Changing behavior, at the corporate level as well as the individual level, will be key to solving our energy problems and reducing the world’s carbon footprint. (Often it’s the elephant in the room, sharing the sofa with energy conservation.)

Information alone isn’t going to accomplish the task, and a couple of events are coming up that look at this issue. One is the Behavior, Energy and Climate Change conference in Washington, D.C., Nov. 15–18 presented by ACEEE, Stanford’s Precourt Energy Efficiency Center and the University of California’s  California Institute for Energy and Environment. (I’ll be there, presenting on Thinkshift’s Credibility Quotient assessment tool in the poster session.) It will bring together industry, academics, policy makers and others to consider the latest research, pilot projects, and more.

One of the main speakers will be Doug McKenzie-Mohr, who’s also presenting a two-day workshop, “Fostering Sustainable Behavior,” Nov. 2–3 in Portland and Nov. 4–5 in San Francisco. McKenzie-Mohr literally wrote the book on the subject, available as a free download from his website (which is loaded with articles, case studies, and forums). Workshop info is on his site; registration is here. (Thanks to the Triple Pundit post by Deborah Fleischer for alerting me to the workshop and the book download.)

Companies making vague and poorly supported environmental claims are about to get a smackdown from the Federal Trade Commission’s upcoming revised Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims (aka Green Guides), according to Victor Bell of Environmental Packaging International, which has been giving the agency feedback on the long-awaited revision. That is, if the guidelines are enforced—and Bell believes they will be.

Bell’s presentation at the recent Sustainable Packaging Forum conference in Atlanta caused a stir—many in the audience seemed taken aback by the draft guidelines’ stringency (and possibly by Bell’s delightfully vehement presentation of them). For example, Bell said, a brand name like Eco‐Safe would be considered deceptive if it leads consumers to believe that the product or package has environmental benefits that the manufacturer can’t  substantiate. A wrapper labeled “environmentally friendly” because it wasn’t bleached with chlorine would be considered deceptive if production of the wrapper created other harmful substances. And claims that packaging is recyclable will be considered deceptive unless they’re recyclable in at least 60 percent of U.S. communities.

I preceded Bell on stage with a presentation on the Thinkshift Credibility Quotient—the public debut of  the official version of our system for measuring the credibility of any communication. I was happy to see that the criteria we’re using line up neatly with the FTC’s draft guidelines. (Bell told me later that he thought I was saying essentially the same thing; I was just nicer about it. Maybe I shouldn’t have been!)

I see credibility questions popping up more and more—and I think companies that believe they can continue forever to make grandiose, unsupported claims are in for an unpleasant surprise.

Sierra Magazine has released its annual “Cool Schools” environmental rankings of U.S. colleges and universities. Their rating appears to be just that—an assessment of the school’s green hip factor. At least, that’s what I’m left to guess. The magazine based its ratings on questionnaires sent to the schools and doesn’t disclose many details about how it evaluated the answers.

A comparison of the top 10 rankings from all three years Sierra has ranked these institutions shows the ratings aren’t consistent, either. Only two—Middlebury and Oberlin—made the top 10 all three years. Yale, a model of sustainability, has never hit the top of the list (it’s #14 this year). And Warren Wilson, a school that lives and breathes environmentalism, ranked #3 in 2007 but dropped to #18 this year.

As a result, it’s not very credible, even though the Sierra Club is a highly respected organization. (Full disclosure: I’m a member.)

Part of this can be explained by the explosion of schools that are making sustainability a priority. There are simply lots more colleges and universities making green claims. Now more than ever, those that communicate best about their programs—providing full information, with clear measures of success—will get the recognition.

I’ve found that educational institutions are uncomfortable about trumpeting their work generally and about marketing in particular. But they shouldn’t be. There’s a lot at stake. Both parents and prospective students care a lot about whether a school is green, with two-thirds of them saying the it would influence their decision to apply or attend, according to Princeton Review’s 2009 “College Hopes and Worries” survey.