I think government-certified standards target industry first and then motivates industry to acquire certifications that influence consumer choice. Green marketing targets the consumer directly, by claiming something broadly (like the bamboo example). The effectiveness is pretty interesting, I've heard that bamboo is the 'greener' choice and I also will opt for energy-star certified appliances over non-certified and that goes for prop 65 as well. However, I think the effectiveness through government-certification's have a longer lasting impact, when accounting for the social benefit and its effectiveness (energy-star's 362 billion dollar social benefit). I primary feel that government certifications use a science first approach that eventually shapes values, while green marketing uses a values first approach (this garners a high initial acceptance, like the corn/ethanol alternative energy), but eventually has to incorporate science to have long lasting effectiveness.

This comparison absolutely impacts the way I evaluate products. Each one of us has fundamental values that are represented through the dollar of which we use to vote for products. Some certifications align with both values and sound science, while other only align with values or science. As a customer, the ability to actively make a choice by seeing a certification on product I'm interested in or hearing a green marketing pitch that motivates me to choose one product over another provides me with an important opportunity for evaluation involving my own research on the product and allows me to question my values that ultimately influences to my decision to purchase.