Consumer goods environmental policy is increasingly focusing on product durability and product lifetime extension (PLE) to reduce their impact. Given the growing societal relevance of PLE, this review investigates the discourse about its environmental effects, and the empirical knowledge that substantiates this discourse. One hundred and nine relevant articles were selected from 388 distinctive records identified in two databases, Scopus and Web of Science. The statements about the environmental effects of PLE in these publications were extracted and analysed, and a detailed process of backward citation tracking was followed to identify the empirical base substantiating these statements, leading to 85 additional publications that were included in further analyses.
The findings show that the main environmental benefits expected from PLE are related to reductions in the volume of goods produced, which result from expected reductions in demand due to delayed product replacement. However, this reasoning is based on two under-researched assumptions about consumer and industry behaviours: that the demand for new products is driven by replacement, and that decisions on production volumes in the industry are driven by consumer demand. The empirical base in the field is dominated by quantitative assessments that reproduce these assumptions rather than studying them. The findings from a handful of field studies that investigate the presumed behaviour, question that it applies. Therefore, a research agenda is proposed to better understand the relations between product lifetimes and material flows and the influence of consumer and industry behaviour over them. Moreover, given the current gap between the durability discourse and the empirical knowledge that would be needed to substantiate it, recommendations are made for academics, policy makers, advocacy groups, and businesses environmental strategists to moderate their expectations from product longevity measures.
Forfattere: Ingun Grimstad Klepp og Tone Skårdal Tobiasson
Produktene er ‘fulle av gift’ og det er ikke ’bærekraftig å kjøpe produkter av lav kvalitet fra andre siden av kloden’, skriver avisen. For klær, som utgjør 41 prosent av varene ifølge bransjeorganisasjonen VIRKE, er det ikke funnet ulovlige kjemikalier i disse produktene, men i smykker og leker. ‘Den som leter, finner’ skrev vi i en kronikk om dette i Aftenposten for noen år siden.
Mest kommer fra fjerne Østen
Det aller meste som importeres til land som Norge kommer fra det fjerne Østen med Kina som definitivt størst i klassen, omkring 1/3 av klær og tekstiler eksporteres fra Kina (UNEP 2020).
I komi-serien Javel, herr statsråd, prøvde ministeren, Jim Hacker, seg stadig på ‘quick fixes’, som alltid viste seg å ha helt andre effekter enn de som var tilsiktet. EUs kommisjonær for miljø, Jessika Roswall, forteller at ‘mye er på vei som ennå ikke har trått i kraft’ og nevner utvidet produsentansvar som løsningen på problemet. Det er bare et par haker ved denne ‘fixen’, det ene er at EPR slik det er implementert i en del land, og slik planene er både i EU og Norge, ikke vil gjøre noe med produksjonsvolumer, rett og slett fordi avgiften er for lav. Videre at det er vanskelig å se for seg hvordan den faktisk skal inkludere selskaper som Temu og Shein, hvor importen er direkte til kunden. Vi har tidligere foreslått en reell ‘quick fix’, et utvidet produsentansvar der de firmaene som selger ‘bruk-og-kast’ varer med presisjon kan rammes, altså de som bidrar med overproduksjon. En ny SINTEF rapport ser på dette forslaget som et av flere scenarier og vurderer mulig økonomiske implikasjoner av flere ulike EPR løsninger.
Trump metoden?
En annen ‘quick fix’ er Trump-metoden, med høye tollsatser, fra første krone. I tillegg kan man sette import-tak, slik vi hadde frem til 1990-tallet gjennom Multifiberavtalen. Kina kan også strykes fra listen over land som har gratis post-frakt, en ordning som er beregnet for utviklingsland.
Frankrike har planer om å legge på en høy toll på det de definerer som ‘fast fashion’, definert blant annet på grunnlag av hvordan de markedsfører og hvor lenge de selger produktene. Prosessen har imidlertid stoppet opp i det franske senatet. Det er to grunner til å stoppe denne galopperende hesten. Den ene er proteksjonisme, trolig grunnen til at Frankrike ligger foran med sin sterke motebransje. Den finnes også i Norge, klart uttrykt av Erna Solberg i samme Aftenposten utgave: kjøp europeisk.
I den storstilte tekstil-strategien fra EU er ikke lokal produksjon nevnt med ett ord. Heller ikke i Norge har det politisk vært villighet til å heie frem lokal produksjon av klær. Er det på tide? Her kunne Norge gå foran.
Olve-genseren produsert av Tingvoll Ull fra lokal saueull, er muligens fremtiden?
Den andre grunnen er miljø. Vi har mer enn nok klær fra før og disse havner på toppen av et allerede voksende berg av klær som ingen kan få brukt (opp).
Dette er et mengde problem. Det kan reguleres dersom politikken ble rettet mot nettopp mengde. Så langt har vi ikke sett villighet til det og EU strategien for tekstiler inneholder ingenting med potensiale til å redusere mengdene som importeres.
