Marketing for Sustainable Development. Группа авторов
Читать онлайн книгу.
small accessories
2.2.2. Luxury companies and the challenge of sustainability
The various responsible initiatives taken by luxury brands have been the subject of communications, whether in detailed corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports or on their own websites. This new trend for transparency, contrary to the policy of secrecy that has always characterized the luxury sector, is intended to respond to the different pressures coming from consumers and other stakeholders. However, they expose luxury companies to two major risks. The first is being accused of greenwashing. The green market is indeed characterized by the multiplication of companies’ opportunistic behaviors that have contributed to the increase of consumer skepticism towards environmental information. In the luxury sector, Kering has recently been accused of greenwashing; the group, which considers sustainable development one of its strategic priority areas, has received criticism for its treatment of animals, especially rabbits, whose skins are destined to be used in the production of the brand’s coats. This situation refers to the concept of “hypocrisy” mentioned by DeTienne and Lee (2005). The dissemination of ecological information is, in fact, not enough to build a responsible image because companies may act inconsistently in regard to their promises of environmental and social engagement. A perception of hypocrisy has a negative impact on consumer beliefs about a company’s responsible commitment (Wagner et al. 2009). When the brand is perceived as “showing off”, owing to the misuse of the environmental argument, consumers doubt the legitimacy and authenticity of its claims (Cervellon and Shammas 2013). Luxury companies must thus be convincing in the credibility1 of their commitment to sustainable development and in the sincerity of their communications on this issue.
The second risk to which luxury companies are exposed is when their engagement relates to a negative perception of their new responsible offer. Environmental actions, such as recycling or even social initiatives, such as the replacement of animal raw materials with alternative ones (synthetic or of vegetable origin), can in fact have a negative impact on the perceived quality of luxury products.
2.2.2.1. Environmental practices that could damage the perceived quality of luxury products
Luxury brands such as LVMH and Estée Lauder have implemented actions to optimize water and energy consumption by encouraging the use of renewable resources. Others have adopted recycling, such as Yves Saint Laurent (now Saint Laurent) which, in June 2009, launched its New Vintage collection, created with unused fabric from previous seasons, and Hermès, which in its Petit H workshops produced small accessories made from offcuts of leather or fabrics, and even 16e Sud, which makes bags from recycled leather.
Some brands are convinced of the positive impact of environmentally-friendly practices on the perceived quality of their products. Kering, for example, considers sustainability to be an extension of quality; the natural dimension that characterizes environmentally-friendly materials can strengthen the superior quality of luxury products. In reality, the final outcome depends on the judgment of consumers, who can be skeptical of the inclusion of sustainable materials in luxury products (Achabou and Dekhili 2013). Luxury companies should demonstrate caution in the selection of new sustainable raw materials and plenty of creativity in how they are used.
As an example, Gucci’s communication (via its website) on its environmentally-friendly shoes emphasizes a production process that brings together creativity and responsibility, with the ongoing concern of responding to consumer expectations in terms of quality, unique design and so on:
Gucci is delighted to announce the launch of environmentally friendly soles made from bioplastics (biodegradable materials) [...] This new project is emblematic of the aim of the House, which is to interpret the desires of the modern consumer in a responsible way though sustainable items, while maintaining the balance between the timeless values of style and superior quality and an expanding ecological vision.
2.2.2.2. A social concern harmful to the perceived quality of luxury products
One of the issues that has been at the heart of debates on the luxury industry for a number of years is animal welfare. In addition to various NGOs that campaign for animal rights (PETA, L214, etc.), we have seen the emergence of a consumer movement (veganism) which considers that any use of animals is unethical, that humans have no right to use animals and that animals should be considered living species just like humans (Plannthin 2016, pp. 49–122). In this pressured context, a range of strategic responses from luxury companies has been observed. Some brands, such as Lagerfeld, have decided to continue to use animal raw materials, thereby ignoring the criticisms of animal rights advocates. Others, such as LVMH and Hermès, have opted to buy farms in order to secure their supplies and have better control over livestock conditions. Still others, such as Chanel, have preferred to limit the use of animal skins to those of animals destined to end up as human food. Lastly, another group of brands has made the radical choice of ceasing to use animal raw materials and to replace them with substitutes (see Box 2.1). This movement was started by the Calvin Klein brand in 1994 and has since been adopted by a number of other companies; Stella McCartney (2001), Ralph Lauren (2006), Vivienne Westwood and Tommy Hilfiger (2007), and, since 2016, Michael Kors, Jimmy Choo, Donna Karan, Maison Margiela, Giorgio Armani, Hugo Boss, Donatella Versace, Burberry and Gucci.
While the decision to include alternative materials has been welcomed by animal rights groups, the same cannot be said of fur producers. The president of the French Fur Trade Federation saw this as a communications campaign.
However, beyond the pro- and anti-fur debate, it is the consumer response that is the biggest challenge for luxury companies. The choice to replace animal raw materials with vegetable or synthetic substitutes comes back to affect an important aspect of luxury, namely quality. A recent study conducted in the French and Saudi contexts (Dekhili et al. 2019) sheds light on this subject. The consideration of the challenge of animal welfare leading to the use of vegetable leather has a neutral effect on the perception of luxury products among French people. However, the Saudis tend to lower their assessment of the quality of luxury products made from vegetable leather. This illustrates the ineffectiveness of the animal welfare argument among luxury consumers and highlights the influence of culture on the perception of the quality of sustainable luxury products. Beyond the low environmental and social awareness of Saudi consumers, the social pressure in a cultural context based on appearance can explain the reluctance observed towards the sustainable offer. Some brands try to overcome this risk by presenting the alternative materials used as innovative and luxurious. This is the case of Stella McCartney, for example, which, on its website, associates vegetable leather with innovation and animal leather with an old-fashioned material: “Scientific research is discovering new mixed fibers that are therefore becoming rare products, which is why innovative materials must be perceived as a real luxury, more so than leather, which has become a relatively common product today”.
Box 2.1. A luxury leather made from pineapple: interview