Why “sustainable” dampens my mood and “regenerative” builds me up

Why “sustainable” dampens my mood and “regenerative” builds me up

In an interesting article about Patagonia, which just called itself an unsustainable brand, it says in the last paragraph:

Patagonia’s rejection of the label “sustainable” is rooted in a deep understanding of human psychology. The concept of being “done” implies a static state, a finish line that suggests there is nothing more to achieve. Patagonia recognizes that this mindset can lead to complacency and stagnation. By acknowledging that it is not a sustainable brand, it embraces a perpetual sense of growth and improvement. This psychological shift fuels its determination to consistently raise the bar and make a greater impact.

It’s a collective style of growth mindset that rallies people around the idea that humans — and the organizations they build — can always improve.

This is to me that total difference between “sustainable agriculture” and “regenerative agriculture” (although in a german term, I call it “resource building agriculture”; the term doesn’t translate well into english) – the one turns me down, doesn’t really get me going – the other stirs me up and motivates me.

Posted by Stefan in Allgemein, 0 comments