I was always aware that new “inventions” were surfacing, it seems as if something revolutionary is created every single day. However, I was completely astonished by the extent of sustainability related innovations I discovered throughout this course, and I remain unable to fathom how such ideas have become ideas, let alone realities.

Did you know that cement production is responsible for roughly 5% of the world’s carbon emissions? This was not a statistic that I had given much consideration to, however it is not surprising considering the amount of cement utilized in infrastructure development worldwide. Consider the footprint of the Walter Gage Residence on campus, or Buchanan- I had never previously pointed fingers at these buildings for environmental degradation. It goes to show how much we overlook the environmental impact of the spaces we rely on for everyday living and learning.

Luckily, Solidia has developed cement and concrete technology that decreases carbon emissions by 70% and water consumption by 60-80%. This is possible because the cement is procured with CO2 rather than water. Due to the immense worldwide market for these materials, this product has the potential to make an incredible impact. Who knew something so grey could become something so great?

Another incredible product that I was exposed to this semester was Graviky Labs Air-Ink Pens. These are the first pens in the world to use air pollution as ink. More significantly, this is the first product I have heard of that converts air pollution into something of value– art. Their device attaches to exhaust outlets on vehicles in order to collect soot. What has been collected thus far, is the equivalent of cleaning 1.6 trillion litres of outdoor air.

These innovations demonstrate the significance in optimizing the entire production chain. Solidia helps eliminate carbon emissions in the production phase of the cement product lifecycle. Graviky on the other hand, capitalizes on the “disposal” of pollution, by capturing it before it enters the atmosphere and using it as a product input. Innovation is no longer about inventing something new. It has become about inventing something better to improve the existing inefficiencies within systems. Today’s innovation gives me hope for tomorrow’s wellbeing.

As it is well known, fast Fashion is under serious scrutiny for its negative environmental impacts as a result of the extreme volume of clothing produced and poor end of life planning for products. I find that most of the blame is placed on large companies and what or how they produce, but less emphasis is on how they advertise. If you conduct a Google search using the phrase “fast fashion sustainability issues” the top results include statements such as:

• Environmental pollution due to cheap synthetic fibres and chemical dyes,
• By 2030 it is predicted the industry’s water consumption will increase by 50%,
• Fast fashion under fire for human rights violations and supply chain practices, and
• Insatiable appetite for fashion.

However, products produced and the speed of production are not the only fashion-related sustainability issues, the marketing of these products have sustainability implications as well. This association is significantly lacking in the key search results, as well as majority of the dialogue surrounding this industry. That being said, a result of fashion marketing is alluded to in the final bullet point above. Advertising for clothing strongly suggests that what you wear defines who you are, and makes people feel a need to use purchases to compensate for their shortfalls. There is constant pressure to reinvent oneself, be better or more attractive and the result is often a longing to buy more.

A key player in fashion advertising and induced purchase pressure is the modelling industry. This female dominated industry is granted admiration and is associated with prestige, status and desire. Well-known models get to flaunt luxurious and trendy clothes that are generally considered symbols of status. These individuals become role models and public figures within society and contribute to fundamental norms and ideals.

Sustainability on the other hand, is one thing that modelling does not appear to have any association with- in positive or negative contexts. I find this disconcerting, as I have identified many reasons as to why modelling is unsustainable. Such reasons include:

• Encouragement of constant consumption and element of circular economy;
• Promotion of extreme individualism and need to buy products that establish differentiation;
• High association with the makeup industry- which lacks a strong foundation in environmental sustainability;
• Trend of a slim female figure, leading to increased prevalence of eating disorders and body dismorphia; and
• A lack of pressure or accountability to encourage sustainable practices.

Not only does this industry harm environmental sustainability, but it also influences the economic and social realms of sustainability. Unhealthy outcomes such as eating disorders impact individual health practices, as well as social interaction. Women judge their own bodies more harshly, as well as other’s, which does not contribute to sustainable health practices.

Due to the above reasons, I cannot help but wonder how this industry has avoided sustainable scrutiny and if there are any changes expected in the future?

After discussing Repack in class today, I could not help but look into the company a bit more to discover how this business functions and how feasible it seems. Once I have outlined the company’s current procedures and scope, I will apply aspects of the Supply Chain Operations Reference (SCOR) model, to demonstrate ways that I believe the company can have a greater sustainable impact.

So far, there are 30 stores that offer the RePack option and 50,000 customers have used this service when making their respective purchases. The packaging is designed to survive at least 20 cycles and is designed specifically for clothing purchases. Another differentiating factor of this product, other than being reusable, is that it is adjustable. This feature ensures that the air can be removed from the packaging, which saves more money and nature as transportation becomes more efficient.

One weakness of this service highlighted by the website is that the return rate is only 75%. This means that out of the 50,000 purchases that have used the RePack shipping option, only 37,500 of the packages were returned. The question is not only an issue for the company’s costs, but also for the disposal after use. Considering that these packages are more durable than a standard envelop, is it possible that they could have a greater negative impact if they end up in the landfill? A claim made on the website is that “it reduces C02 by 80%” but I am curious if this is the case considering those packages that are “lost.”

Something this company does extremely well is highlight the social sustainability aspect, in terms of strengthened relationships. They have proven that customers that use Repack are far more likely to be repeat customers, bettering the bond between the customer and the company. This connection is something that is much more difficult to develop in the ecommerce setting.

Using aspects of the SCOR model, I have created a list of the current strengths and potential considerations for the development of this company (in bold):

Environmental

• Design and Plan: Designed for multiple uses/reuses
• Source: Sources recycled material for the creation of the product
• Deliver: Packaging is returnable to improve fuel efficiency
• Use and Return: Successfully creates reverse-logistics channels, but needs a plan for the 25% of packages that are not returned.

Social

Overall, the social aspect of the SCOR model is not the strong point for RePack. The majority of barriers are related to the fact that this is a relatively new company that requires expansion. Therefore, the suggestions for social betterment are listed below.

• Deliver: Currently, the company is reaching out to companies to form partnerships and spread the use of the RePack shipping solution. However, the company must look to expand its use beyond Europe, as currently only European companies are engaged.
• Use and Return: Find a way to increase the percentage of packages returned. Also, ensure that there is a plan for end-of-life, once the 20+ uses have occurred.  

Economic

• Make: RePack will definitely have to look into investing in geographic manufacturing hubs to help improve supply chain efficiency if expanding into other continents.
  They would also benefit from taking advantage of economies of scale by expanding into other locations and potentially expanding the product offerings- greater variety in package sizing. 

While there are improvements that need to be made, I have to say that this is a pretty awesome innovation. I am hoping that stores I frequently buy from start to use this system so that I am no longer left with the guilt of the waste that comes with my purchases.