corresponding EFs.
While CO2Counter and ECE tools have embedded EFs for certain pathways, the remaining EFs were obtained
from the National Greenhouse Gas Accounts Factors, 2019, and research pertaining to the carbon footprint of
internet usage. A number of rounds of calculations were performed following feedback from the Academic Advisor
and Mentor so as to validate calculations.
2.1. Description of Research Process
The main output(s) to Gaia Partnerships comprise Excel based calculations of: (a) Emissions by store, pathways
and Scope; (b) Emissions hotspots from both stores; (c) Emissions from paper versus digital advertising; and (d)
Approximating scale of emissions and drawing comparisons. Gaia intends to bank on these calculations to draft
and share with Retailer a Communications Piece, outlining the basic research process, results and insights.
Table 3: Emissions from George Street

9
Table 4: Emissions from Parramatta Westfield
Figure 6: Emissions Compared

10
Table 5: Paper Vs Digital Signage Figure 7: Paper Vs Digital Signage
The following observations and inferences can be drawn from the results above:
1. George Street has total emissions of 104.66 Tons/year, which are almost twice the emissions from the
Parramatta store at 54.89 Tons/year.
2. Emissions from electricity consumption and digital panel manufacture are responsible for a higher emissions
count at George Street.
3. Paper manufacturing, printing and disposal account for similar carbon emissions in both stores, given similar
quantities are used.
4. For both stores, electricity consumption from digital display, panel and paper manufacture and printing, are
the primary emissions hotspots – although this can vary for digital signage depending on the extent to which
a store is Digital versus Paper.
5. In both stores emissions from Digital advertising (118.97 Tons/year) are higher compared to Paper (37.43
Tons/year) – again this could be attributed to electricity consumption and panel manufacture. This is
interesting because the retailer considers (Annex 1) Digital signage as more cost-effective, whereas the study
highlights that it is also more carbon intensive.
6. The results seem to be consistent with Life Cycle Analysis literature for paper and digital devices, as well
as Scope 3 emissions studies that highlight Purchased Goodsand Product Usage as emission hotspots,
particularly for the retail sector (Farsan et al., 2018; Johnson, 2017; Ferrari et al., 2012).

11
Estimating Scale and Utility for the Retailer
It is important to understand the scale of emissions across this retailer and the retail sector as a whole– assuming
average emissions from the two stores are representative of 352 retail stores. Calculations also assume 500 retail
businesses, as in the sample size used by Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) to conduct annual retail sector
surveys (ABS, 2020).
Emissions from all retail outlets can be estimated at 28,000 Tons/year – this is a significant number when compared
to Retailer’ total reported Scope 3 emissions of 13,203 Tons in 2019 (Reference supplied but removed from blog,
2019). Furthermore, a rough approximation for retail sector emissions could amount to 14,000KiloTons/year. To put
the impactof these numbers in perspective:
1. Retailer Wide: As in O’Neill (2020), assuming a typical Australian family spends AUD 0.2756 per KwH per
yearfor electricity and therefore releases 5.3 Tons of carbon;POS advertising at Retailer releases as much
carbon as is released by more than 5,000 families annually.
2. Retail Sector Wide: At 14,000 KiloTons, this is close to as much carbon released by the Hazelwood power
station in Victoria, which releases about 15 million Tons of emissions per year (SECRC, 2017).
Figure 8: Estimating Emissions at Scale
2.3. Project Outcomes

