Phoresia.org

This is the last in a three piece series by contributor Scott Paynton. In this final installment Scott discusses how both business and the individual can lend a hand to lower our over all impact from consumerism. As always, we welcome your comments and ideas.

In the past two articles I discussed systems theory in relation to how we as individuals, in combination through our connections with each other, impact those around us and our environment through our individual and combined behaviors. Simply put, all of our actions have an impact. I argued that we all must change our consumer behaviors as well as those behaviors that relate directly to the carbon footprint we leave. Individuals, in combination with other individuals, can do a tremendous amount of good. For example, Californians saved $100,000,000 last year simply by switching to energy efficient light bulbs. While I have focused on individual and collective surfers, for this article I want to talk to a particular group that plays an incredibly important part in the system. This group has perhaps the greatest ability to influence the ways we consume and use products.

More and more, multi-national corporations are demonized as the one group that is practicing some of the most environmentally damaging behaviors. Images of smoke stacks, waste, pollution, etc. fill the magazines and airwaves. Seeing these images, it’s easy to understand the global impact these organizations have. As a response to many of the worst offenders, a multitude of grassroots organizations devote themselves to challenging the practices of these corporations to try to hold them accountable for their actions. It’s essentially an “us vs. them” mentality over environmental sustainability and economic profitability. Even though we may not like to think about it, many large-scale surfing companies are engaged in practices that ask us to continue consuming at the expense of our precious resources and fellow humans. It’s ironic that a sport like surfing, one that is relatively friendly to the environment, is largely driven by companies that have the potential to cause great damage to the environment.

However, a relatively new phenomenon has been happening in the past couple of decades that I like to call commercial activism. In fact, the companies that sponsored our trip are all part of this movement whether they know it or not. In essence, this movement operates from the belief that there does not have to be an inherent conflict between economic profitability and sustainability. Instead, these companies operate under a business model that promotes an ideology that argues that it is certainly possible to accomplish both with imagination and creativity.

In western societies we tend to view the world in dichotomies of “either/or” statements. Everything is framed as good or bad, black or white. But, what happens when a company decides to be the one engaging in environmental activism through its business practices in order to create positive change? I would argue that Patagonia can be credited with starting the idea of commercial activism. From the beginning, Patagonia’s strategy was simple: Only buy supplies from people willing to produce them according to Patagonia’s environmental and social ethic. Thus, if a supplier wants to sell its goods to Patagonia, it must do so under the strict environmental standards set by Patagonia. Engaging in this practice, Patagonia has a positive environmental impact by pressuring suppliers to produce their goods in environmentally friendly ways. On the other side of this chain, Patagonia then sells its quality products to us by producing environmentally friendly products that last a long time, reducing the time between our need to consume another Patagonia product. Patagonia, as the middle of the consumption chain, impacts both the practices of suppliers as well as the practices of consumers. This is a very powerful place for organizations to operate. Again, all of our actions produce either a positive or negative impact on the whole, and corporations are no different. From the beginning, Patagonia has engaged in environmental activism through its business, not by ceasing to do business (I need to state that I have never worked for, or been sponsored by, Patagonia).

The companies that supplied gear for our trip are following this ideological viewpoint, using their business practices to engage in a form of environmental activism that impacts both suppliers and customers. Companies like Homeblown US, Finisterre, Wavetribe, Trunq, Matuse, Simple, and Matunas are all manufacturing products that start with environmentally friendly materials produced by environmentally friendly suppliers. In the case of Homeblown US, they ARE the environmentally friendly supplier, providing an ecologically friendly surfboard blank to shapers. Even though I as a consumer don’t make these choices at the beginning, I finish a chain of decisions when I choose what products to buy. While consumers can make a big difference by choosing to buy sustainable products, manufacturers and retailers really have the power to promote sustainable practices by demanding that suppliers supply materials that are produced in sustainable ways, as well as sell sustainable gear to retail outlets. Retail outlets, as part of the corporate link, can choose to stock their stores with gear that is sustainable, thus sending a powerful economic statement to suppliers and manufacturers to produce goods that are sustainable. In fact, when you look through magazines like Surfer’s Path, you’ll notice more and more surf shops that are stocking primarily sustainable gear. It seems that this practice is more common in the UK, with retailers following suit here in the US. The more companies are willing to send this message to those that manufacture supplies or retail items, the more it will influence my choices as a consumer.

Large organizations like Patagonia and IKEA have learned that they can be environmental activists by utilizing their purchasing power when they choose suppliers. But, the real activists are the smaller companies like the ones that supported our trip. It is through their business actions that we are seeing true changes. These smaller companies have provided an alternative to us as consumers by manufacturing gear that is an alternative to the gear produced by larger companies. Likewise, the success of smaller companies pressures larger ones to be more conscientious about what they manufacture and sell. Hell, even Wal-Mart has begun to sell “green” lines in their stores. Regardless of what one might think about the true intentions of this practice, it never would have occurred unless smaller companies decided to produce and sell goods under a strict environmental and social ethic, proving that profitability and environmentally friendly practices actually can join hands.

What can we do to continue this trend? First, as a consumer, buy sustainable gear when you have to buy gear. Even if it’s a bit more expensive, it’s cheaper in the long term on you, future generations, and the environment. Second, as a consumer, demand that your surf shops carry sustainable gear from sustainable companies. By doing so, you can support your local shop and economy while doing good. Also, the more our local shops demand sustainable gear, the more retail suppliers will follow suit in order to compete. Third, demand that larger surf companies join the movement and develop sustainable products. This needs to be a genuine effort. A company that produces one environmentally friendly boardshort can’t really argue that it is a sustainable company. For those of you who work in the surf industry, be the voice that demands that your companies do everything in their power to produce or sell sustainable gear. Simple Shoes has been a good example of switching to sustainable manufacturing practices. If you work for a surf gear manufacturer encourage those who make the decisions to buy from sustainable suppliers. If you work in a surf retail store, order gear from sustainable manufacturers to give your customers true options. If you are a shaper, choose blanks, glass, and resins that produce a low environmental impact. My Ned McMahon board was shaped with bio-foam, covered with bamboo cloth, and glassed with eco-friendly resin, and I love it.

While we as consumers can have a great impact through our actions, we need to be aware of where we can focus our attention in order to create the greatest changes. Thus, let’s focus on companies that have a two-way impact on both suppliers and customers in ways that can truly change the face of surfing gear while protecting the environment.

Scott T. Paynton is a professor of Communication at Humboldt State University, with an emphasis in organizational communication. During his free time you can find him surfing at his local breaks.