The $500 billion beauty industry’s ‘green’ ambitions are a patchwork at best. And they’re falling short

Cnn
–

The increasing climate crisis changes the purchasing models of many people, which extends to the $ 500 billion global beauty industry struggling with a series of sustainability difficulties at product production, packaging and disposal.

Strategy and Consulting Firm Simon Kucher’s Global Sustainability Study 2021 60% of consumers worldwide have found that they rated sustainability as an important purchasing criterion, and 35% will be willing to pay more for sustainable products or services.

This change in consumer preferences has pushed many beauty brands to set environmental goals: to move away from disposable and virgin plastics, to recyclable, reuse and refillable packaging and to provide more transparency around the materials of the products to determine how “green” is.

However, according to the British Beauty Council, consumers are still struggling to understand the sustainability identity information of many products. This is because the industry’s cleaning efforts are inconsistent and inadequate to have a recognizable effect on the absence of collective target determination, global strategy and standard regulations.

Content and brand transparency

For the beauty industry, there is no international standard in terms of how much product component information will be shared with customers. Brands can determine their own rules and goals by leading to confusion and “green washing ğı that allegations of sustainability are generally launched but not confirmed.

Companies usually use marketing language such as “clean beauty, to make their products look natural, for example, they may not actually be organic, sustainable or ethical.

According to Millie Kendall, CEO of the British Beauty Council, the term “clean beauty ‘has become quite dangerous. It is used to sell more products,” he added, adding that British customers lost their shortcomings in England wisely. “Customers need better marketing information and certificate information.”

One 2021 Report Calling the sector to have “courage to change” Business practices, the British beauty council, even natural components in the production of products, “excessive consumption, non -regenerative agricultural practices, pollution, waste and neglect” wrote.

Kendall said to CNN, “The only way to get out of this is transparency.”

Jen Lee, an impact manager of the US -based brand Beautycounter, said that it continues to see confusion on the materials among consumers. (In 2013, the company launched and published more than 2,800 chemicals, including heavy metals, parabens and formaldehyde.)

“Natural and synthetic components have been a speech. People think it was naturally safer, but not always like that, Lee Lee said. “Natural components formulated in the industry may have toxic load. Heavy metals may occur in the natural components of the world.”

Sasha Plavsic, the founder of the make -up brand Ilia Beauty, added, “We used to be more natural and organic,” he added. “What was challenging was difficult to originate from raw materials or would not make income or products in an inconsistency.”

Plavsic explained that most makeups were created and molded at high temperatures. Completely organic materials are usually disintegrated at this temperature, which leads to inconsistent results and subpar product performance. “Not every synthetic is bad, Plavs Plavsic said. “Sometimes it helps to create the best class formula.”

According to the British Beauty Council, the plastic packaging of the industry is a special sustainability difficulty -95% is discarded and the majority is recycled.

According to Vantage Market Research, the cosmetic operating is globally the fourth largest plastic packaging user – food and beverage, industrial packaging and drugs – and about 67% of the packaging volume of the plastic industry. Beauty giant L’Oreal used 144,430 metric tons of plastic For example, according to Ellen Macarthur Foundation (EMF), the packaging material in 2021. Estee Lauder companies reported that their brands produce 71,600 metric tons of plastic in their product packaging in the same year.

According to a report from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, only 9% of global plastic wastes are recycled. United States Recycling only 4% of plastic wastes.

Many brands are trying to remove harmful plastics from their operations and to adopt recycled plastic after the consumer. (L’Oreal targets the target of use of 50% PCR plastic until 2025, while Estee Lauder 25% “or more” PCR plastic aims at the PCR plastic – but both are far from achieving their goals.)

“Between 60-70, a large global brand has made an unprecedented progress between 60-70. However, Defruyt emphasized that PCR plastic should be adopted with brands that bring single and virgin plastics from use cycles to make a difference.

However, it is not easy to find PCR plastic – means that low recycling rates worldwide are a limited supply. Meanwhile, he said that demand was increasing demand between industries. This competition increases the higher price than Virgin Plastic.

Fekkai, a hair care brand, claims to use PCR content up to 95% in its packaging, but pricing and supply problems have created a challenge and forced at least 50% PCR containing containers and packages in its packaging.

“PCR plastic is more expensive than stock plastic. Cost is difficult and then supplying.

Beauty retailers play a very important and less used role with control of stocking decisions and supply chains. However, many of them vary when it comes to standards for the brands they sell.

Jessi Baker, the founder of Provence, the technology platform Provence, who helps brands to show sustainability identity information for customers, said, “Smaller businesses make more of them more,” he said. “They are moving more agile. Some of them were part of the installation of good brands-friendly. They do not need to restructure all supply chains.

Sephora started him.Clean + Planet Positive”In 2021, the initiative in 2021, which label the products that meet the determined criteria. It can create the “target zero”, “target zero”, “target zero”, reflecting and reflecting, reflecting and reducing plastic packaging or concentrated products.

Nevertheless, many steps taken by brands and retailers do not even start to address the waste and pollution produced during the production and transportation, and all the major problems to deal with the industry.

The gaps in the standardization in the beauty ecosystem can be filled with certificates such as the US -born. B Corporation, or B Corp. This accreditation, one of the most well -known ones in the field of beauty, is published by a non -profit B laboratory, which scores a company in various criteria for ethical and sustainability. However, although eco conscious consumers, it is completely volunteer to apply for brands.

Many experts and business leaders are governments and multinational companies that implement arrangements and determine a basic line for brands to operate while making sustainability claims.

Susanne Kaufmann, the founder of the beauty brand, said that his efforts in Austria would get better results if there were more strict, smoother laws of garbage destruction in the world.

Orum I’m packing our product in a recyclable material, Kauf Kaufmann said. (The products of their products are made of 75% recycled plastic – and 100% can be recycled.) If I send it to the US, the garbage is not separated… and not recyclable, ”he explained, referring to the inconsistencies in recycling laws in the United States.

And in the case of materials, the European Agency of Chemicals Lists 2,495 items Use was banned in cosmetic products marketed for sale or for sale in the block. However, US Food and Pharmaceutical Administration List only 11It makes it more difficult for American consumers to find safer, greener options. A guardless guard, Environmental Working Group 51 Sunscreen Laboratory Tests of the Product In 2021 and only 35% of the products meet the EU standard compared to 94% of the US standard.

However, while the government can set minimum requirements, Mia Davis, Vice President of Sustainability and Impact at Credo Beautyy, says that the needle will move in the private sector.

“A person who does not have information about the regulation can raise the ground a little (sustainability problems) should still be able to enter a Bodegaya and buy clean products… But this will never happen to the market.” “Market leadership is very important.”

In the absence of global standards on brave arrangements or sustainability practices, this “leadership”, which undertakes by both brands and customers in the beauty market, can be the most effective vector to address the climate deficiencies of the industry. The meaningful climate will take the ongoing collective advocacy and initiative to see conscious change.