Louis Vuitton

Louis Vuitton is an international company owned by the LVMH multinational group. The
French brand founded in 1854
(https://eu.louisvuitton.com/eng-e1/magazine/articles/a-legendary-history) is a luxury fashion
house that sells goods ranging from handbags to travel accessories. Louis Vuitton although a
luxury fashion house, is no stranger to the common issues caused by the fast fashion industry.
Luxury items are known to last longer therefore causing less waste however the processes of
producing these goods are still a concern. The consumer society is also increasing in wealth
and therefore luxury goods like Louis Vuittons are becoming more common. The luxury fashion
industry has been known to have a wide range of issues including but not limited too burning
unsold goods
(https://www.businessoffashion.com/articles/professional/luxury-brands-burn-unsold-goods-what
-should-they-do-instead), contributing to the 13 million tonnes of textile waste
(https://theprettyplaneteer.com/fashion-industry-waste/), and various animal welfare problems.
LVMH is a contributor to this, producing over 9,000 metric tonnes of fashion and leather waste in
2015. Although waste is a large issue in the fashion industry, something less looked at is the
actual materials and their energy efficiency.

Leather
Leather is a commonly used material in the fashion industry, especially in the luxury
fashion realm. However it is a material that requires a large amount of energy input. Louis
Vuitton uses leather for the clothing and their
bags.(https://www.lvmh.com/houses/fashion-leather-goods/louis-vuitton/) Even their canvas
bags have an layer made of leather. It is one of their most used materials and a key part of their
brand image. Although leather is a key part of Louis Vuitton it would be valuable to see if there
was a way for Louis Vuitton to move towards a more sustainable source as there have been
many advancements in leather alternatives, like plant leather and plastic leather. This seems
like something plausible for Louis Vuitton as they currently have sustainable goals, and are
trying to move towards a more circular model.
(https://eu.louisvuitton.com/eng-e1/magazine/articles/louis-vuitton-environmental-commitment)
However, they are focusing on the end life of their products, like donating the waste leather,
wood, gold and textiles to workshops like the ‘La Réserve des Arts’ in France or ’MFTA’ in New
York.(https://eu.louisvuitton.com/eng-e1/magazine/articles/louis-vuitton-environmental-commitm
ent#)

Focusing on the issue at hand of leather. Looking at the process of creating leather will allow us
to identify the main areas of concern that are unsustainable.

1. Cow (80-90% yield)

2. Fleshed
3. Salted/salt brine (stops the skin from decomposing)
4. Lime bath (calcium oxide) to remove hair
5. Tanning
 a. Loaded into tanning drum (chromium salt mix)
b. Special fats added to add strength (liquoring process)
c. Pushed through leather
d. Repeat tanning
6. Dying possible > large drum with dye for long time (8 hours)
7. Finishing (finishing spray)
https://mahileather.com/blogs/news/how-is-leather-made

Looking at the process a majority of the steps contain unsustainable activities or waste.
Cattle farming is known to produce large amounts of methane gas which is a green house gas
stronger than carbon dioxide. Cattle farming can also result in overgrazing and degradation of
soil along side the destruction of ecosystems and habitats. The fleshing of the cattle contains a
large sum of animal welfare issues, ranging from how the cattle has been killed to where the
rest of the cattle goes (if the animal waste {byproduct} is used for food).

The tanning process could be considered the most impactful as they use chromium
mixes. Chromium mixes can result in leaks into the local environment, or into the factory
effecting the workers. Factories in the past have been shut down both in the US and Europe due
to issues relating to chromium. This is because it can cause cancers, liver damage, kidney
damage and fertility problems amongst those exposed.
(https://gizmodo.com/how-leather-is-slowly-killing-the-people-and-places-tha-1572678618).
Although there are a large variety of substitutes for tanner like vegetable tanned leather, they do
not produce the quality of leather needed for fashion accessories. Therefore leather could be
considered one of the most harmful materials Louis Vuitton uses to date.

Louis Vuitton and leather

Louis Vuitton does not directly acknowledge its use of leather and the unsustainable
features of the material. However they do advertise a move towards a more sustainable
company. The LVMH group aims to reduce emissions and become more sustainable, the goals
they have established are supposed to be adopted by Louis Vuitton. In relation to leather they
hope to source 70% of their leather from monitored tanneries. This means that the tanneries
would be audited. This does not ensure that there are no chromium spills, no damage to worker
health or to the surrounding environment. Louis Vuitton only addresses the end of the leather
waste cycle and how they are attempting to combat waste. They send about 60% of their
leather waste to workshops in New York, however the waste from the workshops and the goods
created are not clearly identified. The lack of information and acknowledgement here gives the
impression that they are not keen on addressing this issue.

