Is brand design moral? Can it be sustainable?

is design just 'acceptable' manipulation?

The past week has been full of unpleasant things: thick fire smoke blanketing the sky, bringing an artificial chill to the air, conversations around where in Canada is safest for a climate-ravaged future (water access? garden and food security possibilities?), and if a family property is fire-safe enough to keep or if it should be sold in the interest of finding a magically safer spot. In some ways it feels like the end of the world is here. But that’s not true, it’s merely beginning to seep into our daily lives, fears, and decisions.

I chose the niche of green graphic design because of these anxieties. I wanted to make a difference. To help, even in a very small way about bringing awareness to better practices within the industry. And a lot has changed from when I began this little journey to learn sustainable design in 2017/2018. But in some ways, nothing’s changed at all.

When I started, people questioned whether or not anyone would hire a designer for sustainable work if all my clients would leave/dry up/be uninterested. I found the opposite to be true–in fact people were seeking out designers who were aligned in the same environmental values they were. That made things easy and very fulfilling, especially in the first 5 years.

I found great catharsis and comfort in learning more about the intricacies of climate crisis, understanding where the real problems are lying (corporate / political corruption, industry lobbying groups, etc) instead of blame upon individuals for not recycling something properly.

It felt when 2020 came around with the pandemic it was the perfect opportunity for change. Bernie Sanders was campaigning for presidency with high polling numbers and there was a lot of hope despite the world being turned upside down. But then Bernie was pressured out by the democratic party and his own morals around encouraging unsafe voting during the pandemic. The pandemic was an opportunity for huge reform but it was also a perfect moment for further disaster capitalism. This “shock doctrine” of politics, coined by Naomi Klein in her 2007 book, “The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism” puts forward the theory that “shock therapy” politics are:

“the exploitation of national crises (disasters or upheavals) to establish controversial and questionable policies, while citizens are too distracted (emotionally and physically) to engage and develop an adequate response, and resist effectively.”¹

Instead of change, forest fires swept across the world multiple times in the following years. First Australia, then California, now Canada and Maui. Just to name a few. Deathly heat events come every summer, including hazardous wet bulb events that make even lower temperatures deadly with 100% humidex ratings complimenting them.

I now have the problem where I’m not scared because I don’t understand the headlines to the full extend and don’t know what’s dramatized by poor journalism and what’s a legitimate concern. Now I know what’s going on, why, and am all too painfully aware at the fixes not being implemented. As Kate Aronoff talks in her book “Overheated”, the true climate denialism is no longer people or politicians believeing climate change isn’t real. It’s the denial of what the viable solution spaces are. This means that any solution that threatens the unfettered continuation of freemarket capitalism in its current state is “not viable”, despite it being a very viable and crucial solution to climate crisis (see: Green New Deal politics).

And it feels like in many ways, not much has changed from 2017. Even though sustainable design is a growing practice and more people than ever are asking for it in their products, in some ways it feels like I’m still spinning my wheels and the world around me fails to shift in the ways it desperately needs to.

So great, everything lowkey highkey sucks. But what about DESIGN. And branding. The following isn’t meant to be a prescriptive condemnation of design. Just simply some of the complicated feelings and thoughts that have been bouncing around in my head. I’m still working out my own relationship to these ideas as a brand designer that has no intention of quitting her job.

One of the most common questions I get asked in our Green Graphic Design course is how we stick to our values with clients.

Working with sustainably-oriented clients used to bring some hope and optimism that at least through working with them to make better changes we’d be reducing waste in some capacity in the world. And for a while there, especially when working with alternative-protein start-ups this felt real and possible. Like we were really helping make a difference and hopefully positively encouraging people to purchase alternative meats instead of animal-based ones (a direct carbon savings).

But as the world keeps playing back the status quo and capitalism’s demand for continuous growth and continuous purchasing by individual consumers the shiny edge of neat clients has begun to wear off a little. Being a sustainable designer doesn’t mean huge successes all the time. It’s easy to look at a portfolio and be envious or feel like all the designer’s projects must have gone swimmingly and their clients are 100% aligned with their own values and it’s just a cakewalk. But alas, it’s still a pretty complicated world out there.

So I guess here’s me exposing all the difficult parts of being a sustainable designer.

Problem 1: Unrelenting Consumption

At the end of the day, it’s started to feel in the past year that ultimately I’m just designing something prettily in order to sell more product. No matter what it is. I’m still encouraging the increased consumption of ~things~ that may or may not need to exist.

The most sustainable product is the one that doesn’t exist.

It’s prestigious to say you design product-based businesses, especially that you do it sustainably and know all kinds of things about plastic laminates and FSC-papers and cardstocks and suppliers. That you know a lot about a niche topic.

The clients we work with are all bright-eyed and optimistic and ready to make change. But I’ve found myself biting back my tongue: your product may have goals to be sustainable, ethically sourced, and better than anything on the market, but inherently creating a product into this world involves plastic waste and transportation carbon costs and countless externalities that are harmful for the planet. One could even argue that not only is the most sustainable product the one that doesn’t exist, but that the fact it’s so easy for ANYONE to make a startup through white label products or any other means of production is actually one of the reasons why we’re currently seemingly stuck in a lockstep towards 2 degrees or more of warming. And this really isn’t aimed at any of our clients in particular: it’s also all around me. On Instagram, on the Dieline. On their sustainable blog. It’s everywhere.

