Podcast 282: Why beauty cannot count – and the data gap that holds sustainability back

Fertilizable covers, carbon neutral cleaners, recyclable jars of plastic ocean-the beauty industry is fluent in the language of viability.

But behind the glossy claims and Instagram campaigns, there is a serious problem: most brands still do not really measure their environmental impacts. And without hard data, all of these “sustainable” promises are at risk of being a little more than rotation of marketing.

In the episode of Formula Botanica’s Green Beauty Conversations, Lorraine Dallmeier, pulls back the curtain for the viability of the beauty sector – the unpleasant truth that without measurement, the industry cannot be meaningless.

After last week’s interview with Fairglow’s Evan Peters, Lorraine is shared because life cycle evaluation (LCA) could be the missing part, how even the biggest beauty companies are struggling to show clear data and why the real challenge is to get the whole industry.

If beauty wants to move from history to a solution, less slogans and more computing sheets need. In this episode, Lorraine disputes every brand, large and small, to stop hiding behind the vibrant vibes and start collecting the unpleasant numbers that could really lead to change. Because if we can’t count, we can’t change.

“If beauty wants to matter in the long run – if it wants to be part of the solution, not only of the discussion – it must stop hiding behind the narrative, it must open some computational sheets and must measure.” – Lorraine Dallmeier

KEYS PRODUCTION:

• Sustainability without measuring is just marketing: Lorraine explains how beauty brands often talk about sustainability as brand value or vibe instead of supporting it with strong data. Without measuring environmental impacts on the whole life cycle of the product, claims remain superficial and can mislead consumers.
• Even big players are struggling with transparency: Looking at the viability reports by L’Oréal, Procter & Gamble and Unilever, Lorraine shows how some publish clear goals based on science, while others are selective or confused. Application field emissions 3-the largest share of a brand’s footprint-are often hidden in difficulties that are difficult to find front and centers notifications.
• Unilever sets a better example but remain questions: Among the big companies, Unilever’s report is more transparent, sharing openly total broadcasts and incorporating the Net-Indo-goals into their development strategy. However, even this approach does not fully answer the fundamental question: Can high growth consumer goods really reduce their overall footprint in speed and scale required?
• Most brands do not count at all: In addition to corporate giants, the majority of beauty businesses do not know the emissions associated with their ingredients, have not mapped their supply chains and do not monitor after sale packaging. This means that they cannot identify the larger areas of change, but they still market products as viable.
• The industry needs fewer slogans and more computing sheets: The appeal for Lorraine’s action is clear: viability should be treated as a data problem. Brands must embrace the life cycle assessment tools, publish clear measurements and face unpleasant truths to make real progress.

Thank you for joining us for this episode of Podcast Formula Botanica Green Beauty. If you liked to hear, share, register and review this episode Podcasts Apple; Note or YouTube so that more people can enjoy the show. Don’t forget to follow and log in with us Facebook and Instagram.

Leave us a comment

Lorraine Dallmeier is a biologist, a chartered environmentalist and the CEO of Formula Botanica, the award -winning online school cosmetics school. Read more about Lorraine and Formula Botanica.