This report explores how we might go about 'closing the loop' for the production and use of technical outdoors equipment
In conducting this analysis I grew my knowledge of all the bad things that go into producing the gear I rely on to keep use safe out in the mountains
Most importantly, through my research, I produced 3 core methods we can implement within the sector to reduce it's impact and preserve the nature that makes adventures worthwhile.
I’ve spent the majority of the last few years paying my way through university, working in outdoor retailers and playing around with various kinds of outdoor adventures. As a result, I’ve grown pretty familiar with the limitations, considerations, and intentions that the gear associated with these disciplines is designed with. The issue with this, though, is that the more I find out about the materials and processes that go into manufacturing the equipment that makes these adventures possible, the more I find the damage that these same products have on the environments they’re being designed to operate in.
Since the start of my design journey, sustainability has been a core part of my process, at first to fit a marking criteria, but now, it’s one of my core foundations as a designer, and therefore I thought I’d be remiss if I didnt take advantage of my dissertation to go on a deeper dive into how one of my passions impacts another.
In the lead up to my final year, I started researching books on climate change, sustainability, design and their intersections. I knew I wanted to incorporate some elements in my final year, but I wasn’t sure how or what. Each of the books I read took a slightly different approach to the narrative around sustainability. The Uninhabitable Earth, for example, talks of how we’re doomed and explains all the ways we’ve brought this on ourselves, maintaining what can really only be described as a pessimistic tone throughout. Cradle to Cradle, on the other hand, puts a much more positive spin on things while it presents various hypothetical solutions to mitigate the damage we’ve caused and how we might go about implementing the solutions.
Each of these books gave me something, though. There’s at least one thought from each of them that rattled around my head in my final year and lingers there even now.
I’m not so niave as to think that writing one article delving into the environmental shortcomings of the outdoors industry is going to solve all the issues overnight. I’d honestly be amazed if anything I came up with sticks with any reader, but, in carrying out this research I’ve gained a much better understanding of the current limitations designers must work against and how I might be able to get around some as I progress in my carrer. And that, I think, is about all I could ask for for now, and all I could have hoped for in the beginning.
The Ellen Macarthur Foundation have a wealth of information on all things circularity and was therefore one of my first stops in the process of writing this report.
Alongside reading into circularity and sustainability as general concepts, I searched far and wide for any articles on the environmental impact of alpine equipment, ultimately coming up with very little. While this was something of a nuisance in the early stages of the report, it did help reassure me that there was some value in producing this piece of work.
On the alpine safety side of things, I was also looking into the standards that products need to be rated to in order for them to be allowed to be sold and used safely. As part of this, I grew a better understanding of the material and manufacturing constraints that currently exist within the industry.
caused.
All of this primary information was then used to craft questions to squeeze more detailed information from industry experts.
As the heading would suggest, the next key stage of my process was picking the brains of those much more informed than I am about all areas of the alpine outdoors industry. Challenging the assumptions and preconceptions I’d built from my earlier research, and uncovering angles I had yet to consider. This whole process turned out to be super interesting and a lot more fun than I had initially anticipated.
I guess the most crucial stage of this report is what I did with all the information I’d gathered. It wasn’t exactly a fast process, but it definitely could have been trickier. While many of the more seemingly obvious solutions were infeasible for one reason or another, the swathes of information I’d gathered ended up almost forming into their own channels that led to 3 core takeaways that could be actioned on to theoretically reduce the industry’s impact on the environment
As a representative of the largest organisation that I spoke with, Julian offered a wealth of insight into the limitations that come with operating large multi-national corporations like The North Face and all the other brands that fall under the umbrella of VF solutions. While they have the advantage of deeper pockets, they lack the versatility and flexibility of smaller businesses, which can lead to slow progress and a host of issues when it comes to trying to implement change. He also notes some of the benefits of being bigger as well, the deep pockets are naturally the key one, but the incentive of being able to act as a leading example is another, as is being big enough to be able to influence trends and change in the market at least to some extent.
Findra is a small outdoor clothing brand based in the Scottish Borders. They work predominantly with Merino, and a large part of their brand is the environmental benefits of manufacturing and using garments made from such materials. Alex made clear the value of exploring older solutions to modern problems. For example, Merino or wool in general has been used in clothing for centuries, but as we’ve evolved, we’ve developed newer, more technical materials that, in many cases, don’t actually work as well as natural fibres. Sure, they don’t require as much care, but the natural antimicrobiality of wool trumps the bacteria-ridden alternatives like polyester or nylon.