Det er synd fordi de store mengdene klær står i veien for å redusere miljø (inkludert klima) belastningene fra kles-produksjonen, og står også i veien for EUs strategi om lønnsomme sirkulære forretningsmodeller (reparasjon, gjenbruk, osv.). Den stadig økende strømmen av mer eller mindre brukte klær som havner i verdens fattigste land og utgjør et enormt helse- og miljøproblem der, er en av flere uakseptable følger av overproduksjonen.
Bukken og havresekken
I slutten av juni arrangeres den internasjonale nedvekst konferansen i Oslo, og her skal vi diskutere nettopp hvilke politiske tiltak som kan stoppe overproduksjonen og hvordan få det politiske apparatet i EU og Norge har vært til å lytte til forskernes ‘quick fix’ råd.
I stedet er det den globale mote- og sports-industrien som utvikler virkemidlene på vegne av EU. Dette er ‘fast’ og ‘ultrafast’ fashion, som derfor selvsagt passer godt på at «fixen» ikke kommer til å slanke en overproduserende industri. Det er høyst uvanlig å sette bukken til å vokte havresekken, men altså i dette tilfellet har myndighetene tydeligvis fått det for seg at det er en god idé.
Derfor blir produsentansvarsavgiften minimal og derfor er det selvsagt ikke snakk om tiltak som kan begrense mengdene. En ‘quick fix’ vil medføre betraktelig dyrere produkter som ikke er populært blant velgere.
Men det er mulig å stoppe den galopperende hesten, om man virkelig vil.
(Denne teksten er opprinnelig skrevet som en kronikk, som ikke fant et hjem.)
Increasing product longevity is seen as an effective way to reduce consumption within the circular economy. This paper explores narratives of product longevity, focusing on textiles, household appliances, and furniture as expressed by Norwegian business representatives and consumers. The study reveals dominant narratives of physical and emotional durability among businesses. Conversely, consumers emphasise managing consumption volumes and their relationship with products based on use contexts and life events. While both groups recognise the importance of physical durability, there’s a disconnect regarding how emotional attachment can be created between user and product, and the significance of production volumes. The study suggests that narratives of product longevity, shift focus from production to consumption, distancing from questions of volume and growth and that efforts should take ‘life durability’ of products into account when designing strategies and interventions aimed at extending product lifespans, including business models and policy directly targeting lower production volumes.
Forfattere: Frode Syversen, Ingun Grimstad Klepp, Olav Skogesal, Kristiane Rabben, Anna Schytte Sigaard, Lisbeth Løvbak Berg og Kirsi Laitala
Sammendrag
Ved å analysere tre ulike materialstrømmer besvares FoU-prosjektet Wasted Textiles’ spørsmål «Hvor mye tekstiler, spesielt syntetiske, kvitter norske forbrukere seg med». I perioden 2021-2023 har prosjektet analysert prøver av tekstiler fra tekstil- og avfallsstrømmer fra Oslo, Vestfold og Romerike. Basert på resultater fra Wasted Textiles’ analyser, Mepex’ lukkanalysedatabase for husholdningsavfall, statistikk over mengder restavfall og tekstiler samlet inn av ideelle organisasjoner, er det beregnet nasjonale tall for mengde tekstiler, av tekstilprodukter, tilstand og andel syntetiske fibre i de tre strømmene.
Authors: Ingun Grimstad Klepp and Kerli Kant Hvass
Abstract
Among sustainable fashion and textile themes, product durability has recently come into focus within EU policy making. The dominant understanding is that increased textile lifespan will reduce environmental impacts, but this intrinsic link is not supported by research. The volume of clothing produced poses the greatest environmental burdens. Increased clothes availability leads to longer lifespan due to reduced utilization. To reduce the environmental impact of increased textile volumes measures should be expanded to encompass not only product design, life-prolonging, and end-of-life strategies, but also the volume of products to market. This concept paper contributes to the debate on how to address the growing amount of textile waste by applying the knowledge gained from consumer research regarding clothing use and proposing a regulatory measure called Targeted Producer Responsibility (TPR). The central method of TPR is waste analyses which relies on actual use – or non-use – of products as the starting point for eco-modulated fees. TPR reverses EPR and uses waste for overproduction knowledge, thus proposing a tool that can potentially reduce the total environmental impact of textiles.
Many strategies are proposed that should enable the consumers to keep using the products for longer, but there is less research on which and how consumer practices contribute to longer lifespans. In this paper we focus on two specific, distinct ways of reaching long lifespans: 1) retaining redundant products even though they are not needed or used, and 2) keeping on using flawed products despite they no longer functioning, fitting, or delivering the expected service level. In the former, the products are passive while in the latter they remain in active use and thus reach longer service life. The discussion is based on six focus groups conducted in connection with the project LASTING. The overarching theme was product longevity of three product groups: electronics, textiles, and furniture. Our analysis points to five categories of explanations for products that are either kept despite the lack of any intention of using them again or retained in active use despite flaws: Economic, Ethical, Social, Emotional, and Intentions. It remains important to focus on active service life and various ways to promote it to reduce the environmental and climate impacts of consumption. The role of each of the five categories will be discussed, as well as implications for sustainability and policy options.
