Why we need to let designer-makers get sustainability wrong Skip to content

Why we need to let designer-makers get sustainability wrong (Dezeen)

Why we need to let designer-makers get sustainability wrong

The fear of being called out for ‘greenwashing’ is paralysing designer-makers into doing nothing on the climate crisis, says founder and director of Making Design Circular, Katie Treggiden. It’s time to let them make mistakes.

‘Carbon washing is the new greenwashing.’ ‘H&M called out for “greenwashing” in its Conscious fashion collection,’ and ‘Greenwashing won’t wash’ – all Dezeen headlines from the past few years. In fact, the last one was mine. And it’s important that we call out greenwashing – the practice of making false environmental claims in order to sell products, services or policies.

With 66% of all shoppers, rising to 75% among millennials, saying they consider sustainability when making a purchase,[1] the reward is clear. But making products and services truly environmentally responsible takes time, money, and effort, and the road to get there is full of nuance, compromises and trade-offs – none of which makes for easy profits or simple advertising slogans, so companies lie, exaggerate and bend the truth to scoop those sales.

Advertising and sales are hardly known for being bastions of honesty, but there is a bigger downside to greenwashing than simply misleading consumers into buying something they didn’t want. All the time, money, and effort invested into these practices is not being spent on actually becoming more sustainable – and companies are let off the hook. Meanwhile, the consumers who are misled are not investing their money in the companies that are sincerely trying to do things better. ‘Greenwashing perpetuates the status quo because it leads specifiers, end users – everyone in the chain – to believe that they are doing better than they actually are from a sustainability point of view,’ says founder of content marketing agency Hattrick, Malin Cunningham. ‘Equally, the businesses doing the greenwashing have no incentive to improve.’

However, all these headlines are striking fear into the hearts of designers, makers, interior designers and architects who want to do the right thing, but haven’t quite got it all worked out yet. In a poll of my community of designer-makers, 100% said that fear of getting it wrong had stalled progress on sustainability-driven projects. Cancel culture and call-out culture are particularly prevalent on social media, which often lacks the nuance for proper discussions about environmentalism and yet, those are the very spaces in which small creative businesses are promoting their products and services.

The importance of failure in creativity is well documented: for example, the 5,126 failed prototypes James Dyson went through before finally cracking the technology behind his eponymous vacuum cleaner; the Thomas Edison quote: ‘I have not failed 700 times. I have succeeding in proving that those 700 ways will not work’; the fact that Walt Disney’s first film company went bankrupt before he turned 21. But perhaps we’ve heard them so many times that we’ve forgotten what they mean.

In his book Atomic Habits, James Clear gives the example of a cohort of film photography students at the University of Florida. Their professor divided them into two groups – one would be graded solely on the quantity of photographs they produced – the more pictures, the higher the grade, no matter how good they were. The second group need only submit one photograph, but it would be judged on quality – to get an A, it needed to be near-perfect. The result? The better photographs came from the first group – the group being judged on quantity alone. The moral of the story? In order for creative people to succeed, they need to be given permission to fail. Or put another way, holding them to a standard of near-perfection doesn’t create the conditions for success. ‘The only way that we’re going to be able to tackle the huge challenges that humanity is facing is by trial and error,’ says Cunningham. ‘Small independent businesses are very well placed to help find these solutions and it’s essential that they are allowed to experiment without being hung out to dry in the process.’

The difficulty is that the main difference between greenwashing and honest, but imperfect progress is intent – and that can be difficult to discern. For designers and makers, Cunningham recommends transparency in their communications: ‘It is about having clarity around the environmental impact you’re making as a business and what your goals are – and then being transparent about where you are on your journey towards achieving those goals,’ she says. ‘It means taking action first and communicating second.’

And what about those us writing those headlines? It is, of course, crucial that journalists ‘speak truth to power’ and continue to call out companies that are knowingly making exaggerated or outright false environmental claims. But it’s also important that we encourage imperfect progress, that we recognise honest intent and that we ask the right questions to make sure we can tell the difference. In our coverage of sustainable design, we need to celebrate the journey as well as the destination. We need to let designer-makers get sustainability wrong, so that they can get it right. All our futures depend on it.

Katie Treggiden is an author, journalist, podcaster and keynote speaker championing a circular approach to design. She is also the founder and director of Making Design Circular, a membership community in which designer-makers get to feel proud of contributing to a thriving planet with every product they make.

To read the article at its source please click here.

Contact Katie

Subscribe



Katie Treggiden is also the founder and director of Making Design Circular — an international membership community and online learning platform for environmentally conscious designers, makers, artists and craftspeople.
Skip to content