Tougher legislation, complex traceability and deeper CO2-calculations are just a few issues sustainability teams need to tackle – with the global environmental polycrisis as backdrop. How can outdoor companies find their ways, and not get swamped in daily operations? In this interview series, Suston reaches out to industry changemakers to hear their long-term perspectives. This time, we discuss activism, goals and impact with Gina Lovett from Patagonia.

How would you describe your role at Patagonia, and in what areas do you feel you can make an impact?

While Patagonia strives to be a responsible business – meaning that we are consistently trying to reduce our impact on the planet be it the materials we use, or the emissions coming from our supply chain – we are also an activist company. That’s about using our voice and influence to advocate for the protection of wild spaces and to support the communities at the heart of these fights.

My role in the organization sits within this work, exploring the actions and campaigns to amplify grassroots organizations and build solidarity with movements. Here, I try to take a systemic view and think about how we can help change systems of power and create a regenerative, just future for people and planet.​

 

Setting up “hard” financial and sustainability targets can be relatively straight forward. But how do you approach and measure the much “softer” targets of advocacy work?

When it comes to developing alliances and advocacy, it’s about understanding what we’re trying to change. We encourage the groups we fund to focus on the ‘root cause.’ This might be a lack of measures to protect a river in a particular law, or it might be a development bank that’s funding destruction of a protected area. You have to think about the alliances and policy processes that support that or that can change it, and go from there.

There’s a lot of emphasis on the development of impact targets, monitoring and data, particularly in the funding of activism, advocacy and sustainability efforts. Many groups spend a considerable portion of their time on this. Unfortunately, it often eclipses the work itself and takes the focus away from where it really needs to be.

One of my top concerns is where we put the focus in the first place. It’s so challenging to know what will really make a difference and where to direct our energy, particularly in light of limited resources.

Ultimately, we know we have had an impact when we have achieved our goals. For example, when we stopped the funding of infrastructure by public banks that would decimate Europe’s last wild river in 2018, we knew this would make a difference.

 

Patagonia is an organization with a long history of driving change. Can you share about the process behind what drives its vision and goals?

One of the great things about working for Patagonia is that it’s got such a strong philosophy and set of values. I see this coming back time and again, from my first weeks reading Let My People Go Surfing to the Chouinards relinquishing ownership and turning over the company to a purpose trust back in 2022. This locked in our values of environmentalism, quality, integrity and justice for the long haul.

Rather than setting strict frameworks and goals, having rock solid values and a coherent philosophy means that our people across the business and regions can contribute in their own authentic way. It’s the diversity and originality that prove to be strengths. When it comes to solving the climate crisis, we need all the ideas, solutions and efforts we can get. When it comes to our more overarching campaigns, our origins in the protection of wild spaces – free-flowing rivers, wild salmon – remain a huge influence.

 

In your field of work/expertise, what do you wish would happen on an industry level the coming years?

I have so many wishes! Wouldn’t it be a massive unlock if as a society we shifted from market competition –  which prevents companies from working together and solving material and climate problems  –  to collaboration. For example, things as supposedly simple as recycling are made almost impossible by the complexity of materials or logistics in supply chains. Companies are so busy differentiating themselves by ‘innovating’ in packaging or labels that it makes any collective action so challenging. There’s a role for industry bodies and governments to incentivize cooperatives and shared benefits.

Ending the dissonance between lobbying and climate goals is another one. There’s still a massive gap between what companies are saying in public and what they are lobbying for behind closed doors.

 

Lead photo: Patagonia’s Vjosa campaign aimed to protect Albania’s Vjosa River. It culminated in the establishment of Europe’s first wild river national park, preserving its free-flowing nature and biodiversity (Credit: Andrew Burr)