With climate change influencing some proxy initiatives, Patagonia yesterday became the first major apparel manufacturer to announce plans to reveal the impact of some of its manufacturing processes on the environment.
The move is likely to draw attention to the environmental implications of apparel manufacturing and put pressure on Patagonia competitors to also improve environmental reporting. That’s part of the aim, according to Patagonia president and CEO Casey Sheahan.
The privately held California-based apparel maker will track the making of specific garments through an interactive website called The Footprint Chronicles. “We believe that to avoid complacency, we must constantly examine our internal processes to improve upon the positive and mitigate the negative,” Sheahan said in a statement.
“The Footprint Chronicles allows us to do this publicly–sort of learning out loud.” Sheahan hopes the website will encourage thought and discussion. Each season the site will examine new products, so that the more that is exposed, the more harmful practices the company can change. Five new products will be added on Earth Day.
“Our customers are scientists, activists, professors, doctors and more–they have the collective experience and knowledge we’re looking for,” said Sheahan. “We’re highlighting exactly what happens in the manufacturing process and asking customers for their suggestions and help in efforts to find solutions to our less sustainable practices. It’s a unique dialog to engage in — but one that will ultimately allow us to cause less harm to the planet.”
The research involved in developing the website has already altered some business decisions. “The Chronicles revealed that transportation makes up only about 1 percent of our overall energy use,” said Jill Dumain, Patagonia’s director of environmental programs. “Had we listened to the current media buzz touting transportation as the largest factor in energy consumption, we might have greatly misplaced our efforts by making strides to geographically shorten our supply chain–which would have massively impacted our business financially, logistically and perhaps even effected product quality–and we would only have reduced our energy savings by 1 percent.
Instead, we are focusing our energy on areas where we can truly make a difference–right in the heart of the manufacturing process.”