Naked Thoughts: Brands and the Environment
Written by Dan Mullie
So far, 2020 has been a very bad year. (A brave and bold statement, I know.) And making it all the way worse over the past month or so have been the forest fires up and down the American west coast.
News reports of dangerously poor air quality resulting from huge amounts of smoke, and viral videos showing San Francisco’s skyline looking scary-similar to dystopian sci-fi movies, have given people around the world a real-time look at the devastating effects of disregarding our environment.
While the clock is ticking (literally) and the effects of climate change are starting to be felt on a day-to-day basis, people are looking more and more for ways to do their part and help turn the tide of global warming.
One of the ways they’re starting to make change is by taking a closer look at the environmental records of companies they buy from. A poll of consumers from around the world found that a massive 81% felt strongly that companies should help to improve the environment.
With that in mind, who are the brands making headlines—either good or bad—for what they’re doing and saying when it comes to going green?
Patagonia
That Patagonia is making news for its environmentalism doesn’t come as much of a surprise—they’ve have been in the game since day one. But the outdoor clothing company still managed to raise some eyebrows recently when they subtly began stitching the not-so-subtle message “Vote The Assholes Out” onto the backs of tags in some of their shorts. According to founder Yvon Chouinard, it was a message aimed at “politicians from any party who deny or disregard the climate crisis and ignore science.” Patagonia’s environmental CV is pretty well established, but the bluntness of this message definitely managed to resonate with people.
And it should be noted that Patagonia back up their talk, too. In 2018, they started Time To Vote (alongside Levi Strauss & Co. and PayPal), a business-led initiative that helps make sure employees get a paid day off on election days.
They even sued the government for reducing the size of national monument protected lands in 2017.
Amazon
Amazon’s climb to becoming a ubiquitous brand around the globe has meant that its environmental impact is now enormous.
Amazon has pumped out 51 million metric tons of carbon dioxide last year (and that’s a 15 per cent increase over 2018).
But they are trying to steer the ship in the right direction. This summer, they announced a 2-billion dollar fund that will (hopefully) help them reach their 2040 goal of becoming carbon neutral.
And new TV spots being shown across North America are being used to unveil the company’s soon-to-arrive fleet of 100,000 electric delivery vehicles (while also giving a more human face to the company’s environmental turn).
Whether people actually buy into their commitment is iffy at best though. More than 1 in 4 consumers in the U.S. feel “very or somewhat negative” about the company’s ecological footprint. Interestingly though, that same survey showed that nearly 50 per cent of those consumers do at least a quarter of their shopping on Amazon. Apparently it’s hard to argue with the convenience of getting your coffee filters, shampoo and Godzilla garden gnomes delivered right to your front door.
Fashion
It isn’t just a single brand, but that’s the heart of the issue. The entire fashion world has been called out lately for coming up short when it comes to sustainability. Water usage, massive CO2 outputs, fabric waste and more mean the clothes we buy have a huge effect on our planet.
And beyond knowing we need to cut back on our new clothing purchases, whether it’s through thrifting or just plain old buying less new clothes, consumers also have to watch out for brands putting on an ecological fake-out. (A Carbon-Footprint Fugazi, if you will.)
Called “greenwashing” since back in the 1980s, companies will sometimes exaggerate their environmental claims to chase the sort of consumer loyalty that comes with actually exhibiting an environmental conscience (à la Patagonia).
While greenwashing doesn’t only happen with clothing, things like fast fashion are definitely main perpetrators. Like at H&M, where in-store recycling bins were unveiled as a way to reuse textiles that people would have otherwise tossed out, but that actually only recycled about 1 per cent of what got put in them. (Not to mention the store coupons people received for every recycling drop off they made, which gave the whole thing more of a marketing and sales feel than a real effort at sustainability.)
The Swedish outfitters also have a whole line of clothes that are supposedly a step towards sustainable style. But in reality, their claims of ecological concern pretty much start and stop with line’s vague and ~deep~ name, “Conscious.”
H&M were even investigated in Norway for Conscious because the country’s Consumer Authority (a.k.a. the Forbrukertilsynet) believed the brand were being misleading about whether the clothes were actually made in a sustainable way. Thankfully though, it’s easier now for consumers to get the information they need to make things like greenwashing harder to get away with.
Popular shows like Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj are devoting whole episodes to explaining the “ugly truths” of fast fashion. And non-profits like Climate Neutral are helping people sift through the avalanche of branded environmental statements by giving companies and their products an easy-to-recognize badge that proves they’ve achieved carbon neutrality.
(And it goes without saying that Norwegian consumers can always count on the Forbrukertilsynet.)
So, where do we go from here?
Going forward, Climate Neutral CEO Austin Whitman says companies will have to make more genuine, concerted efforts to make environmental improvements if they want to stay relevant.
And while people should definitely take responsibility for their personal impact on the environment, a big part of altering the dangerous path we’re on will be to hold companies accountable for their much, much larger ecological footprints.
Because otherwise (to borrow an apt and timely phrase from Whizy Kim, the author this insightful Refinery29 article) we risk missing the burning forest for the trees.