Tom Bourne explains that although the word ‘sustainable’ is widely used in the flooring industry,
its broader definition is problematic.

THE term ‘sustainable’ is one widely used in the flooring industry. I for one write it on an almost daily basis. Admittedly, it’s a great way to bundle up various things when it comes to environmental, social and governance (ESG), but its broad definition is also problematic.

The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) defines sustainability as, ‘meeting the needs of people living today without compromising the needs of future generations, while balancing social, economic and environmental considerations’.

So, in the strictest sense of the word, something can only be sustainable when it achieves this.
A product or business that can’t demonstrate it meets the needs of today without compromising future generations, can’t really be called sustainable: the definition is rather like an on/off switch.
But the term has become so widely accepted as defining a reduced impact on the planet and its people that it’s become ingrained in all kinds of communications from every type of flooring company and for every type of flooring product.

Primarily, it’s used to describe actions or materials that have progressed a company and/or product to a reduced impact on the environment and/or society.

All too often, a product that’s a ‘sustainable alternative’ or a ‘sustainable choice’ is far from it, and a ‘sustainable business’ is anything but it’s simply less harmful on the planet than what went before it.

Perhaps the problem is more in the word itself and a misunderstanding of the definition than it’s in blatant misuse by businesses. While previous years may have seen companies throw the ‘sustainable’ word about to try to gain competitive advantage, I believe many companies now have a more responsible approach to its use, or certainly a more hesitant one.

With guidance and regulation around greenwashing and misleading terms, such as the CMA’s Green Claims Code and the EU’s Green Claims Directive, this reticence is perhaps wise, avoiding a dip into hot water down the line.

Greenwashing is also a financial risk for businesses, even without government or regulatory intervention. Volkswagen’s emissions scandal cost it £193m in the UK alone in a class action lawsuit and that’s before you calculate the harm the misleading claims had on trust in its brand, potentially even more damaging to the business in the long-term than a walloping one-off payout.
Making claims on environmental and social impact is a devilishly difficult path to navigate and one that’s constantly moving – everyday is a school day when you work in sustainability – so some might find it easier just to bury it under the carpet (excuse the pun) and hope it all goes away.

But with 93% of respondents in Edelman’s 2023 Trust Barometer Report believing climate change poses a serious and imminent threat to the planet, and PWC’s 2024 Voice of the Customer survey reporting that 46% of consumers are already buying products with a reduced climate impact, no action really isn’t a wise long-term action.

So, with concerns around misrepresenting the environmental impact of business and products but a growing sense communicating on sustainability is a must to preserve a future, what can manufacturers and businesses do to ensure they don’t inadvertently mislead their customers?

Theoretically, the recipe for success is all about transparency and building trust. There is broad acceptance that sustainability is a journey and that no one, or no business is perfect. Flooring manufacturers that embrace this are more likely to succeed in their communications on the topic.
Patagonia, an outdoor apparel brand valued north of $3bn, has openly admitted the mistakes it made on its journey to reducing the impact of its products and operation, yet is still considered a shining light in purpose-driven businesses. It’s a brave move to admit what you aren’t doing so well at, but it’s arguably far more powerful.

In balance with the positive actions a business has taken, it forms the basis of a transparency that’s frankly far more believable than just a string of environmental achievements. Ergo, transparency builds trust (and likely business growth).

Practically, it means an understanding of good sustainability communication practices and ensuring the business is aligned to these to further cement the trust established by being transparent.

Our partnership with The Anti-Greenwash Charter achieves exactly this and provides a pathway for validation of claims, helping build trust through independent, critical response. At its heart lies a green claims policy that provides a framework for communications, internal validation and definitions.

These factors were instrumental in Select First becoming part of this growing movement, which also includes other forward-thinking businesses.

By working with The Anti-Greenwash Charter, flooring companies can ensure they establish a ‘safe space’ for everyone to communicate on sustainability related matters and that what they say is accurate and honest and most importantly of all, trustworthy.
www.selectfirst.com
Tom Bourne is creative director at Select First