To reinforce what Julian spoke about, Alex agreed that due to the business being smaller, they could implement change and reduce environmental impact much more quickly and easily. The only downside is the lack of a financial cushion to help get new solutions up and running.
My conversation with Tom was primarily about the stresses and strains that the equipment he relied on to save lives was put through. This information worked in conjunction with what I heard from other interviewees about manufacturing and design considerations and how they impact the environmental impact of a product.
As a fellow enjoyer of outdoor pursuits while off the clock as well, we also spoke about gear features that we’d used that stood out as good or bad and how that might contribute to a product’s carbon footprint. Waterproofing was a big one during this conversation. To keep a garment light and dry requires all kinds of nasty stuff that poisons the planet and the user; however, it does its job extremely well. The opposite of that would be lower impact solutions like natural fibres treated with oils or waxes, in most cases just as waterproof, sometimes more durable, but heavier and significantly less technical. At the time, this conversation felt quite social, but as I kept working away, it became clear that these are the kinds of considerations that need to be made when considering the most sustainable solution to a design problem. You could make the lowest impact product possible, but if it doesn’t do the tasks asked of it well enough, customers will go for the higher impact product regardless.
My conversation with Joanna focused on a retailer’s role in the reduction of carbon footprint within the industry. Ultimately, retailers are stuck within the confines of market trends; if they don’t stock the products customers want, they won’t sell products. That doesn’t mean there’s nothing they can do, though. Tiso, for example, operates a ‘badge’ system that highlights products they deem to be lower impact than others so that the more eco-conscious of their clientele can easily find the lower impact solutions.
They also operate social schemes that focus more on educating people and social sustainability. After all, one of the biggest ways we can really enact some change is by getting people invested in protecting the world that offers us all these places to explore. So, while a retailer’s hands are somewhat tied when it comes to the design side of the industry’s carbon footprint, there are absolutely still ways in which they can work toward sustainable change.
Graham and I focused more on the technical limitations of making carbon footprint a larger focus in the design of products. The most standout nugget I got from this interview was the idea that you could make all the sacrifices possible to minimise a product’s impact, but if that product only lasts an hour before it needs to be replaced with a new one, does the increase in consumption counteract the considerations made during the design phase? The analogy he used was glueing soles to shoe uppers using water and flour as an adhesive instead of a solvent adhesive. The context behind this is that this was the last piece of the puzzle that Keen had to find in order to have removed all the forever chemicals previously used in the production of their footwear.
Joe Macleod is a designer and the founder of design studio AndEnd. He primarily works as a consultant, delivering workshops on how to design the end of a product’s lifecycle, or as he calls it, “endineering”.
This interview was conducted as part of the research for my honours design project, but much of what he had to say applies to this paper too. He spoke about the fact that in order to truly cover all bases when working toward the lowest impact version of a product, it’s important to consider the impact it will have during its lifetime as well as when that lifetime comes to an end. By designing in recyclability, repairability or disposal networks, a manufacturer can ensure as little waste as possible is created and reduce the need for fresh material in the production of new products.
Before we can make effective change, we first need to understand what and where the weaknesses lie. By educating designers and consumers on how their products impact the planet and what we can do to mitigate this, we can begin the societal shift required to halt the damage we’ve been doing for so long.
This can be acheived through the use of tools like the EU circular assesment tool, Lifecycle Analyses or the B Corp Assesment tool
This solution also somewhat relies on the education of designer and consumer alike. Only in this instance it takes a more practical approach. By educating consumers on what to do with their products when they reach the end of their lifecycles, the products impact can be reduced, whether that’s through refurbishment, recycling or anything inbetween, the less waste and the lower the requirement for virgin material, the better.
Sometimes the old ways don’t need to be changed. In this industry in particular, I think we’ve gotten carried away with wanting the new thing or the more technical thing. In reality, though, many of the stresses we encounter have remained the same for centuries, and the solutions we used years ago do hold up against them just as well as modern solutions, but with a significantly lower carbon footprint. Even things as simple as taking better care of our gear and not replacing it until it’s truly worn out can have a big impact.