Is fast design at odds with sustainability?

This article first appeared in Mix Interiors #231

Words and moderated by: Chloé Petersen Snell

If we know change is necessary, how do we create systems that needn’t come at a cost? In this Mix Roundtable with Interface we consider how to rethink the way we create and construct, explore what can be done to shift mindsets and ask how we can adapt aesthetics to fit with truly sustainable design.

Is constant change and the desire for ‘newness’ unsustainable?

When it comes to fast design, trends and sustainability, can the two ever get along? For Magdalini Kollatou, Willmott Dixon, design is starting to follow in the footsteps of fashion. “Once you would pay more for a pair of jeans that would last, but now we have fast fashion, where jeans cost five pounds and you buy a new pair each year. It could be the influence of social media – especially when it comes to hospitality. The lifetime of a product might be great, but the environments its placed in are too fickle and fast-paced.”

“There is a danger of following trends in the hospitality industry,” agreed Faber’s Tony Matters. “I would say probably 70% of our clients couldn’t give two hoots whether something is sustainable – their focus is whether it’s going to work, and if in a year’s time they are still going to be trading, this is the nature of the sector. And often, when some of the more transient, trend-led businesses closes, the materials and furniture are just sent to landfill. It’s up to us to make sure this doesn’t happen.”

“We’re tasked as part of a brief that the building must last 40, 50 years,’ said Corstorphine & Wright’s Tom Higginson. “But who is doing that from an interiors perspective? Are clients asking for something that’s going to be fit for purpose and on trend for the next 20 years? I think we need to maintain integrity of design, and as designers it’s our obligation to ensure that we’re designing spaces which are fit for purpose for a longer period of time, suitable to be adapted and developed  with or without trends.”

“That’s something that’s fundamentally quite broken about the industry,” added Interface’s Becky Gordon. “We need to either find a way to design in such a way that aesthetics and materials can last through those different leases – or you need to try and shift people away from the three-year leases to much longer leases. Longer and cheaper.”

Is old still a dirty word?

 Today it’s a trend, tomorrow it’s landfill: in an effort to reduce waste, can designers embrace the value of second-hand and consider modular products that can be easily replaced and repaired when needed? Eve Waldron reflected on a recent project for Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership which fully embraced circularity and sustainable principles – including over 60% of the furniture bought second-hand.

 “We found chairs from the 60s, others that were in the Museum of Modern Art’s permanent collection, and ended up with better quality furniture that wouldn’t have been afforded on a typical university procurement budget. At the end of the project we worked with Archetype and did a report on the embodied carbon in the job, and at the start of the project the furniture represented 13% of the embodied carbon. We looked at the figures if you replace the furniture every five to seven years versus if you buy second-hand furniture; refurbish it, recover it and keep it for longer. After about 50 years, the embodied carbon of the furniture in the project would be equivalent to around 37% of the build cost. It just shows you that furniture is a huge consideration, but is often there to suit a trend. In some cases, design can be more about seeing what’s there than it is about creating something new.”

It’s not always as straight forward as simply purchasing second-hand furniture, Gensler’s Kelly Stanton said, as the certifications and warranties often required aren’t as readily available from second-hand sources. “I wish there was somewhere that I could go to find second-hand furniture that still came with everything that you need for a project. It doesn’t seem to be easily available.”

Interface’s Becky Gordon agreed with the challenges around second-hand flooring – and noted that specifiers and end-users also have a pivotal role to play. “If reused flooring is something that the industry is wanting, there does have to be a level of flexibility from specifiers to use what we have currently on offer in our warehouse due to the nature of second-hand. We have a programme to reuse our flooring, but often a designer can’t use the product because the reality of what’s available doesn’t work when presented to the client.”

“We should be choosing products for their sustainability above everything else”, challenged Stanton. “It’s more important than what it looks like. We have a database and if it doesn’t tick all the boxes, it’s not going in.”

Yet for Gordon, choosing the most sustainable products also means meeting different functions and requirements. “Otherwise, when people are in control of that project you can’t guarantee that they’re going to make the right decisions – for example, our most sustainable, carbon negative products are a carpet tile, but that won’t work in a kitchen space.”

If there are complications with stricter briefs, could a leasing model prove more palatable – and, for our designers, guilt-free? “About 15 years ago we trialled a leasing model at Interface, but the market just wasn’t ready for it, and no one used it,” continued Gordon. “The idea of leasing is interesting, especially if it means that a manufacturer can maintain ownership and provide maintenance for the product’s lifespan, and then find a new home for it at end of life.”

“It comes down to the lifecycle of the product,” added BDP’s Ackerley. “Can you rent it and then rent it again and rent it again? That would mean looking upstream and putting the onus on the manufacturer, meaning we wouldn’t need to feel guilty about clients wanting a new or refreshed scheme.”

Changing aesthetics for a changing world

Should we follow trends (even the most well-meaning) if it means incorporating something that will be ripped out in 5 or 10 years – or can we evolve clients’ expectations for the way spaces look to adapt to truly sustainable design thinking? For Waldron and others around the table, it’s not about ticking boxes but adjusting the mentality from the start – sometimes, warts and all.

“[At CISL] there was no going back because they were reporting on it. We just had to be flexible – we might have thought we wanted orange chairs, but then we found some green ones. It was kind of freeing in a way because instead of thinking ‘what do I want’ it became ‘this is what I have to work with’; it became part of the challenge, making the best of what we could find.”

Matters agreed. “I feel like when everything is so coordinated and perfect, sometimes it feels a little bit inhuman. When you do allow for that sort of flexibility and mismatch it can create these funny little human moments. Maybe there is a new aesthetic needed to allow for this sort of conscious sustainable restriction.”

“Maybe a slightly planned randomness,” laughed Waldron. “For instance, we made one of the doors a different colour to the other doors – it was a kind of planned collage, so that if you then had to replace another door it wouldn’t look out of place as not all the doors match anyway.”

“We did some toilets once in the restaurant where we used leftover tiles from other jobs and each individual space was unique,” continued Matters, “and it turned out to be one of the most popular projects we’ve done.”

“From an architecture perspective, we’re having conversations now about recycling the steel that goes in the structure,” added Simon Jesson, Glancy Nicholls. “There are 80,000 tonnes of steel floating around that we can start to match into your projects – even designing to show off the steel as an authentic sustainable narrative that’s part of the design. Why not interiors too?”

Mindsets are changing

When it comes to clients – and even those creating within the design industry, does cost always win? Our table are generally optimistic, but there is work to be done. “We are seeing consumers making more conscientious decisions in deciding to pay more for sustainable office space and BTR schemes in order to have lower energy bills, but also a clear conscience,” said Higginson. “Once the product starts to gain more value it’s an easier pill for the client to swallow.”

Providing reassurance of quality is a start when it comes to changing mindsets of clients and developers, said Jesson, as well as pushing for changes in legislation and tax incentives and government accountability. “We need to use data to reassure developers and clients, and create innovations that won’t butt up against the bottom line.”

Ackerley agreed. “For most clients the focus is always going to be what it looks like and how much it costs. If you’ve got a client that thinks sustainability sits side by side with that, then that’s great, but educating clients and advising them to make better decisions falls to us, and I don’t think we always harness that power. We need to educate ourselves on topics like sustainability, circularity, new ways of designing and then pass on that information on in a collaborative way with client and suppliers, to look for more innovative solutions, not shortcuts.”

Gensler’s Stanton rounded off the conversation with a call to action. “There are no hacks, there are no shortcuts. It’s hard work and there are big changes, and some compromises will have to be made. But we need to stop talking and start doing, we have a big role to play.”