Redesigning Design Systems to Reduce the Carbon Footprint.

Image: Pexels/Simon Migaj

Image: Pexels/Simon Migaj

We’ve all been there, working in an office that requires us to leave our emotions and our personal morals at the front door. Maybe you’ve been told you’re too emotional, or idealistic, or maybe you’ve just been told; “that’s not how we do things”. This point of view not only goes against our basic human needs for personal connections and purpose, it actively harms the environment. So can we redesign our design systems to reduce our carbon footprint?

Our current system of tendering out finalised design packs to suppliers doesn’t benefit anyone in this system. With no relationship being built between teams, no exchange of ideas or information, there is no mutual growth to either the individual or businesses. It was not so long ago that designers could hop in the car to visit Brenda on the cutting room floor, and for the cost of a Bounty chocolate bar and a cuppa she would help you solve the problems you were up against. You would have left a better designer and made your company more money in the process.

Now we live in a world where we don’t know the names of our pattern cutters, in most cases, we don’t even speak the same language. Technology has risen to the challenge to solve many of these issues but brands and retailers are reluctant to take them on, preferring instead to rely on a vast number of product people, turning them over every few years as they burn out or become disillusioned with the process. And to counter the communication barrier we are producing more and more samples to try and achieve the designer’s vision, creating more waste and more disconnection. 

Image: Unsplash/Nick Kane

Image: Unsplash/Nick Kane

Most designs now are made by designers with only a few years industry experience, the view being that they need to prove themselves commercially before they themselves are invested in. But what changes would we see if, instead of sitting behind a computer screen, these designers visited the cotton fields or the dye houses? Would what they see change how they view the products they create? Are we stifling creative vision that would solve many of our problems by performing to the status quo?

For example, we know the damaging effect farmed cotton has on our planet and those who work in the fields. It’s an area rife with human rights abuses, medical conditions linked to the use of chemicals and the extreme poverty that makes it one of the worst professions for suicides globally. How many have visited factories that make the synthetic fibres, feeling that hot, acrid air hit the back of their throat, all the while being told by an enthusiastic account manager that employees aren’t wearing face masks because they are too uncomfortable? 

I invite you to imagine a range kick off meeting, instead of a room full of designers, merchandisers and marketers, what if there were representatives of all the stake holders over the whole supply chain. Where quantities could be planned, yarns assessed for consumer and employee benefits, where fabrics are considered, not just for their performance, but for their widths in relation to the type of design, and colours decided on based on how harmful the chemicals used to create them. 

With this type of future planning we would use less resources, create less waste, generate a more harmonious supply chain and create a more engaged work force where, literally, bringing everyone together could save lives.

Previous
Previous

Linear Supply Chains - Linear Thinking.

Next
Next

Being a Sustainable Consumer.