While the rain briefly visited ‘the Sunshine Island’, as Bornholm is affectionately known, experts and an interested audience came together for a debate about the potential of crafts and design in the green transition under the heading ‘Too Good to Throw: Better consumption with crafts and design’.
Facts
Too Good to Throw: Better consumption with crafts and design
The debate was organized by the Danish Crafts & Design Association, Kulturens Analyseinstitut [Institute for Cultural Analysis] and the Danish Design Center as part of the project Green Craft & Design Guide.
The guide is intended as a tool to help makers, designers and consumers make more sustainable choices.
Panel members
Lars Bertolt Winther, head of Tourism, Culture & Experiences, Confederation of Danish Industry
Nina Husted Erichsen, head of programme, Royal Danish Academy – Crafts in Glass and Ceramics, Bornholm
Christina Schou Christensen, ceramic artist
Anders V. Munch, professor, University of Southern Denmark Kolding, Design Culture studies, and a
representative in the Danish Arts Foundation’s Committee for Craft and Design
Morten Riis, deputy mayor, Regional Municipality of Bornholm
Moderator: Jacob Teglgaard, specialist consultant and project manager at Kulturens Analyseinstitut
The Wild West
The debate about the role of crafts in the green transition was held on the last day of Folkemødet and debates on the previous days fully demonstrated the urgency of this topic. Here are a few highlights from the 3,400 talks and debates that took place during the event:
The European Environment Agency hosted workshops and debates about upcycling of textiles, including presentations of serigraphy prints on reused textiles and short talks about textile manufacturing and new EU regulations, including discouraging data about how much water is used to produce a single cotton T-shirt, plastic fibres in our clothes that end up in nature and, not least, the large quantities of chemicals used to preserve clothes during long-distance transportation.
‘The textile industry is the Wild West,’ as Else Skjold, textile scholar at the Royal Danish Academy, pointed out in a debate with Claus Teilmann Petersen, head of Stakeholder Engagement & Human Rights of the Danish fashion company Bestseller, and Maria Josephine Mustelin, a political consultant in the Danish Chamber of Commerce. Skjold further underscored that ‘we can buy no more than five items of clothing a year,’ if we want a life that is more in balance with the planet’s resources. Claus Teilmann explained that Bestseller had managed to reduce the amount of clothing that is scrapped before it reaches the shops. Only one in 20,000 pieces now have to be discarded, primarily because their chemical content were not in compliance with health regulations. He also said that it is difficult to comply with the new EU regulations, that we need to approach the sustainability effort as a global undertaking – and that he would not want to be a micro-company having to navigate the new rules and regulations.
The point about micro-companies takes us the core of why we need a common guide to help makers and designers meet consumer demands and production regulations. Although the regulations are necessary, they can seem overwhelmingly difficult for a one-person enterprise.
Production and consumption go hand in hand. The availability of fast fashion helps drive a culture of disposable shopping, as consumers get more used to online retail, which does not offer any sensory impression of materials. But can production also help change our consumption by engaging with crafts and design? This question was addressed in the debate ‘Too Good to Throw: Better consumption with crafts and design.’
What will it take to change consumption for the better?
Lars Bertolt Winther from the Danish Chamber of Commerce, who opened the debate, argued that we all need to develop a better understanding of products, including how they were made and from what materials, so that we can carry out minor repairs ourselves, rather than throwing things out. This should get easier once the EU’s new product regulations are implemented. Product design should have a much greater emphasis on securing durability and repairability than it does today. Aesthetics and emotional attachment also play a key role in motivating consumers to prolong the lifetime of a product.
Ceramic artist Christina Schou Christensen pointed out that ‘it’s fairly astounding that major fashion brands, such as H&M, sell seasonal glassware and ceramics’. Consumers should be educated to avoid buying seasonal items intended for short-term use. Ceramics are not inherently very sustainable, said Schou Christensen, explaining that ‘it’s one thing to change to a different source of energy [in production], but every time you make a cup, you dig a hole in the ground. For now, clay is not in short supply, but raw materials are being depleted, and it is crucial to look into alternative resources. Waste seems like an inexhaustible source of materials.’
Christina Schou Christensen has acquired a crusher that pulverizes glass and porcelain so that it can be used to make new products. (See also ‘The Aesthetic of Crushing’.)
Lars Bertolt Winther argued that we should not put too much faith in our ability to nudge consumers into undertaking the green transition: ‘We need legislation. There are already many good solutions in Denmark, which even have an export potential, but if the world does not put a high priority on sustainability, we will be offering solutions that are not in demand. It is important to make this a global effort.’
Morten Riis, deputy mayor of Bornholm and chairperson of Maker’s Island added, ‘We can’t simply leave this problem to the makers. Their sensibility to materials is not going to take us all the way, but it will be a small step. Consumption cannot remain on the same level – it has to be based on various forms of co-ownership. Are there things we can share instead owning them ourselves?’
Anders V. Munch, professor of design history and a representative in the Danish Arts Foundation’s Committee for Craft and Design, called for more knowledge and a better understanding of consumer culture: ‘Some things make sense to own, others make sense to share, and some things should come with a deposit fee. Some things we need to get better at repairing, and some things should be passed on. What value does it hold, to whom and in what condition? There is a general need for sustainability education.’
Nina Husted Erichsen, head of programme at the Royal Danish Academy – Bornholm, pointed to the siloed character of sustainability efforts. She sees great potential in the efforts of the Royal Danish Academy on Bornholm to reach out to the local community, for example by having its own waste container at BOFA (Bornholms Affaldssortering, the municipal waste management utility).
Lars Bertolt Winther added, ‘It is still up to the individual citizen whether to scrap things or drop them off for reuse. Generally, sustainability should be the simple choice.’
The panel agreed and expressed frustration that Danish politicians are moving too slowly. Anders V. Munch underscored that we need a change of mindset but that he is confident that crafts can provide answers. However, he also pointed to the issue of inequality:
‘The young generation do not have well-stocked cupboards. Globally, there is also a disparity, as people living in third-world countries naturally want products too. The change of mindset needs to consider that issue as well.’
According to the panel, part of this change in perspective also involves embracing the concept of multiple consumption circles: generally, we are hanging on to too many things that could instead be useful to others.
The debate about sustainable choices involving crafts and design continues at Kulturmødet Mors (Culture Meeting Mors) on 23 August 2024.
Thanks to
The Danish Arts Foundation
Augustinus Fonden