Richard Kuchinsky: ‘A sustainable shoe must be a good shoe first, sustainable second’

SGI Europe: Current Status of Sustainability in Running Shoes: Where do we stand today? What are the key weaknesses of current products when considering materials, production, lifespan, and recyclability?

Richard Kuchinsky: In performance, there is always compromise. For example, lighter weight materials may be less durable, or higher performance may come at the expense of cost. When considering sustainability and performance it is important to keep this in mind. Now, performance and sustainability are often (but not always) at opposite ends of the spectrum. Sustainable materials often provide less performance, are less durable and are more heavy than non-sustainable counterparts.

Defne Yalkut: I absolutely agree. From my point of view in running footwear the dominant component is the sole. The sole has different materials and most of them aren’t possible to replace with bio-degradable or recycled materials for performance needs. And they are from different compound families, not possible to grind together. Unfortunately there’s not enough attention, the products come out not even repairable.

“Because no one truly cares about planting a tree which they’ll not eat the fruits. Holistic approach requires time, long-term planning, and a bigger investment.”

Defne Yalkut

Circular Economy vs. Net-Zero: What challenges and trade-offs must running shoe manufacturers address in each of these areas, and why is a holistic approach often more difficult than simple carbon offset models?

D. Yakult: Because no one truly cares about planting a tree which they’ll not eat the fruits. Holistic approach requires time, long-term planning, and a bigger investment. Brands are more about short term profit, and the sustainability is only a marketing strategy where the brands introduce some “sustainable” products and make lots of advertising.

R. Kuchinsky: A performance running shoe is only as good as the weakest link. The upper and outsole may be good, but a high performance super critical foam may loose significant performance after as little as 100 km. Circular or subscription models don’t take this into account. Runners also use different shoes for different kinds of runs with multiple pairs in rotation so the simplicity of use-return-renew fails in actual real world use cases. A truly holistic approach needs to better understand the real performance needs of consumers.

Infrastructure for Material Separation: Where do the major industry players stand, and what are the biggest hurdles in the take-back and recycling of old and new products?

D. Yakult: Honestly, the big brands are making some moves with recycling, but it’s still tiny compared to how much they produce. The problem is that shoes are so complicated… all the different materials glued together make them really hard to take apart. Plus, there aren’t many recycling plants, the cost is high, and most consumers don’t even bring their old shoes back, they aren’t well informed. So yes, there’s progress, but it still feels like we’re very far from a real solution. It’s something that should progress together with the consumer. If the consumer cares, brands will forth that we, of course, always to sell more.

R. Kuchinsky: But, Consumers often don’t want to do the work to return and recycle shoes or accept performance compromise with single-material products. Per Example, Subscription models may remove some of the barriers but I think most people today have subscription fatigue. I don’t think most recycling models align with what people actually want. The benefits don’t outweigh the costs in performance, time, choice.

”The real change starts with educating the consumer.”

Defne Yalkut

Brands, Suppliers, Designers: Who Solves the Problems? What role do design decisions and production processes play, and where do you see leverage for a true circular economy?

D. Yalkut: If consumers actually care about buying sustainable stuff, brands will follow, they want to sell. Right now, social media and trends push everyone to buy more for less, and brands just try to keep up. We know how to do better: brands invest, designers pick the right materials and processes, suppliers make low-CO₂, recyclable materials. But then the price goes up, few people buy, and what happens? Back to cutting costs to hit those target prices. Brands aren’t the enemy, they must grow. The real change starts with educating the consumer.

R. Kuchinsky: I agree, and of course, there are many stakeholders in moving towards better products. But I also believe firmly that change needs to be driven by consumer needs and behaviour. It is in this way that I think most brands and approaches to sustainability lack momentum. That being said, designers are important because we are in the middle between brands, suppliers and the consumer. Designers have an incredible opportunity to understand consumer insights and drive innovation with new materials from suppliers, but it is the brand’s job to accept the risk of doing things differently.

What is the true willingness to innovate and invest when it comes to sustainable materials, production, and product policy?

R. Kuchinsky: Innovation is easy to start, but hard to finish. Innovation takes risks. Risk of time, risk of money and risk failure. It’s important that brands pick their priorities and focus on them. Sustainability as a marketing priority is not the same as a product innovation priority.

D. Yalkut: But, to be honest, some brands are genuinely curious and are ready to experiment with new materials or processes, even if they’re expensive or untested. Others are driven mostly by marketing, they want to look sustainable without changing much into practice. Innovation isn’t just about materials, it’s about changing the system, and that takes bold decisions. Personally, I don’t see enough willingness in the industry to make a change. Most projects are for marketing purposes, the ugly truth.

“The most sustainable shoe is one that is never produced. The second most sustainable shoe is the shoe that lasts as long as possible for its intended use.”

Richard Kuchinky

Performance vs. Environmental Impact: How do manufacturers and designers decide when weighing biomechanical peak performance, efficiency, and ecological challenges and how open are they to taking risks? Or are there limits to what is possible?

D. Yalkut: Frankly, it’s not the designer’s or brand’s to decide how much risk to take because Running shoes are made to perform, that is their reason to exist. And taking risks means injuring runners or giving them products that will not last, and now they have to buy another pair. The longevity of a product crucial when we talk about sustainability. The limit is always performance.

R. Kuchinsky: Defne is wright! It’s hard to make a great high performance running shoe. It’s hard to make a sustainable shoe. It’s nearly impossible to make a great high performance sustainable running shoe. There are always limits and it’s important to understand what the limits are and then it’s a question of if those limits are acceptable depending on priorities.

Are there any practical examples are the most promising when it comes to ecological footprints and athletic function?

R. Kuchinsky: The most sustainable shoe is one that is never produced. The second most sustainable shoe is the shoe that lasts as long as possible for its intended use. Any sustainability conversation must include thinking about the experience of shoe wearing. Comfort, performance, style, and fit in addition to materials and processes. If you make sustainable shoes but no one buys them or wears them - that’s not sustainable. A sustainable shoe must be a good shoe first, sustainable second.

“The most sustainable shoe is one that is never produced. The second most sustainable shoe is the shoe that lasts as long as possible for its intended use.”

D. Yalkut: Since running footwear cannot compromise on performance, and the sole is a component that is fundamental to keeping functional, durable, flexible and containing where it’s needed, running will never be the segment where sustainability is even close to perfect. What I see most possible is resoling. Creating the soles designing them at least repairable in the outsole part.

What material innovations and design trends do you currently see as the most exciting intersections between sustainability and uncompromising performance?

R. Kuchinsky: The most important innovations in performance today are in foams and material science. There are some incredible bio based super critical foams that I’ve seen that have the potential to balance sustainability and performance. Additive manufacturing and rapid prototyping also have the potential to change the industry not only from the consumer side, but in design and development. If designers and brands can try more ideas, more quickly and get to market faster it can benefit not only the bottom line, but consumer choice as well.

D. Yalkut: Some brands started the repairing service, this is promising. Also there are inventions and more and more research about bio degradable midsole materials. In soles mould making is another area of production that harms the environment a lot. 3D printed moulds are really exciting, I hope it becomes the only process to produce moulds!