Slow Death by "Fast Furniture"

As a fire-y inferno devours the Western US, there's little room to doubt the truly devastating consequences of climate change. My heart breaks for my former home and for countless other communities around the world that continue to suffer from climate-related disasters.

How did we get here? And where do we go from here?

It seems big, not small changes are needed. In fact, as the Guardian reported in 2017 and again in 2019, big (oil) companies can be largely blamed for the current state of affairs. As others have suggested, we can, and we should continue to hold them accountable.

This accountability, although important, doesn't relieve the rest of us of our individual responsibility to do better. Now seems like a good time to take stock of our personal contribution to this problem and see what adjustments might make a difference; Adjustments to our food, drink, clothes and, yes, even our furniture.

The impact of the "fast furniture" industry was yet another interesting finding from my Wayfair case study.

Fast furniture, like fast fashion, aims to provide as much as possible, as quickly as possible, to as many people as possible. It's furniture for the masses at bargain basement prices. In fact, the prices are so low, it's often more affordable to buy something new than to fix something that's broken, old, or out-dated. And many of us do.

In 2017, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimated that Americans throw away 12.2 million tons of furniture and furnishings each year. Of this, roughly 80.2% ends up in landfills. In contrast, Americans of the 1960's threw away 2 million tons of furniture, which means the growth in furniture waste is greater than the growth of our population.

Unfortunately, waste is only half of the equation. Presumably, folks throw things away to make room for something new. New things require new resources - new wood, new plastic, new fabric - all of which made me wonder:

Is "fast furniture" slowly killing us?

...... Is my couch to blame for climate change....?

Let's break this down.

Estimates suggest the average American keeps their couch for 8 years. That means, every 8 years, each couch demands the following resources:

That's a lot of resources, just for one couch. For easy math, let's multiply that by the American population (~328 million) and then divide it by an estimated number of people per family (~4) since we usually only need 1 couch per household/ family. That gives us 82 million couches, every 8 years. Even if you factor in folks who furnish their homes with used or second-hand goods, that's still a staggering number of resources.

The consequences of this kind of extraction have been studied and the results are grim. But there is good news: one of the world's fast furniture giants has a plan.

IKEA is piloting a series of new programs that encourage consumers to recycle, refurbish, rent, or buy used. Their goal is to sell only recycled or renewable materials by 2030. While COVID-19 has undoubtedly caused a wrinkle in some of these plans, the goal is ambitious. It's these kinds of sweeping changes that will effectively address our climate crisis.

Unfortunately, not every company is following this trend. Wayfair, for example, has not announced intentions to deviate from their existing business model which, as others have noted, seems to focus primarily on the pursuit of growth at all costs. Although unsustainable, the model seems to be working. Since COVID-19 began, Wayfair became profitable for the first time since going public in 2014. This boom in business was driven by a spike in consumer demand following worldwide directives to "shelter-in-place." As it turns out, all this time at home has inspired us to invest in home upgrades.

But at what cost?

To be clear, I don't fault Wayfair for their success. Their goal was to give us what we wanted: endless home furnishing options at prices we can afford. They're simply meeting consumer demand.

What if consumers made a conscious effort to demand something better? Could Wayfair successfully pursue a different goal?

What about sustainable furniture?

As it turns out, many consumers are already interested in purchasing sustainably made furniture. The trouble is, most consumers are unwilling or unable to pay the sustainability premium.

In 2017, McKinsey surveyed a sample of American consumers. Of those surveyed, 70% said they would be willing to pay just 5% more for sustainable or environmentally-friendly products. Less than 10% of consumers surveyed said they would be willing to pay 25% more.

To put this into context, Wayfair offers attractive couches for around $450. According to McKinsey's study, the majority of consumers are only willing to pay an additional $22.50 for a more sustainable couch option. Given stagnant wages and falling purchasing power over time, consumers can hardly be blamed for feeling this way. Even those with the best intentions have bills to pay too.

As consumers are unwilling to pay more for sustainable options, what can be done to turn the tide?

How can we stop our slow death by "fast furniture?"

First, consumer education is an important part of the equation. If consumers are to change, they should first understand the impact of their home furnishing decisions. Perhaps most will be unable to afford premium sustainable pieces, but instead, perhaps many will simply choose to purchase less.

Second, supply chain transparency is crucial. Growing consumer interest in sustainable, ethical furniture should inspire companies to be open and honest about where and how their products are made. This journey towards supply chain transparency will also uncover opportunities to do better. Can manufacturers produce more sustainable choices while maintaining low prices? Can innovative shipping practices reduce the carbon footprint of furniture transportation? Even small adjustments might yield large improvements.

Finally, bold ideas must become the standard. IKEA is thinking beyond incremental change to a total shift in the furniture industry. This kind of daring thinking is aligned with the scale of the challenges we face because of climate change. Others must follow suit, innovating and thinking outside the box of conventional business wisdom.

As the West Coast burns, the urgency is clear: we can no longer afford to participate in business as usual. We must all act, in big and little ways. If we fail to do so, very soon there will be nothing left to burn.