12
Retailer cites environmental performance and informed sustainability decisions as primary interestsbehind the
project. Therefore, the most important outcome is the learning and awareness it can generate as they adopt
Science Based Targets (SBTs) such as reducing Scope 3 emissions by 30% by 2030 (Retailer, 2019). However,
only the following parameters in their Scope 3 calculations are included: (a) Contractor Fleet; (b) Air Travel; and (c)
Employee Commute(Reference supplied but not shown in blog, 2019). This considerably understates emissions,
warranting major research aimed at broadening the scope.research, perhaps spearheaded by firms such as Gaia,
ought to encourage other major industries to expand the purview of Scope 3 emissions management and therefore
boost contributions to reducing global warming.
Given POS advertising spending is a fraction of overall advertising spend (Annex 1), potentially the total Scope 3
emissions from advertising alone ought to be significantly high. In fact, if indirect emissions from other business
functions at Retailer were to be included, emissions could well exceed the Total Emissions of 418,060 Tons of
CO2e reported in 2019. Thus if the retailer is to truly adhere to SBTs, it can draw lessons from the project as to the
implications of undertaking an enhanced Scope 3 measurement boundary. The widespread continuity of similar
research, perhaps spearheaded by firms such as Gaia, ought to encourage other major industries to expand the
purview of Scope 3 emissions management and therefore boost contributions to reducing global warming.
Implications for the Triple Bottom Line (TBL)
Economy
Research on emissions measurement can go a long way in influencing informed and impactful business
sustainability decisions (Bellucci et al., 2020; Bhattacharya, 2019). This in turn could lead corporations to seek
partnerships through multi-stakeholder engagement to measure and manage indirect emissions, as well as acquire
carbon efficiency in supply chains (Schaltegger et al., 2019). The more companies invest in such initiatives, the
greater their contributions to sustainable economic growth, as well as the possibility of securing potentially billions
of dollars in green investments (Landberg et al., 2019).
Environment
The SBT Initiative (SBTi) is a multi-stakeholder platform aimed at guiding corporations to reduce carbon emissions
– around 375 companies have signed up. Projects such as this could contribute towards assisting Australian
companies identify new emissions pathways and better position themselves to meet SBTs – this is likely to reduce
GHG emissions, augment environmental sustainability and help meet the Paris Agreement targets (Henderson et
al., 2020; Farsan et al. 2018).
Social
The negative ramifications of GHG emissions for both mental and physical health span a gamut from clinical
depression to cardiovascular and respiratory ailments (Landrigan et al., 2018). More disconcertingly, climate
change is linked to deteriorating health of future generations and to the productivity of labor (COE, 2015; Zander
et al., 2015). As companies rally to better measure and reduce emissions, it is expected that population health will
benefit, as will the productivity of employees.

13
Business sustainability has been gradually shifting from a profit driven Business As Usual approach to a multi-
stakeholder led TBL centric approach, and more recently towards a ‘True Sustainability’ model that applies an
‘Outside-in’ lens by prioritizing social and environmental challenges; and utilizes resources and competencies to
create value for the common good (Schaltegger& Burritt, 2018; Dyllick& Muff, 2016).This is somewhat evidenced
by the fact that companies are now rapidly adopting SBTs to help reduce absolute emissions and emissions
intensities.
However, this is not an easy task, as even with the existence of the Corporate Value Chain Standards (CVCS),
measuring indirect emissions in 15 categories along the supply chain is a complex process (Hertwich& Wood,
2018; Patchell, 2018).Conversely, supply chain emissions are typically 4 times higher than operational emissions
and cannot thus be excluded (CDP Worldwide & ADEME, 2019). It is therefore, of profound importance to
undertake and scale up emissions measurement research, so as to contribute to the body of knowledge concerning
quality measurement tools, emissions factors and measurement processes – bearing in mind the overall goal of
keeping global temperatures within 2°C(SBTi, 2018).
2.4. Contributions to Bodies of Knowledge

14
1. The initial research scope was perhaps too ambitious (including 3 retailers) and was not achievable, thus
barring inter-industry comparisons;
2. There is very little literature on what constitutes sustainable advertising practices in its paper or digital forms –
most studies are skewed towards the efficacy/ethics of deliveringsustainability messages;
3. Acquiring data has been challenging – for instance data on disaggregated advertising spending would have
made for more meaningful comparisons using emissions per dollar spent;
4. Given the time available and complexities triggered by COVID-19, the research could not dig deeper into
emissions from transportation and internet usage; nor could it factor in the consumer perspective to emissions-
intensive advertising.
3.1. Challenges and Limitations
3. Reflections on Research Process
Highlights of what went according to plan, adjustments made and what could be done differently:
1. The project’s central intent remained unchanged, so the extent of emissionsfrom POS advertising can now be
communicated with the retailer;
2. Under the guidance and technical support of the workplace mentor and academic advisor, a sound data
inventory and GHG measurement system was applied;
3. Seamless communication within the research team paved way for greater cooperation from the client and
timely adjustments were made in research scope and method;
4. In future, it is important to carefully evaluate the feasibility of the research scope at the onset so as to enable a
focused and deeper research experience;
5. It is imperative to engage the primary client as early as possible in the research process so as to better
integrate their objective and perspectives.
3.2. Key Research Highlights

