Tutorial

COP tutorial with Pete 7/11/18

Case studies (my examples) = 

Neil’s yard

- life style solution through them promoting the consumer to  up-cycle

- all similar types of bottle which could reduce the carbon footprint

- life style advice, saying they are recycled materials however they cannot refill the bottles so its putting the burden onto the consumer by saying you can recycle this - related to sharing responsibility

- in a way they are being fair  as they do inform you of their limitations which is they can’t refill their bottles but they can used ‘pre-loved’ material - giving the consumer an informed choice of some sort

Louis Vitton 

- in some ways can be seen as package-less, you can potentially keep that bottle and can go back to get the new product in the same bottle

- with it being LV probs got more brand power in terms of it being a desirable object

- refill is an old fashioned idea, the point is that it could be seen as more effort than it is worth to find the old bottle and then take it back to refill, again putting the responsibility back on the consumer

- perfume is something you don’t use that much and will last a long time, so when it fits in the model of the life cycle of the product you get your money worth from it, would it be that bad refilling it assuming you want the same perfume again? 

- LV know you won’t need one in a short period of time, it would be a longer amount of time, again putting the responsibility back on the consumer because they know that the consumer isn’t going to want one straight away thus showing for them to offer that there is no real affect on them

Tesco 

- incentivised system getting consumers to reuse

Edible six pack ring & Carlsberg recycled glue 

- These are solutions where to corporation has taken responsibility for sustainability

- this is the absence of packaging, making packaging that is environmentally friendly

- better than LV because the corporation has come up with a design problem and have taken responsibility for the design, not left it to the consumer to dig out an old bottle and take it back to the store to refill it

- With C there is no packaging just recycled glue, the aluminium cans can be recycled, there’s less waste which shows a measurable solution much like the 6 pack ring, where the brewery have taken it upon themselves to make a sustainable solution to the plastic rings that are so commonly seen in our world today (through the media - could try to link here?)

Mushroom packaging also very much about the company finding a design solution 

Need to critique the examples and ask who is being made responsible for the products, looking at the whole life cycle of the product, in some cases 6 pack and Carlsberg are looking at the whole life cycle as they are thinking about what happens after they sell their product, their products are actually being purposeful and useful. Where the NY and LV are putting the responsibility for after the sale onto the consumer. NY they are using recycled plastics much like a lot of companies, however they are more about the life style solution more about the aesthetic rather than being purposeful.

Nike 

- don’t see everyone walking around with a shoebox bag for a normal bag, is it a competent solution? It is a new solution and interesting with a cool edge to it but its v niche

- affliction with nike makes it more appealing

- it has another life - looking at the whole life cycle of a product - it is on the right track to sustainability however it is an interesting solution but is it functional? we need functional bits of design in the world today which do a good job doing what they do, they do fulfil and make it fair to the consumer because you have a choice to make a real difference

General 

- NY = lifestyle example saying you should up-cycle the bottles (NY example was to hang loads of the bottles as lights for decor), to start with you have to love the product in order to buy a lot of bottles to use as decor, but none of the reduce, re-use recycle aspects are ground breaking in the sense they are not changing a lot in relation to sustainability and the environment.

- In relation to title - we aren’t saying that the consumer is taken out of the equation completely but its the idea of what is a fair burden, is it fair to tell someone to go fill up their perfume bottle at a LV store.  

- need to integrate the idea of who is responsible, using the structure I have, its the idea that the company are making you responsible e.g. LV to go back to their store, doesn’t affect them, they can offer that service easily as they know most people wouldn’t use straight away

- companies who are designing new solutions are making the most impact because they are offering a solution and being fair to the consumers because they are giving you a solution that actually works e.g. Carlsberg

- talk about reduction of packaging somewhere

- consumption, consumer theories e.g. capitalism - theory to go alongside the theories of packaging, gives the idea that packaging is part of a process, the consumer and the packaging don’t just exist in isolation they exist in a capitalist society - find some theory that relates to capitalism.

Intro point - 

talking about the idea of responsibility, corporate responsibility and sustainability and introduce the subject of why its important, what kinds of issues are related to the subject as well. Got to do with whole life cycle, culture of throw away, reduce reuse recycle, the relationship between packaging and consumer. There are 4 basic points that this essay is going to explore which are these and why they are important.