The ethics of leather is hotly contested. On one hand, raising cattle is known to be a major contributor to climate change. Leather tanning processes – both chrome and vegetable tanning – are known to be harmful to the environment. But, leather is steeped in a heritage of being a natural animal product.
In this series, we will explore the different facets of leather production and its associated sustainability claims. To start, we look at a common argument in favor of leather that comes up often in debate: “Leather is a byproduct of the meat and dairy industries.”
“Leather consumption cannot be dismissed as a charitable act of zero-waste by the meat industry.“
Environmental Impact of Raising Cattle
According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, 14.5% of all anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions come from livestock. Cattle alone represent 65% of these emissions [1]. Cows release methane when burping, a greenhouse gas that is more than 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide. They also contribute to deforestation as trees are cut down to create grazing pastures and to grow their feed. The leather industry has been documented to contribute to slash-and-burn deforestation in the Amazon Rainforest [2]. The rising demand for meat is only exacerbating the problem.
The claim that leather is a byproduct of the meat and dairy industries shifts the blame off of leather as a driving cause of the booming and destructive cow farming industry. It frames leather as a product of resourcefulness – as a means to reduce waste by using all parts of the animal.
Brief History of Leather Production
It is true that leather production, as originally handled by indigenous peoples, was once a resourceful means to use all parts of the animal. However, the goal posts have shifted with the industrialization and commercialization of the leather industry.
Indigenous communities around the world have long tanned animal skins to create leather for shelter, clothing, and footwear. Tanning is the process of turning animal skins into leather to prevent degradation when used. Traditional tanning techniques used tree bark (vegetable tanning) or the animal’s brains and organs (brain tanning) [3]. First, the animal was skinned, then the fat, flesh, and fur were removed. After drying, the tanning mixture was rubbed and soaked into the skin. This made the skin soft and pliable. After removing the tanning solution, the resulting skin would be stretched and scraped to further break up the fibers and soften the skin.
In the mid-1800s, chrome tanning was invented as a means to expedite the tanning process. This resulted in leather that was more water-resistant and more pliable. Rather than using tree bark or animal organs, chemicals are used to treat the skin. Chrome tanning can lead to severe health risks to workers and highly toxic effluents can leak into waterways if the resulting wastewater is not treated properly. Today, about 90% of all leather is produced using chrome tanning, mostly in countries with unregulated environmental practices.
Leather as a Co-product
The adoption of chrome tanning helped leather production keep up with increasing demand and catapulted it into a highly profitable industry. The leather manufacturing industry has grown to a multiple billion dollar industry, providing raw materials used primarily in footwear, automobiles, and furniture.
By definition, byproducts are incidental products produced unintentionally in the production of the primary product. For example, sawdust is a byproduct of milling wood. Co-products, however, are produced alongside the primary product and carry equal importance. When leather is considered a valuable material created in the process of beef, it can be better thought of as a co-product.
Cowhide has historically accounted for 6-8% of the total value of U.S. cattle, comprising the largest share of a cow’s non-meat co-product value [4]. Each head of the cow has a low profit margin and the leather industry helps make the meat industry more financially sustainable, while the leather industry – except for veal and lamb – isn’t valued enough to drive animal farming by itself. They are co-dependent industries.
While most leathers do come from animals that are also raised for their meat and milk, it is important to remember that most exotic leathers – from snakes, alligators, ostriches, etc – come from animals that are killed solely for their skin. Ostrich leather can account for up to 80% of the bird’s value [5]. In this case, ostrich leather is undoubtedly not a byproduct. Additionally, some livestock such as calves and lambs, are bred with the sole intention of selling their skins, as their skin is much more valuable than the meat.
Recent Decline in Leather Popularity
Recently, the price of leather has fallen dramatically as the demand for leather has fallen and the world is turning more towards the usage of cheaper “vegan” and “faux” leather. In 2020, leather accounted for only roughly 1% of the total value of U.S. cattle [6]. In contrast, the demand for meat is up, which means more cows are being raised and slaughtered to satisfy the demand for meat and fewer hides are being used. The imbalance of consumption is causing hides to be incinerated or sent to landfill [7].
The vast number of unused and wasted hides illustrates the delicate balance between these two industries. Beef prices have skyrocketed since the mid-2010s, and as the price of leather continues to drop, it can no longer prop up the price of meat [8]. As the price of leather continues to fall, it may pressure the price of beef to grow to unsustainable levels.
Why is This Important?
Why is it important to distinguish leather as a co-product, rather than simply a byproduct of the meat industry? Using the word “byproduct” trivializes the impact that the leather industry has on the environment. Leather consumption cannot be dismissed as a charitable act of zero-waste by the meat industry. Ultimately, both unsustainable cattle rearing practices, as well as toxic leather production processes still need to change.
Tune in over the following months for more on this series exploring the world of animal leather.
Citations:
- https://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/197623/icode/
- https://www.epa.gov/gmi/importance-methane
- https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/05/style/lvmh-nike-prada-amazon-deforestation.html
- https://www.maharam.com/stories/barbe_the-history-of-leather-tanning
- https://www.iowabeefcenter.org/bch/MaximizingHideValue.pdf
- https://www.usleather.org/press/US_Cattle_Hide_Value_Declines_Significantly_in_Wake_of_COVID19
- https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-12/shoe-shoppers-going-vegan-as-beef-boom-creates-cattle-hide-glut#xj4y7vzkg
- https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/beef
Extra Reading:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2008/aug/27/ethicalfashion.leather
Note: Bucha Bio rebranded to Rheom Materials in January 2024 to better reflect their process and offerings. The new name combines the Greek word "rhéō" (meaning "flow") and "form," describing how a melt-extruder works, where the biopolymers flow into place and then solidify, or form, the final product.