15
1. The retailer seems to be inclined towards adopting a Digital Signage based POS advertising strategy given
its cost-efficiency and content delivery speed (Annex 1). However, the results indicate high degree of Scope 3
carbon emissions, which is something that the company ought to be mindful of.
2. The retailer claims to use recycled and certified paper for advertising; however, they have no paper or digital
panel recycling policy that could help address carbon emissions from waste disposal.
3. The following are indicative strategiesfor the retailerto reduce emissions: (a) explore innovation ssuch as
cleaner printing inks or energy storage systems; (b) engage, educate and incentivize suppliers to adopt SBTs;
and (c) assume a leadership role in expanding the boundaries of Scope 3 emissions measurement (Cadez &
Czerny, 2016; Weinhofer& Hoffmann, 2010).
Finally, while it is true that profit is still prioritized by most companies and it is early days for Scope 3 measurement,
there is reason to be hopeful given the tremendous carbon abatement potential of large corporations and the fact
that there seems to be noteworthy momentum in Scope 3 emissions measurement; evidenced through growth and
acceptance of multi-stakeholder platforms such as the CDP, CVCS and SBTi(Bhattacharya, 2019; Patchell, 2018;
Jung, 2012; Hertwich & Wood, 2018).This momentum, however, needs to be supported byworld class research in
emissions measurement, sector specific emissions factors and institutional guidelines and national policy support
and investments (Downie & Stubbs, 2013).
4.1. Impacts on the Workplace
4. Reflections on Impact
Based on Kolb’s model of reflective learning, the following impacts on the researcher are tabulated (Bergsteiner &
Avery, 2014; Terry, 2001):
4.2. Impact on the Researcher

16
Figure 9: Impacts on Researcher

17
1. ABS. (2020). 8501.0 - Retail Trade, Australia, Jan 2020.Australian Bureau of
Statistics, Canberra. Retrieved from https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/
allprimarymainfeatures/3DDA13ECDC094B1CCA257734002042F2?opendocument
2. Adamson, J. (2017, May 16). Carbon and the Cloud: Hard facts about data storage. Stanford Magazine.
Retrieved from https://medium.com/stanford-magazine/carbon-and-the-cloud-d6f481b79dfe
3. Bellucci, M., Bini, L., &Giunta, F. (2020). Implementing environmental sustainability engagement into business:
sustainability management, innovation, and sustainable business models. In Innovation Strategies in
Environmental Science (pp. 107-143). Elsevier.
4. Bergsteiner, H., & Avery, G. C. (2014). The twin-cycle experiential learning model: reconceptualising Kolb’s
theory. Studies in Continuing Education, 36(3), 257-274.
5. Bhattacharya, C. B. (2019). Small Actions, Big Difference: Leveraging Corporate Sustainability to Drive
Business and Societal Value. Routledge.
6. Cadez, S., & Czerny, A. (2016). Climate change mitigation strategies in carbon-intensive firms. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 112, 4132-4143. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.099
7. CDP Worldwide & ADEME. (2019). ACT Sector Methodology: Assessing Low Carbon Transition: Retail.
Assessing Low Carbon Transition, ACT. Retrieved from https://actinitiative.org/resources-2/
8. Council of Environmental Health, COE. (2015). Global Climate Change and Children’s health. Pediatrics,
136(5), 992. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2015-3232.
9. Department of the Environment and Energy, DEE. (2019). National Greenhouse Accounts Factors - August
2019. Australian National Greenhouse Accounts. Retrieved from https://publications.industry.gov.au/
publications/climate-change/climate-change/climate-science-data/greenhouse-gas-measurement/publications/
national-greenhouse-accounts-factors-august-2019.html
10. Downie, J., & Stubbs, W. (2013). Evaluation of Australian companies’ scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions
assessments. Journal of Cleaner Production, 56, 156-163.
11. Dyllick, T., & Muff, K. (2016). Clarifying the meaning of sustainable business: Introducing a typology from
business-as-usual to true business sustainability. Organization & Environment, 29(2), 156-174.
12. Farsan, A., Chang, A., Kerkhof, A., Scerna, B., Yan, C., Villasana, F., R., Labuton, L. (2018). Value Change in
the Value Chain: BEST PRACTICES IN SCOPE 3 GREENHOUSE GAS MANAGEMENT: Version 3.0. Science
Based Target Initiative, SBTi. Retrieved from https://sciencebasedtargets.org/
13. Ferrari, A. M., Barbieri, L., Folloni, B., &Neri, P. (2012). Life cycle assessment of advertising folders.
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 17(5), 625-634.
14. Henderson, K., Pinner, D., Roger, M., Smeets, B., Tryggestad, C., Vargas, D. (2020). Climate math: What a
1.5-degree pathway would take. McKinsey Global Institute, USA. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/
business-functions/sustainability/our-insights/climate-math-what-a-1-point-5-degree-pathway-would-take
5. List of References

