Abstract:
One of the world’s most creative and environmentally conscious businesses was Patagonia. Patagonia outright encouraged anti-consumerism and denounced extravagant spending. The company was well known for its efforts to promoting sustainable agriculture, fighting climate change, protecting public lands and waterways, educating the public about the benefits of using Fair Trade labour in its factories, and supporting green government policies. From a clothing manufacturer to an organisation committed to environmental action, Patagonia had changed over time. The brand aimed to develop brand equity, analyse its unique marketing strategies, and, most significantly, persuade customers to make environmentally friendly purchases.
But Patagonia had gotten too far from its roots as an environmentalist. In 2019, the brand was available in big-box stores like Nordstrom and Amazon alongside numerous other fast-fashion brands, whose excessive packaging resulted in waste. Due to the use of hazardous chemicals in Patagonia’s garments, Greenpeace criticised the company. Both humans and plants and animals were harmed by the toxic compounds found in waterproof materials. The viability of Patagonia’s market-facing sustainable brand image. It remained to be seen, whether the company’s commercial goal is supported by the aggressive market expansion and branding strategies. Is Patagonia real or is it just a myth? These issues will be covered in this situation.
