The hidden costs of Collagen

Collagen, in powdered form is one of the developed world’s most popular health supplements – a business worth an estimated $4.7 billion in 2022. Recommended by several leading lifestyle influencers, a daily dose is claimed to work wonders for hair, skin, nails and joints. In addition, due to its ‘excellent blending properties and ‘smooth flowability’ it is increasingly used as a component of what are known as ‘processed food products’. A major issue arises though as much of the supply of commercial collagen is produced from the hides of cattle raised on newly cleared land in Brazil. Investigators have shown it is inextricably linked to deforestation, biodiversity loss, land invasions, and violence against indigenous peoples. Collagen seems to be a classic product of late-stage capitalism – so profitable it excites the insatiability of the biggest multinationals yet is so damaging to the environment and people that details of its production have to be veiled in secrecy. Too often details are hidden under the catch-all ‘commercially sensitive’ label. Like palm oil (multiple uses) and coltan (raw material for mobile phones), collagen is a contradictory product that satisfies (Western) humanity’s present desires but at a planetary cost that is increasingly problematic.

Cattle and deforestation. Image by Greenpeace (Bruno Kelly)

One of the leading companies involved in the collagen trade is Vital Proteins Inc. a subsidiary of the giant Nestlé Corporation, one of the world’s biggest food producers. Nestlé has been involved in major scandals for decades involving among other things misleading baby milk advertising, unsustainable recycling claims, unethical food sources etc., and has a bad reputation among campaigners for many issues. According to analysts CBInsights Nestlé would like you to believe they have left all this disreputable behaviour behind as they now claim to be ‘prioritising health and sustainability across their portfolio.’ Look a bit closer and you see that this admirable objective is part of their ‘growth strategy’. In other words sustainability comes second to maximising profit. However, as they admit on their own website ‘preserving natural capital becomes increasingly crucial …for the future of our business.’ It’s difficult to believe they have heeded their own words.  

Vital Proteins also claims the moral high ground with a commitment to ‘doing business in a way that respects people and the planet’. But not just yet, it would seem. Following the exposé of their Brazilian supply chain by the Bureau of Environmental Investigations they admit they won’t be ‘deforestation free’ until 2025. Meanwhile forest clearance and attacks on indigenous people continue. Since presumably they were aware of their own supply chain before being exposed, their ‘way of doing business’ may be a form of words of fairly recent origin. Vital Proteins certainly seem like a perfect fit for Nestlé.

There is a plethora of beauty products and treatments now available with collagen as a key ingredient. Image by Silvia from Pixabay

My question is, why is it that big corporations can’t find reputable ways of doing business instead of behaving so badly, even when their unscrupulous practices are uncovered by activists and journalists? Once exposed, instead of changing policy the preferred approach seems to be to try silencing the investigators or even questioning their motives. Greenwashing seems to be ingrained in some parts of the corporate world.

A major trend in recent years is the move towards ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) disclosure, as a way of claiming compliance with growing international standards. Some of these standards, especially those to do with biodiversity are ill-defined, and while the basic morality underpinning a whole enterprise or its methods go unquestioned, the value of this exercise is unclear. The ESG claims of companies such as Purdue Pharma, Smith & Wesson, Johnson & Johnson are all first rate, yet all three have had to pay out billions due to what courts found were ‘irresponsible marketing’ strategies leading to tragedies great and small. As some of the ESG rating agencies admit, the disclosure process is aimed at reassuring investors, not at changing corporate behaviour. Whatever its value the whole ESG movement is gaining momentum internationally, notwithstanding the ridicule of right-wing commentators such as the Wall St. Journal, who regard the whole process as a distraction from the main purpose of business – to maximise profit. But should profitability be the sole purpose of business, whatever the cost to others and the environment? It’s a set of values that has been termed ecocide, but there are other ways of doing business.

Greenwashing – a key risk of superficial corporate approaches to sustainability. Image by Jarrett Tilford from Pixabay

When management of the giant Swedish timber corporation STORA learned how damaging clear-felling (their preferred harvesting method) was to the overall forest ecosystem, they decided that the entire company urgently needed a changed mindset – even if it meant their profits were reduced. If their business was based on the forest, then the health of the forest was their responsibility – not a concept that big business seems too familiar with – and company policy should reflect that. Basic classes in forest ecology were provided for all staff, and a fresh approach to their entire business was introduced; the enhancement of their extensive forest holdings was to be the primary objective. As a result, harvesting methods were changed, replanting schemes redesigned and detailed forest monitoring established – and all this was done not to satisfy some inspectorate, or to raise their ESG profile, but because it became part of the philosophy of the company. What they soon realised was that they could still produce timber and enhance the biodiversity of the forest at the same time; it wasn’t difficult, but it just needed a new way of thinking, a new set of priorities. The company’s standing improved and staff recruitment became competitive. Short-term profitability had been sacrificed for long term benefit. Quite a turnaround for a company regarded previously as operating primarily at the low value end of the timber business.

The giant Swedish timber corporation STORA, transformed their whole business model to protect forest ecosystems. Image by Manfred Antranias Zimmer from Pixabay

The natural state of the planet is deteriorating fast and scientists warn that critical tipping points are being rapidly approached. Deforestation of the Amazon is still accelerating – according to INPE, Brazil’s satellite research agency. If big business is ever to take climate change and the conservation of biodiversity seriously it will only happen with a STORA-style upgrade in the prevailing philosophy, the corporate mission. It is not enough to claim good ESG results, or to increase overall profitability, if in reality damaging practices in core activities and the supply chain persist. No company, however big and powerful, should feel free to make money at any cost. If respect for Earth and its people are not taken into account, public relations froth like Vital Proteins’ claims of ‘our way of doing business’ goes unchallenged contributing to an ever-deeper environmental crisis.

One way forward would be independent certification of actual performance as has been pioneered by voluntary bodies such as the Forest Stewardship Council (wood products) and the Marine Stewardship Council (seafood), while the Soil Association certifies organic produce. All three have come in for some criticism; they tend to certify the products of big corporations whereas the means of certifying artisanal (small-scale) production is still in the planning stage largely due to cost. However, these bodies are helping define appropriate standards for different industries where care of the environment is a primary concern and not something to be ignored, downplayed or even mis-represented, in the sole pursuit of profit. Many large companies object to paying for independent certification, at the same time limiting their disclosure of ESG due to ‘commercial sensitivity’. The sort of complete rethink that STORA achieved seems to be beyond the ambition of most large corporations, while the bottom line and today’s share price occupy their overwhelming attention, whatever the reputational risk.

In the meantime, if you want to purchase collagen powder, I suggest you look carefully for a product which causes no deforestation, violence or corruption – now and not at some unlikely pledged date in the future. Such products are available – you just have to ask for them.

Planetary Health Weekly: Biodiversity Blog 13 – by Edward Milner (views my own)

N.B. First published in Planetary Health Weekly, a free weekly blog about the health of the planet.