18
15. Hertwich, E. G., & Wood, R. (2018). The growing importance of scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions from
industry. Environmental Research Letters, 13(10), 104013.
16. Huang, Y. A., Weber, C. L., & Matthews, H. S. (2009). Categorization of scope 3 emissions for streamlined
enterprise carbon footprinting.
17. Johnson, N. (Jul 18, 2017). White Paper: Digital Signage vs. Printed Posters – All the Answers to Your In-Store
Retail Questions. Digital Signage Connection. Retrieved from https://www.digitalsignageconnection.com/white-
paper-digital-signage-vs-printed-posters-answers-store-retail-questions
18. Kamiya, G. (February 25, 2020). Factcheck: What is the carbon footprint of streaming video on Netflix?.
Carbonbrief.org. Retrieved from https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-what-is-the-carbon-footprint-of-
streaming-video-on-netflix
19. Landberg, R., Massa, A., Pogkas, D. (2019, June 7). Green Finance Is Now $31 Trillion and Growing.
Bloomberg, USA. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2019-green-finance/
20. Landrigan, P., J., Fuller, R., Acosta, N., J., Adeyi, O., Arnold, R., Baldé, A., B., & Chiles, T. (2018). The Lancet
Commission on pollution and health. The Lancet, 391(10119), 462-512. Doi: 10.1016/ S0140-6736(17)32345-0.
21. March, S. (2019, April 1). Will we make it? Are Australia’s efforts to curb global warming enough to meet our
Paris target? ABC News, Australia. Retrieved from https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-01/is-australia-on-
track-to-meet-its-paris-emissions-targets/10920500?nw=0
22. O’Neill, B. (2020, January 01).Average electricity costs per KWh. Canstarblue.com Australia. Retrieved from
https://www.canstarblue.com.au/electricity/electricity-costs-kwh/
23. Retailers (2019). Sustainability Report 2019 Our Highlights. from their website
24. Pash, C. (June 12, 2019). PwC: Australia’s advertising spend will grow to $23 billion by 2023. adnews.com.
au. Retrieved from https://www.adnews.com.au/news/pwc-australia-s-advertising-spend-will-grow-to-23-billion-
by-2023
25. Patchell, J. (2018). Can the implications of the GHG Protocol’s scope 3 standard be realized?. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 185, 941-958.
26. Prusak, L. (2010, October 07). What can’t be measured. Harvard Business Review, USA. Retrieved from
https://hbr.org/2010/10/what-cant-be-measured
27. SBTi. (2018). SBTi Criteria and Recommendations TWG-INF-002 | Version 3.0 May 23, 2018. Retrieved from
https://sciencebasedtargets.org/
28. Schaltegger, S., & Burritt, R. (2018). Business cases and corporate engagement with sustainability:
Differentiating ethical motivations. Journal of Business Ethics, 147(2), 241-259.
29. Schaltegger, S., Hörisch, J., & Freeman, R. E. (2019). Business cases for sustainability: a stakeholder theory
perspective. Organization & Environment, 32(3), 191-212. DOI: 10.1177/1086026617722882
30. Terrell, S. R. (2012). Mixed-methods research methodologies. Qualitative report, 17(1), 254-280.
31. Terry, M. (2001). Translating learning style theory into university teaching practices: an article based on Kolb’s
experiential learning model. Journal of college reading and learning, 32(1), 68-85.

19
32. The Senate Environment and Communications References Committee, (SECRC). (2017). Retirement of
coal fired power stations Final report. Commonwealth of Australia. Retrieved from https://www.aph.gov.au/
Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Environment_and_Communications/Coal_fired_power_stations/
Final_Report
33. UNCTAD. (2011). World Investment Report 2011. United Nations, Geneva. Retrieved from https://unctad.org/
en/pages/PublicationWebflyer.aspx?publicationid=84
34. Weinhofer, G., & Hoffmann, V. H. (2010). Mitigating climate change–how do corporate strategies differ?.
Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(2), 77-89. DOI: 10.1002/bse.618
35. Zander, K. K., Botzen, W. J., Oppermann, E., Kjellstrom, T., & Garnett, S. T. (2015). Heat stress causes
substantial labour productivity loss in Australia. Nature Climate Change, 5(7), 647. Doi: : 10.1038/
NCLIMATE2623
Name: Saif Mohammad Moinul Islam
Academic Advisor: Ms Man Yu, UNSW
Workplace: The Gaia Partnership
Workplace Mentor: Mr. Christopher Sewell, CEO
Referencing Style: APA 6th
Date: Friday, 29May, 2020

