Patagonia – 1% for the planet

posted in: Health, Technology | 0

Original post date 4th feb 2013

 

1% For the Planet was established in 2002 by clothing giant Patagonia, to bring together companies that wanted to help the environment and to encourage other companies to do the same.

Developed by Yvon Chouinard and Craig Mathews, its mission is to “build and support an alliance of businesses financially committed to creating a healthy planet.

Patagonia commits 1% of their total sales or 10% of their profit, whichever is more, to environmental groups. Since 1985, when the program was first started, Patagonia has donated $46 million in cash and in-kind donations to domestic and international grassroots environmental groups making a difference in their local communities.

Members range from small to large companies from all over the world. Spawned from Patagonia’s original policy of contributing 1% of all sales to environmental organizations since 1985, the 1,486 members of 1% For the Planet each contribute 1% of their total sales to over 2,000 different environmental organizations every year.

Patagonia was one of the first companies to switch to entirely organic cotton, which in turn is vastly cleaner than non-organic cotton which uses 75% of the world’s insecticides, more than any other single major crop.

Cotton growers who make the transition to biologically based growing practices expect not only to offer a healthier and cleaner product, but also to benefit the planet. Some of the contributions to the different ecosystems include:

  • Protecting surface and groundwater quality (eliminating contaminants in surface runoff)
  • Reduced risk in insect and disease control by replacing insecticide with the manipulation of ecosystems
  • Long-term prevention of pests through beneficial habitat planting.
  • Conservation of biodiversity
  • Eliminate the use of toxic chemicals used in cotton
  • Organically grown crops also yield soils with higher organic matter content, thicker topsoil depth, higher polysaccharide content, and lower modulus of rupture; therefore, reducing considerably soil erosion.

Feed back and constructive criticism is always welcome