66
M. De Angelis et al.
of limited editions, the adoption of an exclusive distribution strategy and the careful
selection of the messages to be communicated. As an example, Louis Vuitton has
recently partnered with six of the world’s most renowned artists to create the limited
edition of Artycapucines collection [27].
4 Luxury and Sustainability
Defined as the “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” [28], sustainable
development is today a very urgent issue concerning both individuals and companies. The urgency to find practical solutions to assure a sustainable growth has been
fueled by the rise of a throwaway society that “relies on the relentless production of
novelty by firms and the relentless consumption of novelty by households” [29, p.
XVI]. Keen sociological insights regarding this phenomenon have been provided by
Bauman [30], who has highlighted the liquidity of postmodern times: In a society
obsessed by appearance and individualism, individuals anxiously look for immediate
gratification of their constantly evolving temporary identities, distancing themselves
from the immobility imposed by traditional and heavy objects of consumption and
embracing the liquefaction of goods. Solid accumulation is replaced by elimination
and substitution that gratify individuals’ need for fluidity. This trend has been both
powered and exploited by product suppliers, who often take advantage of planned
obsolescence. The concept of planned obsolescence consists in producing goods
which will be “no longer functional or desirable after a predetermined period” [29,
p. 4], by cutting production costs at the expense of quality and encouraging consumers
to replace the product (sometimes leveraging on technological development).
Unfortunately, such a sociological and economic context does not allow to
achieve a really sustainable development. Importantly, Elkington’s “triple bottom
line” model, proposed in 1994, identifies three main dimensions that should be taken
into consideration by those companies that desire to pursue a sustainable development. The economic dimension refers to the ability of the company to generate
enough profits to ensure business and technological development, as well as employees’ stability over time. The ecological dimension refers to the ability of the company to minimize its environmental impact by optimizing its production processes.
Finally, the social dimension refers to the commitment of the company to improving
collective well-being and promoting the cultural heritage.
In light of the existence, according to the bulk of extant scientific research, of
a sort of contradiction between the values associated with luxury and those associated with sustainability (see [31] for a review on this topic), whether the luxury
sector can be considered sustainable or not is a highly debated issue. Indeed, in a
surely too simplistic way, sustainability has been typically associated with concepts
such as altruism, sobriety and morality, while luxury has been typically associated
with excess, ostentation and superficiality [32]. In contrast, however, several authors
believe that luxury is among the sectors that best fit with the conditions enabling
M. De Angelis et al.
of limited editions, the adoption of an exclusive distribution strategy and the careful
selection of the messages to be communicated. As an example, Louis Vuitton has
recently partnered with six of the world’s most renowned artists to create the limited
edition of Artycapucines collection [27].
4 Luxury and Sustainability
Defined as the “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” [28], sustainable
development is today a very urgent issue concerning both individuals and companies. The urgency to find practical solutions to assure a sustainable growth has been
fueled by the rise of a throwaway society that “relies on the relentless production of
novelty by firms and the relentless consumption of novelty by households” [29, p.
XVI]. Keen sociological insights regarding this phenomenon have been provided by
Bauman [30], who has highlighted the liquidity of postmodern times: In a society
obsessed by appearance and individualism, individuals anxiously look for immediate
gratification of their constantly evolving temporary identities, distancing themselves
from the immobility imposed by traditional and heavy objects of consumption and
embracing the liquefaction of goods. Solid accumulation is replaced by elimination
and substitution that gratify individuals’ need for fluidity. This trend has been both
powered and exploited by product suppliers, who often take advantage of planned
obsolescence. The concept of planned obsolescence consists in producing goods
which will be “no longer functional or desirable after a predetermined period” [29,
p. 4], by cutting production costs at the expense of quality and encouraging consumers
to replace the product (sometimes leveraging on technological development).
Unfortunately, such a sociological and economic context does not allow to
achieve a really sustainable development. Importantly, Elkington’s “triple bottom
line” model, proposed in 1994, identifies three main dimensions that should be taken
into consideration by those companies that desire to pursue a sustainable development. The economic dimension refers to the ability of the company to generate
enough profits to ensure business and technological development, as well as employees’ stability over time. The ecological dimension refers to the ability of the company to minimize its environmental impact by optimizing its production processes.
Finally, the social dimension refers to the commitment of the company to improving
collective well-being and promoting the cultural heritage.
In light of the existence, according to the bulk of extant scientific research, of
a sort of contradiction between the values associated with luxury and those associated with sustainability (see [31] for a review on this topic), whether the luxury
sector can be considered sustainable or not is a highly debated issue. Indeed, in a
surely too simplistic way, sustainability has been typically associated with concepts
such as altruism, sobriety and morality, while luxury has been typically associated
with excess, ostentation and superficiality [32]. In contrast, however, several authors
believe that luxury is among the sectors that best fit with the conditions enabling