20
ANNEXURES
Retailers’ Response to Sustainability Questions
Why are you interested in measuring emissions from in store advertising?
At the retailer, we aim to improve our environmental performance every year. Also, as a member of the
Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation (APCO) we work with different stakeholders to improve our score
every year. The more information we can gather across a variety of sources – the more informed we are to
make well informed decisions for now and the future.
How do you integrate sustainability in advertising strategy? What strategies if any do you adopt to reduce
carbon emissions from advertising?
We aim to reduce carbon emissions by collaborating with our suppliers in using advertising materials with
lower carbon footprints. Our Print Management partner has a key focus on environmental impacts. This was
one of our considerations as part of the tender business assessment. https://finsbury.com.au/sustainability/
carbon-neutral-print/
How much are you spending on advertising in relative terms?
See below
What proportion are you spending on in-store advertising?
In store retail spend is minimal comparative to the overall marketing investment. The majority of our annual
marketing spend is targeted in Media/ Partnership (TVC, Press, Digital, OOH, sponsorship) opportunities. While
spend is an extremely small % of the marketing budget - it provides significant ROI. We own the space and
apart from the physical POS costs most overheads are shared as business operating costs (e.g.: power, rent,
fixtures etc..). Retail stores are the coal-face of the living brand experience. The merchandising messages and
sales teams need to work collaboratively to ensure cohesive customer experiences.
The marking messaging may be crafted to define the retailer benefits, other times displaying our vendor
products – either way the objective is to ‘start a conversation’. The purchase path starts long before customer
reach the store, but the store is where the personality and experience must embody the retailer.
How much are you spending on paper Vs digital in-store advertising per store?
Physical campaign production is rough % split 85-15 paper vs digital execution budget. However:
• Digital content is cost efficient if we are using what already exists from vendors or internal team. Creating
digital content that video based is far more expensive and time consuming to develop. We predominately
re-purpose.
• Tech infrastructure for digital content needs proactive issue monitoring: bandwidth quality, screen burn,
and cached materials are all risks that need to be monitored actively at store level. While digital provides
greater agility – it’salso more likely than print execution to have an unnoticed issue impacting message
delivery/or visual execution
• Regardless of digital or printed – the offer MUST be of interest to the customer and creative engaging. Too
much digital content poorly constructed over rotated is like visual noise. However static print POS can also
become ‘wallpaper’. It’s a fine balance to create a comfortable yet interesting environment for customers to
visit.
What is the ratio or proportion of paper Vs digital in-store advertising for the two selected stores at Parramatta
Westfield and George Street?
• George St: Targeted to be paperless so should be less than 10% paper.
• Apart from retail bags and brochures and printed contracts all messaging and pricing tickets are
designed to be digital delivery
• Parramatta:
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Sustainability in Advertising

