Following on from yesterday’s mild rant about the word sustainability and it’s shortfalls, this is apparently a topic that seems to never end in the enviro space.
The argument which I totally agree with, is that simply replacing a misused term like sustainability with a “better” term like regeneration only really creates another thing to be used incorrectly.
Instead, all these terms need to be understood in context and seen as a connected network of concepts, rather than separate concepts that exist in isolation.
The below graphic is from an article by Leyla Acaroglu, where she articulates this all quite beautifully.
If you let that graphic soak in, you can see that each term has a purpose – it’s not a case of just using one instead of another.
And really, an organisation should have no right to use a term like regenerative if they’re not actually doing regenerative things (if they did it’d be greenwashing).
Personally, I think it’s helpful to see it visually like this – this is just one person’s (Leyla) interpretation and whether it’s right or wrong, what it does well is put each term into some context.
For self-employed creatives, normal business traps are easy to fall into and overcomplicate things - but they’re totally avoidable when flying solo.
Learn how to keep things simple, enjoyable, and climate-smart in around 2 minutes a day by joining The Climate Soloist.