Is planned obsolescence obsolete?

Planned obsolescence is a term we hear more and more, becoming a buzzword, but not necessarily in the best ways. For those not yet having a clear vision of the thing, planned obsolescence is an industrial concept of designing products that do not last, which have a limited life span development from conception. The idea is to force consumers to always buy the same product in order to turn the global economy. The idea is relevant because it provides the economy in the long term, it generates negative spillover effect on the planet who generate more and more problems.

The planned obsolescence

This concept appeared in 1932 in an article by Bernard London while America was in great depression. London was a philanthropist and his intention was noble at the beginning. Under the effect of the crisis, the Americans kept their products longer, slowing down the economy. Then, he had the idea to increase the replacement rate by reducing the lifetime. The first agreements were signed after the end of World War II between the global manufacturers of filament bulb. An average life of 1000 hours of operation has been decided. This is the Phoebus cartel.

From that moment, we begin to ask engineers to design products less effective, companies have to invest in research and development. The first idea is not to manufacture products of poor quality, but to create a trend that prompts the user to buy a new product in a new cycle. The design is becoming increasingly important in order to create trends and therefore to put products old-fashion after a certain time. The planned obsolescence spreads in all sectors: automotive, computers, vacuum cleaners, etc..

Different types of obsolescence appear. Obsolescence due to the quality, outdated image, obsolescence of incompatibility. You never made the observation to try to repair your printer, your vacuum cleaner bag or even your car and you realize that there are no more parts available? The end of production of spare parts is a key element that can make a product obsolete. Obsolescence is found in all areas, such as computers. Changing the extension of a file between two versions of software making it impossible to read the file from the previous version is a proof of obsolescence. Fashion is a perfect example of obsolescence. Sell clothes or shoes and then receive a message across to consumers in making their understanding to update their wardrobe. The examples accumulate.

Note that life programmed products are different from disposable products, since in our case, life must remain secret.

Proponents of obsolescence

The planned obsolescence has proved revolutionary in its infancy. She has energized the economy and made innovative companies leader. The economy has also become more stable. Indeed, knowing the life of a product can better manage its long-term sales. For some economists, planned obsolescence is a logical consequence of technological change.

This is not fictional, according to a survey of the Friends of the Earth and the independent National Clearinghouse on Waste, French people would have bought six times more electrical or electronic equipment in 20 years. The average length of these facilities has evolved from 10-12 years to 6-8 years on average in 10 years’ time.

There was a change in attitudes. Sustainability is become no longer a sales quality as it was once before. Consumers now are focused instead on performance, design, resulting in a war on industrial innovation.

A new problem has arrived yet. The price is manipulated by manufacturers and brings confusion to consumers.

Why does this pose a problem?

The idea of obsolescence may be ingenious, but we live on a finite planet, where resources are limited and cannot store our products not be used forever. There are actually two opposing ideas in this concept: the infinite of growth and the finish of our planet.

Overconsumption leads to an ecological impact that has always been neglected. The number of waste is becoming increasingly important and it is the third world countries who suffer the consequence to the forefront, becoming the world's trash. This is a real problem, especially for technology products that are sometimes recovered, but that can not be recycled.

The same problem arises for raw materials. Everyone knows they are not limitless, not to mention the changes they condition on the global climate. Oil resources are estimated at 40 years, gas at 65, 200 years concerning coal and 100 years for uranium.

The antis-obsolescence and solutions

There are many solutions to problems caused by obsolescence. Some flexible enough, other more radical.

The simplest solution would be to design products in a sustainable manner, so as to leave no trace after use. This is the philosophy of sustainable development. "Scaling meeting the growing needs of the present generation without compromising the needs of future generations." In this case we speak of a change and not a revolution. But a change is a long-acting and time is a key factor in our problem. This is why some advocate decay.

Serge Latouche, professor of political science and economics at the University of Paris-Sud 11, states that "to survive or continue to life, we have to organiz decrement." He even denounces sustainable development as a sham. In the decay, we must rethink the eigenvalues of man; our eternal dissatisfaction. Concept that seems infinite but with our inalienable life on Earth and our current consumption patterns. This solution is decreasing, it is generaly a European initiative, that is to say, the already developed countries. Developing countries do not yet see the benefit, even if for example China is leader in the field of photovoltaic.

This is the first time we hear of decay and for some, in a world that goes faster and where growth is a necessity, the idea is inconceivable. For Serge Latouche, it would be a step backwards for a lifestyle similar to the 60s.

For others, the solution to the problems engendered by the heavy obsolescence may be present in nature. Nature is far more intelligent than human beings according to some. Not in nature itself, but in its operation. Think that's what Michael Braungart, who defends his ideas in his book Cradle to Cradle. Produce only biodegradable. This is a design that requires the principle of 100% recycling and zero pollution. If we reproduce the pattern of how nature works, planned obsolescence will become obsolete.

The planned obsolescence is, in the absolute, good for man, it helped resolve crises and sit a primary need of change. But in its design, its consequences have not been worked. The real problems it currently generates waste and revolves around the use of non-renewable.

But try to think. If there are problems at certain products, it should perhaps think about developing other forms of wealth, the inexhaustible riches. If you want to change the world you can look into this matter.

According to you, is the term planned obsolescence already familiar to you? What is the solution? What are you doing?

Do you agree or disagree with this concept?

By Mathieu Doutreligne