|
Best Practice - Quality and Ethics
in Product Specification
Interview - Ewan McEoin
David Gourlay, the managing director of Contemporary Leathers has
been involved in the supply of upholstery leather in Australia for
over 20 years.
He has maintained working relationships with tanners all over the
world and visited tanneries on every continent. In 1995 he established
'Contemporary Leathers' with an ambition to provide the Australian
market with the most naturally produced and beautiful leathers available.
His search for such leathers took him to the Danish tannery Swewi.
This was a boutique tannery producing leathers that were too difficult
for the more mainstream tanners to make and too expensive for the
mass market.
The policy of Contemporary Leathers was to source the finest leathers
available while not apologising for the pricing necessary to make
these available in Australia. The architectural and design market
embraced the concept with Australian-based European furniture manufacturers
and designers leading the way. Europeans tended to have the previous
experience with natural leathers that showed naturally occuring
features. These features were previously not seen as acceptable
in a market that had, in the main, only seen pigmented and more
highly processed hides. It is this attention to the natural attributes
of leather that has made the company successful and shifted the
market's perception of what upholstery leather can be about. This
has also opened up a conversation about best practice environmental
production, which has been largely responsible for the high quality
product now available from some tanneries. In 2001 the Danish tannery
Swewi (the original producer of chromium-free leather) was bought
by the giant Swedish tannery Elmo. As a result a joint venture was
undertaken in Australia between David Gourlay and Michael Fitzsimons
of Instyle Contract Fabrics and Leathers. Instyle, had been the
Australian representative of Elmo. A new company, Contemporary Leathers
Pty Ltd, was established with Instyle and Gourlay being equal partners.
(inside) recently interview Gourlay as the first in a series of
industry based interviews concerning the communication of quality
and sustainability in product available to the design sector.
EM: Could you tell us what would initially prompt a company to pursue
the concept of organic leather production?
DG: Perhaps I should start by saying that the term 'organic' is
one that is open to interpretation, or even, misinterpretation.
I believe that strict standards apply to the definition of what
is organic. For example to qualify for 'organic' status, do the
cows have to be fed on chemical-free grass? It is probably safer
for us to use the term 'chrome-free' and to concentrate on the production
of leather rather than the full picture of 'organic', which must
take in the history of the animal's feeding habits etc. However
with this in mind, to answer your question I believe the impetus
for chrome-free production comes from a combination of legislation
and the industry culture in Scandinavia that has been educated to
understand the importance of environmental factors. The concept
of 'polluter pays' has also been an incentive for the industry to
support Government policies.
EM: If the move towards chrome-free was in many ways stimulated
by government legislation and environmental restrictions do you
think these 'environmental best practice principles' will start
to filter into other areas of manufacturing and production?
DG: Yes, I think this will occur as Governments make increasing
demands on industry and as companies see the benefits of this improved
technology in regard both to their products and their public image
as good corporate citizens. In Denmark, the Swewi tannery was determined
to stay well ahead of the Government's stringent timetable and therefore
it was the first tannery to produce leathers tanned with biodegradable
polymers instead of chromium. It is important to recognise that
the whole tanning industry has been cleaning up its act for many
years, steadily decreasing the amount of chromium used per tonne
of raw material. Therefore, it is not as if the planet is being
destroyed by the industry, but clearly zero chromium is better than
little.
EM: Is this environmental responsibility specific to Northern Europe
in your experience?
DG: No, not anymore. It is true that they have lead the way in this
regard, and I guess even today if you consider the fuss over the
Kyoto Protocol, Northern European Governments are showing greater
commitment than recalcitrant governments such as the US and our
own. To be fair one should understand that waterways are inland
and the impact on the European environment can be severe. As a result
customers tend to have a greater awareness of environmental issues.
Countries such as Australia and the USW for example, are not as
strict with their legislation but they are nevertheless beginning
to focus more and are tightening legislation accordingly. Pressure
groups such as Greenpeace are also focusing attention on general
environmental issues and are no longer considered to be as radical
as even a few years ago.
EM: Along with the benefits of cleaner manufacturing procedures
what have been the other benefits of environmental best practice
production to both the product and the end consumer?
DG: The benefits of the technology are generally two-fold. Environmentally,
100 percent of waste material can now be returned to nature. Sludge
that was previously regarded as toxic waste is now reprocessed and
used as fertiliser, or converted to biogas. the consumer benefits
in other ways as well. The leather produced is softer, and as it
has no toxins is allergy-free. The colours tend to have a greater
clarity, as chrome - free hides become white not blue - as with
the use of chromium - thus fewer pigments are required during the
finishing of semi-anilines.
EM: Does environmental best practice production incur a greater
production cost? Why?
DG: Yes there is a small increase approximately 10 percent - due
to things like raw material costs for example. As fewer pigments
are used the selection of hides becomes critical thus only the better
end rawhides can be chosen, which obviously cost more. Some chemicals
are also more expensive and regular maintenance is higher. These
costs are partially offset by savings on in-house recycling of water
and waste management. Obviously this small increase in cost is more
than offset by the environmental advantages gained - so the consumer
ends up paying a 'true cost' that factors in all flow-on effects
of production and manufacturing - there is often a hidden cost (usually
paid by the environment) with cheaper products. As I said earlier,
zero damage is caused to the environment with chrome-free tanning.
EM: In this case how difficult is it to communicate this 'true cost'
to potential consumers?
DG: Most people know little of leather production or even that chromium
is a factor in the production of leather. Many people still make
their decisions on which leather to use based only on colour. Having
said that, there is a hardcore group of architects and designers
who are becoming increasingly influential in this regard. They are
leading the way. I also spend a lot of time giving my leather seminar,
'From Farm to Furniture', and the environment is always one of the
topics we always discuss. So the word is spreading and I am confident
that more specifiers will take the environment into account when
choosing products, not only leather, for their projects and sell
the benefits to their clients.
EM: In your experience how concerned are Australian designers about
the true cost of the products they specify?
DG: I guess I covered this in your previous question - the answer
in short is that they are becoming increasingly so, the the combination
of the few architects and designers who are making the environment
their 'hallmark', designing buildings that minimise the use of air
conditioning for example. These sorts of people are leading the
way and the education programmes from the industry, such as ours
mentioned above, mean that the word is spreading.
EM: How would you encourage designers for specifiers to justify
products that cost more due to greater environmental considerations
in production?
DG: In the longer term the environment should be an integral part
of university courses or other design courses undertaken by designers.
In other words it should be an everyday part of design culture.
by taking this responsibility for their part in the whole project
the saving can be found in lighting and other energy efficiencies.
These savings can then be turned to using other products that have
a reduced effect on human environment and health.
In the shorter term specifiers can explain to their clients that
by using these chrome-free leathers (and other products produced
to high environmental standards) they will not only be contributing
positively to the environment, but their purchase will be an investment,
not a short term purchase, that will look good for only a short
while. Clients look to the architect and design community for leadership
and guidance and I guess if this elite group does not insist on
real quality in everything they do, then they will be partly responsible
for its disappearance.
|
