History of the Think Outside the Bottle Campaign

Think Outside the Bottle

In 2005, Corporate Accountability International launched a national public education and action campaign dubbed Think Outside the Bottle to challenge the misleading marketing and irresponsible practices of leading water bottlers, Coke, Nestlé, and Pepsi. Employing a decades old model for mobilizing sustained grassroots pressure on industry leaders, and working in concert with partners like Environmental Working Group and the Polaris Institute, Think Outside the Bottle demanded that water bottlers:

• Reveal the sources and sites of the water used for bottling;
• Publicly report breaches in bottled water quality comparable to reports by public water systems; and
• Stop threatening local control of water when siting and operating bottled water plants.

More broadly the campaign and its endorsers have worked to:

• Raise U.S. public awareness of the abuses of the bottled water industry, and the importance of protecting public water systems;
• Pressure bottled water corporations that are turning water into a profit-driven commodity to stop branding water in a way that undermines confidence in public water and paves the way for corporate control of water; and
• Build the broad base of support needed to protect and preserve the human right to water and people’s access to it.

Think Outside the Bottle Victories

Pepsi agrees to label Aquafina’s source. In July 2007, after sustained grassroots pressure from Corporate Accountability International, Pepsi agreed to print “Public Water Source” on its labels specifically and publicly acknowledging Think Outside the Bottle as the source of pressure to make this change. The announcement provoked a torrent of national media attention and highlighted the fact that up to 40 percent of bottled water comes from the same source as the tap.

Nestlé agrees to label Pure Life’s source. In October 2008, in response to increased public pressure and scrutiny on the corporation for its practices, Nestlé Waters North America published its first ever Corporate Citizenship Report. In that report, Nestlé publicly confirmed that, in response to ‘constructive stakeholder feedback,’ it had begun changing the labels of its tap-water sourced brand Pure Life to disclose that its water came from public water supplies. The following spring, during a direct engagement meeting at Nestlé Waters North America’s headquarters in Greenwich, CT, Nestlé executives acknowledged that this change was made in direct response to the calls for increased transparency made by the tens of thousands of people who had been participating in the Think Outside the Bottle Campaign. 

Mayors resolve to buck bottled water. In June 2008, building on a groundswell of local and city action to stop public spending on bottled water, spurred by Think Outside the Bottle and its partners, a body representing more than 1100 mayors resolved to stop city spending on bottled water. Dozens of major cities and a handful of states had already began trimming bottled water from their budgets, saving considerable taxpayer dollars. San Francisco alone cut $500,000 from its budget.

Campuses get off the bottle. More than 150 campuses have now taken action on Think Outside the Bottle, whether by getting campus facilities to stop selling bottled water or by widely distributing reusable water bottles. One such is example is Washington University of St. Louis, which, after months of student campaigning, announced plans to phase out all university purchases and sales of bottled water.

Restaurants serve tap. More than 60 leading restaurants are now serving tap water in lieu of bottled water, from Philadelphia’s White Dog Café to Berkeley’s Chez Panisse.

Legislation and bottled water. While Think Outside the Bottle organizers urge governors to cut spending on bottled water, Food and Water Watch has been working with legislators in California and beyond to advance legislation to rein in the bottled water industry. On March 24, 2009 a bill that would provide critical information about the impact of the bottled water industry today passed out of the California State Assembly Committee on Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials. Authored by Assembly Member Felipe Fuentes, Assembly Bill 301 would require bottled water corporations to disclose the volume and source of water they extract and whether that source is publicly or privately owned. 

Canada beyond the bottle. In December 2, 2008 the Toronto city council voted overwhelmingly to phase out bottled water at all city facilities, becoming the largest municipality in North America to do so.

On March 7, 2009, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) Board of Directors voted today to encourage their 1,775 members to phase out the provision and sale of bottled water.

At the board meeting in Victoria, British Columbia, the FCM passed a strongly worded resolution “urging” all Canadian municipalities to take action on bottled water.

Across Canada municipalities and school boards, universities and colleges, faith-based organizations and restaurants are standing up for public water by taking out the bottle. According to the Polaris Institute, which has helped lead much of the organizing in Canada described here and above:

• 28 Municipalities from 6 provinces have voted to restrict bottled water.
• The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) recently encouraged their 410 municipal members to take action on bottled water.
• 21 Universities and Colleges have established bottled water free zones.

Coke unwilling to report on water quality. In 2007, Corporate Accountability International submitted a shareholder resolution for Coke’s 2008 annual shareholders’ meeting, asking the corporation to publicly reveal the quality test results of its bottled beverages, including its Dasani brand of bottled water. Unfortunately, Coke challenged the resolution with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the resolution was excluded. A similar resolution was filed for the 2009 Annual Meeting which simply asked the corporation to report on ways the company thought it could improve on how it disclosed this information to consumers. Despite this reasonable request, and the overwhelming evidence available that illustrated the public value of this discussion, Coke’s well financed legal representation once again challenged the resolution and had it excluded. This sustained record of aggressive opposition is leading many to wonder what exactly Coca-Cola has to hide.

Click here to learn more about the Think Outside the Bottle campaign.