In September 2022, outerwear powerhouse Patagonia announced they are set to sell their $3 billion company to fight climate change. The company’s founder, Yvon Chouinard, pledged 100% of the company’s voting stock to the Patagonia Purpose Trust. Additionally, all non voting stock has been guaranteed to non-profit environmentalist group; Holdfast Collective. In doing so, Yvon creates a green statement of sustainable practise in an industry sector infamous for its excessive waste production and carbon emission rates. With the current sales rate within the company, Yvon predicts that profits will circa 100m USD (£87m) annually to its climate change charity.
Patagonia previously had what the company coined a ‘responsible consumption’ marketing strategy that was backed up by its ‘don’t buy this jacket’ campaign. The campaign, Launched in 2015, was deliberately designed to deter customers from unnecessary purchasing. However, properly infiltrating responsibility in the age of mass consumption proved its challenge as the company continued to turn over record sales the very same year. The fashion industry faces the two-headed beast of mass production and over-consumption. The influence of a household brand offering a new blueprint for a business strategy with environmentalism at its heart becomes all the more interesting in the rather hostile context of clothing businesses that seems to forget finite resources.
“If we have any hope of a thriving planet-much less a business-it is going to take all of us doing what we can with the resources we have.” – Yvon Chouinard.
Genuine environmentalism is yet to receive substantial backing by big high-street companies. The concept of sustainability and ethical production is often over-simplified. brands focus on marketing strategies to appear in-line with a sustainable ethos, yet these big brands have received backlash for their green-washing techniques that only pretend to be socially conscious. While indigenous communities have maintained sustainable living practises for generations, modern-day practices in cosmopolitan regions have continued the history of resource extraction. The sustainability tagline is now seen plastered over product marketing, but with this sustainable stance adopted by the world's largest-polluting companies; including global fast fashion corporations, the veil of supposed ethical production can be quickly lifted. Industries need to move beyond the buzzwords if they are going to make any difference to our environment. This is where Patagonia’s move has impressed critics.
As the first billion-dollar company to make any tangible devotion to our climate crisis, Patagonia’s influence on the green scene could potentially catapult corporations towards environmental investment, if not for personal beliefs, then perhaps for the financial benefits. It’s no secret that super-rich companies endorse charity funding as a tactical evasion of tax. Not tasteful, but this is the reality of our financial system. It is, perhaps, more likely that big businesses will see the financial profits of this move and overlook Yvon’s personal declaration for environmental justice and reparation. Yet, in such dire times for our climate, do the personal ethics behind such decisions matter if it means corporations finally divesting money into our biggest common cause?
Yvon’s move shows the possibility of purposeful green-investment within a billion-dollar company. We rarely see ethical business conducted within the bounds of a fashion giant. For those audiences caught somewhere between the greenwashing of fashion giants and engaging with fashion trends, Yvon’s unique move offers a bridge. This is an endeavour that could introduce a new strategy, with earth at its core.
Sources:
Comments