Is the Mr. Burns test still relevant or should we use the Lisa Simpson test?

Climate positivity is now a competitive advantage.

Source: Den of Geek

We spend a lot of time in climate-tech thinking about the ‘Villain Test’ or ‘Mr. Burns Test’, which asks us to consider whether a ‘green product’ is so good that even a prototypical climate denialist like Mr. Burns would buy it. 

The idea is to avoid the pitfall of relying solely on early adopters and assuming that they are representative of the wider market, who will demand a product that is better, faster or cheaper - not just greener. 

For example, people buy Teslas because they are ludicrously fast, not because they are green. Consumers install a Nest thermostat because it saves them money, not to save the planet. 

What I struggle to account for with this test is the fact that demand for sustainability-branded products is growing 6x faster than conventional alternatives, that these products can command almost a 40% price premium, and that 85% of Americans say they would switch brands to one associated with an environmental or social cause. 

Source: NYU Stern

Mr. Burns isn’t switching to a more sustainable burger. But Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat have shown us that someone is! The Impossible Burger is the best plant-based meat product I’ve tried, but I don’t know if it’s better than ground beef yet. Does this break the villain test? Who is switching brands and paying this premium? 

As always, the answer to ‘who’s killing the Mr. Burns test?’ is ‘millennials’. 70% of them believe that it’s a company’s obligation to solve societal problems. One can only imagine what Generation Z thinks. These millennials have buying power and it’s increasing fast. We are on the cusp of the largest intergenerational wealth transfer in history, with over $100 trillion expected to pass to these conscious consumers by 2050. 

So is the Mr. Burns test still relevant? Definitely. An equivalent or better value proposition is table stakes. But the Overton Window has shifted, and so we need a test that goes further than this. Companies that tap into the latent consumer demand for planetary health will grow bigger and faster than anyone else.  

Climate positivity is now a competitive advantage. Pension funds are committing to net zero to mitigate climate risk, but also because it helps them attract members. Firms are lining up at Watershed’s door because consumers demand transparency and action. Rivian has designed their entire range with responsible adventure in mind because buyers expect it. 

So maybe it should be the ‘Lisa Simpson’ test. She’s all grown up and has the buying power to match her conviction. She expects more than just ‘better performance’, she knows we need to go further than just ‘sustainability’. 

She and her peers will reward companies that restore our planet.