d like wildfire over Indonesia.
Again, activities that did not account for sustaining nature caused a delayed backlash that whipped havoc over Indonesia’s society. Accounting for both direct deaths from the blaze and indirect deaths from the lingering smokey haze, 100,000 people were estimated to have died from the disaster.
The economic impacts were just as cutting. The estimated cost of these fires for Indonesia, due to humanitarian aid and loss of productive land, was around $1.6 billion.
Sustainable business case study three: Dhaka garment factory collapse
On April 24th, 2013, the factory known as Rana Plaza in Dhaka cracked and shuddered under the weight of its workers and machines. The Bangladeshi factory, serving the fast fashion industry, had its workers stitching and sewing over twelve hours a day, to take home as little as ~$50 a month each.
Structural cracks in the eight-story commercial building were reported, causing the closure of shops in its lower floors. The garment factory owners ignored warnings of potential collapse and ordered workers to continue as normal. Only hours after the cracks appeared, the entire building crumpled, killing 1,138 workers and injuring 2,600.
The world’s attention turned to the human cost of cheap, fast fashion. Brands associated with the Rana Plaza such as Mango, Primark, and H&M suffered both financially and in reputation.
By short-cutting their business’ social responsibility, these fashion companies paid an economic price in the long-run, having to fork out $21.5m to the Rana Plaza Trust Fund. The disaster brought about a campaign concerning fashion retailers and the often unfair treatment of their workers.
Sustainable business case study four: Patagonia’s “Don’t Buy This Jacket” campaign
As counter-intuitive as this advertisement may seem, the crux of Patagonia’s message is strong: do not take unless you truly need.
Founded by Yvon Chouinard, a strong environmental activist, Patagonia puts the environment at the forefront of its business operations. The social impacts of doing so are substantial. Honesty in its campaigns means Patagonia gains trust from its consumers. Taking a charitable sentiment by investing in the environment builds a strong brand that people will support, and often pay more to do so.
Patagonia’s healthy environmental stance has positive social effects for the company, creating a firm foundation of brand evangelists. In addition, the company has only a 4% employee turnover due to its strong brand message and good working conditions.
The environmental and social sustainable actions of Patagonia contribute to the company’s economic success. In 2017 Patagonia obtained $209 million in revenue, and it continues to use its increasing profit to strengthen its environmental and social mission.
The short term benefits of a sustainable business
From the above case studies, it is evident that long-term success and unsustainability are mutually exclusive.
But what about the short-term benefits of sustainability?
Let’s take the business mentioned in the last case study – Patagonia – as an example.
Adopting sustainable actions heightens Patagonia’s brand value, thereby providing them with loyal customers who are willing to financially support a brand which aligns with their own ethics and values. In fact, 81% of consumers suggest they will make a personal sacrifice to address social and environmental issues. For Patagonia, this is a huge short-term economic advantage.
The short-term benefits of sustainable actions don’t end with heightened brand value and the acquisition of loyal, well-paying customers, either:
- Being a sustainable business can help you when bidding for contracts from governmental or corporate bodies who work with sustainability.
- Focusing on sustainability allows you to scrutinize your overall business functions – specifically, where you are wasting time, effort, and money. For example, by incorporating environmental accounting procedures, you can reduce your energy costs. By improving your workplace environment, you will reduce employee turnover,