21
• Approx. 75% paper balance would be digital. The Digital screen devices, services/TV screens, eyelites
and video walls are the only digital assets. Everything else is printed materials.
• Both: we are hoping to migrate customers to be comfortable to access brochure style content digitally so
we can remove the need. This needs changes in customer behaviors/expectations to be successful.
What are the Pros and Cons of Paper Vs Digital Signage?
POS print and delivery
PRO’s Cons
More consistent quality control. High likelihood all
will outputs will look common if QA’d in manufacture
process.
Multiple messages cannot rotate. Dynamic
messaging (or changed messaging at times of the
day) come at cost of incremental manual labour (to
regularly change) or additional space requirements
Static placements create space and cut through
of messaging amongst noise of digital/animated
messaging. They are always on display and more
digestible than moving content on average
Freight is expensive cost consideration and delays
speed to market for campaign activations
Human intervention creates more accountability for
accurate execution / placement
max use of physical space is limited by static
placements. I.e.: message in - message out
creates waste - or if recyclable - more expense
Digital content
Pro’s Cons
In digital formats we can change messaging:
• by the time of day
• across segments/ demographic’s
• test message options in an agile approach
• withbeacon technology - a message can be
triggered by a specific type of customer to be
more appealing
Stable tech hardware and WIFI access/band width is
a mandatory to ensure seamless execution. Eg:
• Power failure immediately removes all the POS
• If creative updates don’t execute correctly - old
cache content may be legally incorrect (but not
noticed by the teams)
• Screen position, glare, age of screen (burn) can
impede customer engagement.
Content delivery speed to market is a massive
benefit. Creative can be minutes after final execution
is approved.
Increased versatility to place messaging options may
come at the expense of customer dwell opportunities.
The message on the screen in the moment - may
not be the one that the customer walking past. It’s
still only one message at a time. Customers rarely
stand and watch all reveals – unless something is of
interest.
Less physical waste and retail store labour - nobody
needs to remove and dispose of the old POS when
refreshed.
No matter how advanced the technology - you still
need a message the customer is attracted to - and
maintains their attention in what can be a very ‘busy’
environment. The product must be of interest and
offer resonate.
Cost to reformat content is cost effective. On average
digital is a more cost-effective approach.
Cost to CREATE content (rather than basic artwork)
can be extremely expensive to generate per
placement. More like a TCV than a static artwork.
Cost to maintain hardware and its shelf life is shorter
than POS fixtures.
Technology & Hardware is evolving quickly - ongoing
investment is needed to ensure messaging is fresh
and relevant. This investment is for both in the CMS
platforms and the screens and chrome boxes used to
manage content and CX interface
Q
A

22
Emissions Related Questions
Are consumers aware of the carbon emissions from in-store advertising? Is this something worth considering
for the future?
Some consumers are aware of our environmental credentials and the awards we have received for our leading
performance such as the APCO award for the telecommunication category (three years in a row). In addition,
we are part of the Mobile Muster program which recycles EoL mobile devices in our stores.
I have attached the updated print spec sheets with the environmental credentials listed on each and logos that
could be utilized. Currently we don’t display the logos – as the size would be very small. The stock selections
reflectresponsible print management – rather than customer facing for each individual execution.
We do have customer facing messages on the below items for recycled and recyclable (take hope items
outside the retail stores) such as below:
• Door drops/Newsletters:
• Retail bags:
Q
A
How are you currently measuring carbon emissions?
We measure scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions using technical guidance from the Australian Government and
DEFRA.
Are you considering Scope 3 emissions? How?
The retailer currently measures Scope 3 emissions. More info in our Group report on their regional website
Can you give us a breakdown of carbon emission sources?
This was supplied
While considering emissions from advertising what sources do you think are most relevant?
Emissions from materials used
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A

23
What is your perception regarding carbon emissions from Paper Vs Digital Signage in advertising?
We need to see the results of a Paper vs Digital Signage LCA to be able to answer this question
How will information and insight regarding carbon emissions from in-store retail advertising be useful to you?
Could it influence sustainability decisions going forward? How so?
Will help us to better understand the emissions from our stores.
Yes, it could help us to identify opportunities to reduce emissions moving forward. Alternative materials.
How would you place carbon emissions information form in-store retail advertising in the broader scheme of
things at the retailer?
Emissions from our retail franchisees are part of our Scope 3 emissions and will help us to continue improving
our environmental performance.
As customer facing information – it would incorporate into an overarching information provided on our websites
and digital facing touchpoints (for customers who are interested)– rather than individual items. Of course, over
time we anticipate this may change as customer awareness increases.
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A
Q
A

24
If you are interested in finding out about optimizing your agency relationships and
performance, then please contact us to discuss your needs and how we can best
advise you.
Contact your nearest TrinityP3 office:
TrinityP3 Australia
Suite 702, 53 Walker Street,
North Sydney NSW 2060
t: + 61 2 9964 9900
TrinityP3 UK
49 Greek Street, London,
W1D 4EG, United Kingdom
t: + 44 203 994 2211
TrinityP3 Asia
Level 27, Prudential Tower,
30 Cecil Street, Singapore 049712
t: + 65 6631 2861
TrinityP3 USA
Suite 3030, 99 Wall Street #330,
New York NY 10005
t: +1 646 666 7142

TP3_White_Paper_The_environmental_impact_of_advertising_within_a_retail_store.pdf

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to TP3_White_Paper_The_environmental_impact_of_advertising_within_a_retail_store.pdf

Similar to TP3_White_Paper_The_environmental_impact_of_advertising_within_a_retail_store.pdf (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

TP3_White_Paper_The_environmental_impact_of_advertising_within_a_retail_store.pdf