JCPenney Executive Says U.S. Cotton Must …Prove Sustainability

THE AMERICAN Heritage Dictionary defines the adjective “sustainable” as:
1. Capable of being sustained.
2. Capable of being continued with minimal long-term effect on the environment: sustainable agriculture.

Sounds simple enough, right? Especially that part about sustainable agriculture. Cotton production is definitely that. Or not. We may believe it, but we are still the minority, so proving it is the cotton industry’s task.

Advertisement

“JCPenney defines ‘sustainable’ as a product which provides a positive impact economically, socially and environmentally,” said Peter McGrath. “It is within that context that we talk about sustainability.”

McGrath is executive vice president and director of product and sourcing for JCPenney, Inc., one of America’s largest department store, catalog and e-commerce retailers. Additionally, he currently serves as Chairman of Global Marketing for the Cotton Board, and is also a Cotton Board Executive Board Member. His remarks were made at a Cotton Board press conference at the Beltwide Cotton Conferences in Nashville in early January.

“We believe at JCPenney that you orchestrate your own opportunities,” he continued. “You have to take charge of what you want to have happen, and what happens to you. And from this perspective, you have to talk about the customer.”

Top Articles
Has the Cure for Low Cotton Prices Set In?

McGrath said corporate social responsibility is no longer just a debate. Customer attitudes are changing, and the pace of change will only accelerate. “Green” retailing is becoming extremely competitive.

The cotton industry has made tremendous strides over the years to minimize, as the popular term goes, its “environmental footprint.” But perception is reality, and if the public in general, and the consumer is particular, do not perceive cotton as doing that, then, well, we are not. McGrath said successful companies must have an “emotional connection” with their customers. “It’s not enough just to sell the product,” he said, to remain competitive.

Companies want shareholder reports to reflect what they are doing toward sustainability, McGrath said, including reducing packaging and converting to recycled materials.

On Organics and ‘Natural’

McGrath is often asked how how much more a customer would pay for an organic cotton shirt, but to his company, it’s not the salient point.

“It is expected that companies provide low-environmental-impact products,” he says. “They also tell us that, as customers – and beyond the sustainability issue – ‘we want you to produce innovative products.’”

A new green version of the very recognizable Cotton Incorporated logo with “Natural” beneath is part of the latest Cotton Incorporated initiative to show the consumer that 100% U.S. cotton products meet all of the explicit criteria of being eco-friendly.

“That’s one of the things Cotton Incorporated is now trying to do to make that connectivity is to try to do what we did 15 years ago with ‘Fabric of Our Lives,’” McGrath said. “We wanted to show that U. S. cotton is sustainable – maybe more so than other cottons grown around the world.”

Another misunderstood definition is “organic.” Quite frankly, isn’t all food and fiber essentially “organic?” But here, too, perception is reality. “‘Organic’ is a very loose term” – in fact, during the presentation is was pointed out that there are at least two dozen definitions of it – “and we at JCPenney have a very small amount of ‘organic’ products in our stores. It’s certainly less than 5%.”

And that begs another question: What exactly is an “organic blend?” Is it a blend of someone’s, anybody’s, definition of “organic” with something that is not? What percentage of “organic” must the blend contain to be called an “organic blend?” One percent? Fifty percent? Let the endless definitions begin.

But, said McGrath, “The consumer is giving us a message about ‘organic.’ But I think the message of Cotton Incorporated is toward sustainability and sustainable farming. I think that’s a message the Cotton Board and Cotton Incorporated have worked really hard on. If we can get the reputation that U.S. cotton is the sustainable cotton around the world, then we can create a point of difference.”

Caption:
Peter McGrath

0

Leave a Reply

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

I am an educator and I am always amazed when I hear or see in print comments about Organic, Natural or Eco-friendly products. It does not matter if the product is food or apparel. You are correct concerning the meaning of each of the above terms. It depends on who is giving the definition as to the importance of it

Junior High Students are the ones to ask this question. They use the term, pure, which means nothing added. They realize that even in nature, purity is difficult. Most elements are found in combination with other elements. Processes must be introduced to separate the elements desired. Safety is what we are all concerned with and the cost is our next area of interest.

Groups worldwide and in the United States,that influence what is provided to the consumer, make such ludicrous demands on the American Farmer and our brother and sisters in all other areas of industry.

We live on the farm, have raised four children and now our two grandchildren live on the same farm. We have the same concerns for our families and their health as do the non-farmer sector, of our communities, have for their families.

My amazement with all of this is how little concern there is for how products that are coming into our country, from other parts of the world, are producted.

Those junior high students that I referred to earlier, they are the ones consuming most of the fast food, made from imported materials, and they are wearing the latest fashions manufactured in countries they can not pronounce, from raw materials that are also producted in countries they never give a thought of unless ask to locate them on a world map. Standards should be universal, then all would be competing on a level playing field. Our government have sold us out by allowing companies to go overseas or south of us, to make hugh profits by exploiting those individuals who have very little because their governments are so corrupt. Our government officials allow those products to come back into this country with little cost to the manufacturer and that item sells for prices far above the production cost.

Our mills have gone by the wayside. Steel companies are bankrupt, fish farmers are not able to stay in business, and the list goes on, all of this due primarily to foreign competition. The junk that comes into American from

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

The article above was sent accidentally early. I am not very proficient with my computer skills. I would have liked to have finished the comment and proof read it before submitting. My fingers do not always touch the correct key.Thank you!

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

Please feel free to take all the space you need. If you run out again, use the next box. We invite and appreciate your comments.

Fire away!

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

I am an educator and I am always amazed when I hear or see in print comments about Organic, Natural or Eco-friendly products. It does not matter if the product is food or apparel. You are correct concerning the meaning of each of the above terms. It depends on who is giving the definition as to the importance of it

Junior High Students are the ones to ask this question. They use the term, pure, which means nothing added. They realize that even in nature, purity is difficult. Most elements are found in combination with other elements. Processes must be introduced to separate the elements desired. Safety is what we are all concerned with and the cost is our next area of interest.

Groups worldwide and in the United States,that influence what is provided to the consumer, make such ludicrous demands on the American Farmer and our brother and sisters in all other areas of industry.

We live on the farm, have raised four children and now our two grandchildren live on the same farm. We have the same concerns for our families and their health as do the non-farmer sector, of our communities, have for their families.

My amazement with all of this is how little concern there is for how products that are coming into our country, from other parts of the world, are producted.

Those junior high students that I referred to earlier, they are the ones consuming most of the fast food, made from imported materials, and they are wearing the latest fashions manufactured in countries they can not pronounce, from raw materials that are also producted in countries they never give a thought of unless ask to locate them on a world map. Standards should be universal, then all would be competing on a level playing field. Our government have sold us out by allowing companies to go overseas or south of us, to make hugh profits by exploiting those individuals who have very little because their governments are so corrupt. Our government officials allow those products to come back into this country with little cost to the manufacturer and that item sells for prices far above the production cost.

Our mills have gone by the wayside. Steel companies are bankrupt, fish farmers are not able to stay in business, and the list goes on, all of this due primarily to foreign competition. The junk that comes into American from

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

The article above was sent accidentally early. I am not very proficient with my computer skills. I would have liked to have finished the comment and proof read it before submitting. My fingers do not always touch the correct key.Thank you!

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

Please feel free to take all the space you need. If you run out again, use the next box. We invite and appreciate your comments.

Fire away!