However Louis Vuitton and other fashion houses have always been ambiguous when
addressing their materials and sourcing as they like to keep this under wraps. A key to
understanding if the leather process for Louis Vuitton is sustainable is to understand their supply
chain and suppliers. However this is not publicly listed, the only mention of suppliers are on the
LV website where they mention their supply is from Spain, Italy and the US
(https://eu.louisvuitton.com/content/dam/lv/online/picture/allcountry/careers/downloads/metiers_l
ogistics_supplychain_job_sheet4_en.pdf). Multiple reports by journalists have discovered that a
large amount of the leather goods for LV and other infamous fashion houses like Gucci are
sourced, and manufactured in the Spanish village of Ubrique
(https://www.bbc.com/news/business-40728150). However all the workers in Ubrique are
required to sign Non disclosure agreements. This tells us again that they do not want to be open
about their supply chain and the working conditions. The lack of transparency brings up
questions about their commitment to sustainability.

Aside from the supply chain, Louis Vuitton has been a victim of the PETA no fur
movement, which resulted in Gucci, Versace, Coach and other fashion houses to stop their use
of fur. Louis Vuitton has not committed. However it has significantly reduced the amount of fur
goods they are producing. NGOs and other animal activist groups have the power to
significantly change tastes of customers, even luxury customers that are often thought to have
more of an inelastic demand (as they are not as influenced by income fluctuations). If these
groups decided to target leather next which is likely due to its unsustainable practices, Louis
Vuitton could suffer significantly through a decrease in demand.

Potential solutions
For LV to move forward they should find a an alternative to leather or a more sustainable
process for its production which they can use to phase out traditional leather slowly. This will
allow them to avoid any conflict with animal welfare associations as well as help them in their
move towards sustainability, possibly reaching a new market. The main concerns with this and
why it has not been done already are listed here:
1. The processes leather requires so it does not decompose
2. The quality of leather is hard to match (longevity, texture)
3. Leather is associated with being rich and luxury
So when addressing the solution we will combat each of these obstacles.

1. Leathers bio qualities

As leather is a bio product, it decomposes. The decomposition can happen quiet fast
and can ruin the quality of the leather if not prevented. This means that the leather needs to be
processed. As mentioned there are some alternatives to the harmful chemicals used for the
tanning process, there are still problems in relation to the farming process. The best way
forward here would have been sustainable farming for the cattle and using vegetable tanners.
However this presents its own issues as the cattle is still being farmed and creating methane
gas. In this instance there needs to be innovation in sustainable agriculture as well as
sustainable tanning which currently does not exist.

2. Quality of leather
Their are many plant based leather alternatives but the complication with these are the
quality and longevity. Pineapple leather is a common source, and has been used by companies
like Hugo Boss for shoes (Piñatex). Experts mention that the leather was comparable to
extremely low grade quality leather. Not only this but the sourcing of the pineapples were
sometimes from extremely unsustainable farms which contributed to environmental degradation
(https://www.fastcompany.com/3059190/this-gorgeous-sustainable-leather-is-made-from-pineap
ple-waste). There are other plant leathers have similar issues like mushroom (too short in
lifespan), or Cactus leather (biodegradable, easily perishable)
(https://www.greenmatters.com/p/vegan-leather-made-from-plants). Taking all these concerns
into consideration plant leathers is not a feasible material for Louis Vuitton to take on at this
moment in time.

Another source of leather is a plastic alternative, PU. PU is used for a large amount of
low cost leather alternatives. PU’s quality is good and can be comparable to leather, although
the texture is not exactly the same this is a potential substitute.

3. Luxury
PU fails as a substitute here, due to its low cost, and easy access, many companies use
this for a large amount of goods with low costs. Therefore for Louis Vuitton to convert from high
grade leather, which is expensive and rare, to PU which is common and low cost will not be
good for the brand image. Moreover Louis Vuitton would not be able to charge how much they
currently charge for the same goods if they were made from PU resulting in low cost goods,
which is not a part of the brands values’ or image. Using low quality materials could heavily
damage the brand, as Louis Vuittons consumers expect high quality materials.

Solution
There is a material however that combats both these issues, Zoa. Zoa is a biofabrication
leather. The leather is real leather however it does not require farming or a large amount of
cattle as conventional leather. The benefits here are endless. With this biofabrication since it is
made from yeast that produces collagen, all the aspects of the leather produced can be
adjusted. This means the leather will be customisable in terms of color, quality, texture.
Moreover the material has been prototyped and compared to extremely high grade leather
showing us that it can maintain the quality that LV requires.

Zoa is also an extremely expensive fabric, which is still in the developmental phases.
They have perfected the process but need some time before commercialisation. If Louis Vuitton
were to partner and ensure that they are the only fashion house with access to ZOA, they could
market it as luxury. Moreover it will be a new era for Louis Vuitton, moving from traditional
leather to a more modern alternative which can be a part of their image. So this satisfies the
image concern.

The process for Louis Vuitton to make this transition require a large amount of investment into
the ZOA’s R&D and creating a partnership that no other fashion house can compete with. If LV
managages to create this close relationship with their suppliers they will be able to create lines
of bags, and other goods that would conventionally be leather with ZOA materials. They would
be the first to bring it to market, and it would be a big step for fashion and Louis Vuitton.