I see the hauls on YouTube and Tiktok of hundreds or thousands of disposable things and how people buy every zero-waste, sustainable product they can get their hands on.

The most sustainable purchase is the one you didn’t buy.

It seems like zoomers as a generation are aware of the problems with over-consumption but have gone full nihilist into believing there is no ethical consumption under capitalism and so therefore their actions have no meaning and therefore a haul culture is ‘fine’. It’s a generalization. Plenty of the millenial/zoomer generation that I am also a part of are deeply aware, responsible, and conscious consumers. But it’s weird to be existing on the internet and still see such extreme waste and support for drop-shipping companies and plastic trash from Shien/Temu/Alibaba being promoted as good or even ethical purchase (under the guise of supporting a small business) in 2023.

In 2019, I had a shopping addiction. Perhaps I’ll write more on this some day, if folks are interested but for now a quick overview.

To combat it, I completed a no-buy year where I bought nothing that wasn’t an essential health item, or a replacement. No clothing, shoes, makeup, skincare, homegoods, decor, etc. It was one of the most challenging things I’ve undertaken but it fully worked to rewire my dopamine cycles and I’ve since kept to a strict budget and shifted how I view purchases and my relationship to the objects I own and wish to bring into my life. It’s jarring to be surrounded by excess waste both online and offline now.

Problem 2: Design is just Socially-Acceptable Manipulation?

We put a lot of fancy words around design and branding. It’s strategic. It’s values-led. It’s targeted to your demographic. It’s designed with intention. It’s designed to sell. That’s the ugly truth.

When we design, we design to sell product and convince other people to buy the product or service. If we design well, we convince more people to buy the thing than they otherwise would have.

Design does this through social proof: people are actively relying on well-designed brands to have done the research for them. If the brand looks professional, trustworthy, and has sustainability information on their pages, it substitutes independent research for many consumers. They trust in the brand.

This isn’t to say brands shouldn’t have transparent information about their sustainable choices, but the quality of this transparency and claims can vary HUGELY and few brands truly and clearly disclose their honest sustainable claims. If the brand itself is marketing it as being aligned to sustainability in their values, consumers can also feel they’re being “pulled towards a common goal”. This is the unity principle of marketing and why values are huge in consumer product marketing campaigns now. This unity goes beyond the functional or practicality of the product being bought; and is something more innate that marketing intentionally taps into to convince you to buy something.

Another manipulation tactic is just simple social signalling. If you wear Patagonia you’re not just someone who picks high-quality outdoor gear. You stand for sustainable clothing manufacturing, environmental advocacy, and you love the outdoors/Earth. This kind of symbolic storytelling is WHY people have brand loyalty because it becomes part of their identity. And they buy and they buy and they buy to showcase this. Usually, far beyond what’s necessary. And in fact, you don’t need things to prove your ethics or values.

And if, as brand designers, we can create that compelling identity that people can tap in to. To create a compelling and trustworthy design that makes people trust the brand over their own research, to convince them to buy it and become a repeat customer, then we have done our job well.

In some ways, it feels that the work I’ve done is just “get really good at manipulating people to think something is worth buying”… in this context am I proud of the design work I’ve done? I’m honestly not sure.

I do believe that alternative proteins are important for transitioning a collective diet away from animal proteins. And the research shows that generally a purchase of an alternative meat direct replaces and is not in addition to a purchase of real meat. Many companies are producing valuable and truly sustainable products that are worthy of being on the market. It’s not that they’re all bad or contributing to the problem. It just gets real difficult sometimes to know when to make choices, which clients to decline, which clients to encourage, and what to do when client projects go imperfectly.

There are no easy answers here. There isn’t a simple “this is bad”. Really these are just some of my icky feelings about the whole thing.

Problem 3: Sustainable Products Are Difficult to Make

Making a sustainable product isn’t easy either. Our clients or inquiries often don’t understand the complexities of sustainable product design, especially when it comes to food. Compostable plastic is greenwashed, food requires a moisture barrier that means plastic. The most sustainable options are often complex, not ideal and come with many drawbacks, aren’t flashy like compostable plastics, and quite simply are expensive. Or they have longer lead-times or minimum order quantities than are viable for small companies.

We often have clients fall off the bandwagon of sustainability after a few choices or a few months/years. That’s saddening to see as well, even though it’s deeply understandable and even justified for their existence. It’s simply too expensive sometimes to run a full product line sustainably, especially when it comes to overseas transportation, storage, packing, and just keeping costs as low as possible. Which I guess, comes full circle: if a company can’t afford to be sustainable should they exist? I don’t have the answer to that question. And in some ways, with multinationals on the scene who CAN afford to be sustainable but don’t, it’s a moot point.

Problem 4: True Sustainability is an Information Overload

Often clients are looking for an easy solution. And sustainability is complex. Explaining why compostable packaging is greenwashed involves breaking down the following concepts:

• Recycling rates of traditional soft-plastics.

