The $500 billion global beauty industry has long been criticized for its lack of sustainability, with a significant portion of products packaging being single-use and non-recyclable. However, in recent years, many companies have made efforts to shift towards more eco-friendly practices, such as using recyclable materials, reducing plastic waste, and increasing transparency around ingredients.
Despite these efforts, many consumers still struggle to understand the sustainability credentials of products, with the industry's clean-up efforts being inconsistent and falling short of making a recognizable impact. This is largely due to a lack of international standardization and regulation, which has led to confusion and "greenwashing" – where companies make unsubstantiated sustainability claims.
One major challenge facing the beauty industry is its reliance on plastic packaging, with 95% of products packaging being thrown away and only a small percentage being recycled. Companies are trying to phase out single-use plastics and adopt post-consumer recycled (PCR) plastic, but this is proving difficult due to high costs and limited supply.
Beauty retailers also play a crucial role in driving sustainability, but many have been slow to adapt. Sephora has launched an initiative to label products that meet certain sustainability criteria, while Target has introduced a program featuring reusable, recyclable, or compostable packaging.
However, many experts argue that regulation and government intervention are needed to drive meaningful change. Governments and multinationals enforcing regulations and setting minimum standards for sustainability claims would go a long way in holding companies accountable.
In the US, for example, there is only one substance banned from use in cosmetic products – formaldehyde-releasing agents – despite 2,495 substances being banned in the EU. This disparity highlights the need for more consistent regulation across countries.
Ultimately, it will take continued collective advocacy and initiative to address the beauty industry's climate shortcomings. "Market leadership" – undertaken by brands and customers – is likely to be the most impactful vector for change, but it will require sustained effort and pressure on companies to make meaningful changes.
Despite these efforts, many consumers still struggle to understand the sustainability credentials of products, with the industry's clean-up efforts being inconsistent and falling short of making a recognizable impact. This is largely due to a lack of international standardization and regulation, which has led to confusion and "greenwashing" – where companies make unsubstantiated sustainability claims.
One major challenge facing the beauty industry is its reliance on plastic packaging, with 95% of products packaging being thrown away and only a small percentage being recycled. Companies are trying to phase out single-use plastics and adopt post-consumer recycled (PCR) plastic, but this is proving difficult due to high costs and limited supply.
Beauty retailers also play a crucial role in driving sustainability, but many have been slow to adapt. Sephora has launched an initiative to label products that meet certain sustainability criteria, while Target has introduced a program featuring reusable, recyclable, or compostable packaging.
However, many experts argue that regulation and government intervention are needed to drive meaningful change. Governments and multinationals enforcing regulations and setting minimum standards for sustainability claims would go a long way in holding companies accountable.
In the US, for example, there is only one substance banned from use in cosmetic products – formaldehyde-releasing agents – despite 2,495 substances being banned in the EU. This disparity highlights the need for more consistent regulation across countries.
Ultimately, it will take continued collective advocacy and initiative to address the beauty industry's climate shortcomings. "Market leadership" – undertaken by brands and customers – is likely to be the most impactful vector for change, but it will require sustained effort and pressure on companies to make meaningful changes.