This week I have been reflecting on the realities of the “green” movement influencing certain practices in modern business. In Patagonia: Climbing to New Highs with a Smaller Carbon Footprint, we get to see a picture of the retail and clothing brand Patagonia. In the earlier years the retailer based their business model around providing high quality clothing made from organic cotton, leading to a revival in quality and organically sourced clothing. Patagonia currently is a two-hundred-seventy-million-dollar company that started out small but has bloomed into a household name on the forefront of being an environmentally friendly retailer (Rarick & Feldman, 2008). Although in May of 89 Patagonia filed bankruptcy following lawsuits from inadequacies of warning labels on products produced by Patagonia for climbing. Despite this even Patagonia still adding recreational outdoor apparel industry. Although some may wonder what the secret is to their success was, it could be said keeping operation costs low and striving for a zero waste standard has given the company the ability to invest in providing high quality cotton & blended cotton clothing , while striving for low environmental impact product.
Often the misconception persists that being “green” means the price will be exponentially more than the “normal” products made without using a sustainable process. Studies have recently proven that building developers that with the ability to use sunlight with massive sunroofs have an increase in the productvity rate as well as keeping energy costs almost to zero (Hopkins, 2009, pg. 39, para. 3). It is in my opinion that Pategonia may not be the best example for every business. Many individuals are looking for a reasonably priced item that they can afford based on how much the individual makes, and Pateegonia doesn’t make “cheap” or “affordable” clothing. Additionally, many of our goods and products that are purchased in America are made in other counties. Thus in order to have a green business would require some very expensive innovations to the manufacturing process of the product. The most influential change that policy makers could implement would be to offer incentives mandates on sustainable energy development .
References
Hopkins, M. S. (2009, Fall). What executives don’t get about sustainability (and further notes on the profit motive). MIT Sloan Management Review, 51(1), 35-40. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 1882653691).
Rarick, C. A., & Feldman, L. S. (2008). Patagonia: Climbing to new highs with a smaller carbon footprint. Journal of the International Academy for Case Studies, 14(7), 121-124. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 1493110111).
Tietenberg, T. H. (2009). Environmental economics and policy (6th ed.). New York, NY: Prentice Hall. Retrieved from https://www.vitalsource.com/
By