Authors: Kirsi Laitala, Lisbeth Løvbak Berg and Pål Strandbakken.
Abstract
The Consumer Purchases Act is one of the cornerstones for ensuring that businesses are liable for defective or faulty products that do not meet the minimum requirements for lifespans. However, this right is too seldom used by consumers. This paper discusses the reasons for not complaining based on six consumer focus groups, where in total 36 consumers described furniture, electronics, and textile products that they were dissatisfied with. Many complaints were not made due to consumers’ cost-benefit evaluations, where they considered the economic costs, time use, and the needed effort, as well as the probability of getting the complaint accepted. Many participants lacked the competencies required to make the judgment when the right is applicable and where and how to proceed. Further, the expectations based on price and brand, properties of the product such as materials, as well as the type of fault and its relation to use were important. Strengthening and extending consumer rights to complain are discussed as an important part of the strategy to increase the quality of goods and extend their lifetimes. The findings show barriers and opportunities to the efficacy of this strategy that is highly relevant for policy development. There is a need for clear guidelines on what the consumer rights are for the specific products, what is considered unacceptable abrasion and normal use, and differentiation between commercial warranties and legal rights. Complaints are an important avenue for businesses to gain information about the performance of their products, and for legal durability expectations to be enforced.
This paper explores narratives of product longevity expressed by businesses and consumers, with the aim of illuminating and comparing ways in which the two stakeholder groups express their engagement with products in the context of prolonging their lifespans. We base our analysis on consumer focus groups and interviews with company representatives. Our focus is on textiles (incl. clothing) and furniture. We find that technical and emotional durability are the two dominant ways of understanding product longevity by company representatives. Consumers, however, tell a different story, of living with their things, of use, of time passing, and of life events triggering change. This is a context in which social and systemic factors play a large role in determining the lifespan of a product – factors that are external to the product itself. Although all can agree on the importance of technical durability, problems connected to excessive production volumes and how products feature in everyday life are avoided in narratives produced by business actors. We argue that corporate narratives of product longevity are diverting our attention away from production toward consumption, keeping questions of volume and growth at arm’s length. These conflict with consumer narratives of product longevity that grapple with the materiality of the things within the context of lived lives in a consumer economy.
Authors: Irene Maldini, Vilde Haugrønning and Lucrecia de León
Abstract
This paper introduces the relevance of volume-centric research in studies of clothing use. The global production of garments has grown dramatically in recent decades, bringing along significant environmental challenges. However, knowledge is lacking about why people deal with clothing quantities in such varied ways, and what leads some of them to overconsumption. A review of wardrobe research methods shows that there are various approaches to studying garments going in, around, and out of wardrobes. Gathering qualitative insights about specific garments, such as favorite garments, has been quite common. However, in order to advance knowledge about clothing consumption volumes, it is important to look at the wardrobe as a whole and include quantitative aspects. This paper reflects on what approaches and techniques can be used to that end. The reflections are combined with lessons learned from a pilot wardrobe study conducted in Uruguay, Portugal and Norway in 2022 with 20 respondents, concluding with recommendations for volume-centric methods in future wardrobe studies. Rigorous accounts of all garments owned should be combined with registration of items going in and out of the wardrobe over time in order to link accumulation to production and waste volumes. Methods connecting garment quantities with practices of daily use are particularly valuable. One example that has proven successful is piling exercises, a technique where participants are invited to categorize garments in groups according to specific criteria.
This project note presents preliminary findings from a PhD project looking into textile waste from Norwegian households. 28 households collected textiles that they would have otherwise discarded for a period of six months. The textiles were collected by the PhD candidate during visits to the households where qualitative interviews were carried out. Then, all textiles were registered along with information from the interviews. The findings indicate that most of the discarded textiles are clothes and shoes. However, when broken down into textile categories, household textiles represent the largest group of discarded textiles. In addition, findings show that about one third of the collected textiles were in a very good condition, either like new or with only minor changes. The fiber content of the textiles corresponded with the preliminary findings from work package 2 in Wasted Textiles, as there was an equal distribution between 100% synthetic textiles, 100% non-synthetic textiles and textiles containing a mix of these. It was also found that the largest group of users were adult women, especially when looking at number of textiles discarded. If weight was applied instead, the difference between the genders evened out more. As these findings are preliminary, it is too early to provide any hard conclusions. Instead, the project note is meant to grant insights into the kind of data that will eventually be available and shared with the project group.
