Ethical Jewellery Movement - Another Lame Marketing Gimmick? This dull Damien Hirst's diamod encrusted skull, which was titled "For the Love of God", became a symbol of lame publicity stunt, but really it should be used as logo for all the jewellers claiming that their fine jewellery is ethical.
As a gemstone buyer I am faced with a dilemma. How can I ensure that the gemstones I purchase are fairly traded, conflict free and ethical? This cannot be done even for diamonds, because if a diamond is not "bloody", it's probably "sweaty". The diamond market is controlled mainly by one organization - De Beers, which comprises of many companies involved in rough diamond exploration, mining and diamond trading. And a monopoly, by my understanding, is already something not ethical.
But here is more, just last year War on Want published a report accusing De Beers parent company Anglo American of profiting from the abuse of people in developing countries in which the company operates.
There is a lot of speculation and marketing exploitation of the term ethical jewellery, especially when it comes as a cheap and easy option of simply printing "conflict-free" on the invoice or calling to ban Myanmar gemstones (i.e. Burmese rubies). These claims do not make jewellery ethical, nor does it actually guarantee that the colour gemstones and diamonds are conflict free, ethical and fairly traded.
But what about Kimberley process, which is a certification system, which attempts to guarantee that diamonds are conflict-free. Unfortunately, the Kimberley process does not certify fair trade practice, environmental and social standards, nor does it address issues with other precious stones, which come from all over the world, including war zones.
Manufacturing a finished product presents another process with its own labor and environmental issues. Plus, there is a wide range of jewellery products, from toy rings to the high end. Attempting to come to an agreed upon criteria of what is ethical with such an elaborate, disparate supply chain is daunting.
As a gemstone buyer I am faced with a dilemma. How can I ensure that the gemstones I purchase are fairly traded, conflict free and ethical? This cannot be done even for diamonds, because if a diamond is not "bloody", it's probably "sweaty". The diamond market is controlled mainly by one organization - De Beers, which comprises of many companies involved in rough diamond exploration, mining and diamond trading. And a monopoly, by my understanding, is already something not ethical.
But here is more, just last year War on Want published a report accusing De Beers parent company Anglo American of profiting from the abuse of people in developing countries in which the company operates.
There is a lot of speculation and marketing exploitation of the term ethical jewellery, especially when it comes as a cheap and easy option of simply printing "conflict-free" on the invoice or calling to ban Myanmar gemstones (i.e. Burmese rubies). These claims do not make jewellery ethical, nor does it actually guarantee that the colour gemstones and diamonds are conflict free, ethical and fairly traded.
But what about Kimberley process, which is a certification system, which attempts to guarantee that diamonds are conflict-free. Unfortunately, the Kimberley process does not certify fair trade practice, environmental and social standards, nor does it address issues with other precious stones, which come from all over the world, including war zones.
Manufacturing a finished product presents another process with its own labor and environmental issues. Plus, there is a wide range of jewellery products, from toy rings to the high end. Attempting to come to an agreed upon criteria of what is ethical with such an elaborate, disparate supply chain is daunting.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Hi, please feel free to share your comment here.
For example: Which pictures is the best?
Thanks,
Admin