• Availability of Industrial compost facilities and breakdown rates of compostable plastic and compost quality

• Breakdown of the chemical properties of a bioplastic and a compostable plastic to understand feedstocks (starch/sugars vs petrochemicals) and climate impacts and land-use impacts from each option.

• An understanding of their product’s shelf-life and moisture sensitivity and how the material properties of the packaging affect shelf life and spoilage.

• Different options for laminate structures with the fewest grams of plastic possible and why actually a less flashy non-marketable option (in fact yes, one that’s not even recyclable) for their stand-up pouch means less plastic in the environment at the end of the day.

And then they have to absorb that information and trust us and our sources, or not. And sometimes they don’t. Sometimes they aren’t interested in really discussing the nitty gritty chemical compositions, recycling rates, and lifecycle analysis of the products. And just want the marketable, good-PR, tiktok trendy solution.

Where does this leave me as a sustainable designer if the work I can do is ultimately not up to the standard I wish it was for sustainability, in ways which is entirely out of my control? Felt much more manageable when it felt like at least politics or public consensus was moving towards the idea that climate change was a serious and immediate issue that needed to be addressed. Now, it just feels like I might be adding to the problem with good intentions.

Problem 5: Greenwashing is everywhere.

And these trendy solutions are everywhere. It’s a sea of too-fancy products that are greenwashed in some capacity (to greater or lesser degrees, to be fair). Scrolling through the Dieline blog about sustainable / branded packaging is simply dizzying.

This feels representative of the current state of brand design… The pages are full of corporate greenwashing, sheer unnecessary garish excess, products that simply don’t need to exist and then the rest is just full of designs that just blur and blend together after a certain point. Bright colours, bold typography. Or alternatively: rustic/detailed illustration style.

Every trendy brand has sustainability claims, but simply put: they all can’t be sustainable. It’s not that simple in the current state of packaging materials. And not all of the sustainable claims are 100% truthful, as is the inherent nation of greenwashing. Even if every single brand was sustainable the very fact they were all existing and making product is inherently unsustainable. But they get awards and accolades regardless.

I say this as someone who’s entered a Dieline competition and won before. In the sustainable categories, they sent out postcards (a set of like 50+) with sustainable design case studies on them and quotes about sustainable design on one side about how bad waste was and a postcard format on the back. So you could write to a friend or colleague with a particularly ugly, niche, and unnecessary post-card back. And they gave me a full pack. Way too many than would ever be used. And they sent them to everyone who entered or won in a sustainable category (if not all entries/winners). The ironic waste was extreme. I almost wrote them an email about it but at the same time I wanted to not disqualify my entry in the competition since it cost several hundred dollars to enter. Ethical conundrum, huh? I never wrote and I placed second in the category I entered in.

Problem 6: Capitalism Demands Labour

I have to pay my bills. No design form is different here: you can make a case that service-based businesses escape some of these pitfalls. But they usually involve purchasing promotional materials of some kind too and even vetting the work the service-based business or nonprofit is doing in the world is difficult at times too.

I may not love my job right now, but it is my current chosen profession. Quitting is too simple and comes with its own set of burdens and problems. No job holds a perfect solution free of problems both minor and worldly such as the ethical conundrums discussed here. By owning Little Fox, I get infinitely more control to advise and execute real sustainable solutions than I ever would elsewhere.

In the end, I have to keep on keeping on. I don’t think giving up is the right answer. I don’t think that not doing sustainable design work or abandoning the niche is correct. I just don’t really think that my work here is having a real significant impact or is contributing to a movement within consumer behaviour that’s truly changing anything.

I am going to keep designing. I am going to keep recommending and pushing for sustainable choices where and when possible. I am going to keep letting my clients know the uncomfortable truths about materials. And I can just hope for the best.

Where Do We Go From Here

I can’t say that perhaps my thinking here isn’t discoloured by my experiences of chronic illness in the last year and a half. I’m definitely burned out. And burnout comes with cynicism. I don’t have any real answers only confused and complicated thoughts. I hope you enjoyed this style of Substack: it’s a bit different from the more rigorously structured essays. Would you like to see this style of content more?

---

Do you feel similar? Do you feel I’m just a ranting crazy cynic and am totally wrong/blindsided to some more positive aspect of being a sustainable designer? Let me know! XD As much as this may seem just cut and dry here, these are issues I’m thinking and grappling with these months and these are just the thoughts bouncing in my head, not necessarily resolute declarations that every designer is deep evil and should quit. Because a lot of other jobs are significantly worse from a climate or moral impact; these problems aren’t exactly unique to designers. :’)

---

If you’re not subscribed, please consider doing so, if you enjoyed this post. You can also like this post to show your support :)

---

1. From Wikipedia. As one example of this in action, during the pandemic, the fossil fuel industry lobbied hard against cloth reusable bags claiming they were dangerous and carried COVID-19. It turns out that this was actually not only false but that plastic bags were better carriers for the virus than cloth (lasting up to 3 days on plastic vs 24 hours on other materials). They also pushed further into more expansion of plastics manufacturing plants.