Climate crisis: why Patagonia chooses not to use the word sustainable anymore

To stop the climate crisis, companies must come together and become part of the solution. To support him is Beth Thoren of Patagonia

Don't store avocado like this: it's dangerous

Cop26 is underway in Glasgow where the fate of our planet, severely tested by the climate crisis, is at stake. Governments undoubtedly have to do their part, but without the private sector pledging to become part of the solution rather than the problem, we have no hope. To support it is Beth Thoren, Director of Environmental Action Emea of Patagonia who in an article also explains why the brand has chosen to no longer use the word "sustainable".

In an article published in Fortune magazine, Beth Thoren, Director of Patagonia's EMEA Environmental Actions and Initiatives, speaks very clearly and points the finger at companies, including his own.

Nobody should feel excluded from the problem and everyone should look in the mirror for a long time since the impact of companies (and not just fashion) is particularly relevant. Furthermore, greenwashing is increasingly widespread which, in addition to having discouraged increasingly aware consumers, is obviously not the solution but only further masking the problem that instead needs to be addressed urgently.

Thoren writes that the word "sustainable" is not used in Patagonia and explains why:

Why we recognize that we are part of the problem. Previously, we set our goal of carbon neutrality by 2025. But buying offsets to get there doesn't erase the footprint we create and won't save us in the long run. We must first put the weight of our business behind drastically reducing emissions along the entire length of our supply chain. What's disturbing is that, right now, we're not quite sure how to do it. Our commitment to use only renewable or recycled materials in our products by 2025 is a case in point. We have spent years of work on this and our recycled content is now up to 68% of our total use, still not enough. Investigating all options, from increasing the sale of second-hand products to moderating growth and cutting the breadth of our product line, only reinforces our belief that we can't do it alone.

The underlying problem that Thoren points out is that it is a change that involves the entire supply chain is needed, responsible - as far as Patagonia is concerned - for 95% of emissions.

We manufacture in shared factories, often alongside much larger brands. So, we had to innovate. We are developing a 'plug in' approach into our supply chain by creating a joint funding mechanism where other smaller brands can partner with us to invest in 'greening' factories in exchange for carbon credits. As is the case with many of our progressive ideas, at the moment we just have the feeling that it will work, but we know we have to try.

The supply chain problem obviously concerns a lot of well-known and lesser-known brands, because it's easy to say that it is a sustainable product but a little less really controlling all the steps necessary to make it happen.

The goal we must achieve, according to the director of environmental actions and initiatives of Patagonia, is "give back more than we take". How can companies do it? By joining forces and working together with other companies that have the same goals and push for a change of course before it's too late.

Our message to businesses? Join us to cut the blah, blah. Our voices are louder when we talk together - write Thoren.

A beautiful message which, however, just like those of the 190 world leaders committed to finding solutions in Cop26, we hope will lead to something concrete and not just a promise, as has happened too often in the past.

Follow us on Telegram | Instagram | Facebook | TikTok | Youtube

Source: Fortune