The Guardian Weekly

Ace of diamonds? The benefits of lab-made gems are far from clear cut

Synthetic diamonds may have environmental upsides, but they could spell doom for the communities who depend on the real thing

By Tess McClure

Diamonds have long been in the debt of marketing genius. Until the 1940s they were not a popular choice for engagement rings. Then, in 1947, a stroke of brilliance: De Beers’ “A Diamond is Forever” campaign. The slogan was a hit. The market transformed. Today diamond engagement rings are ubiquitous, winking from the windows of upmarket jewellers.

Earlier this year came another glittering moment in diamond PR. Pandora, the world’s largest jewellery retailer, announced it would be switching entirely to lab-made diamonds. The move generated positive headlines around the world as an “ethical stand against mined diamonds”.

Pandora is not alone. In 2020 De Beers invested in a lab-grown line, launching a facility to churn out up to 400,000 diamonds a year. Other retailers tout their laboratory stones as “100% ethical and conflict free” or “an ethical choice”. It is a neat resolution for an industry shadowed by reports of exploitation, deftly crafted for millennial consumers.

But the reality, experts and workers say, is more complicated. Switching en masse to lab-made gems could disfranchise the same communities that consumers are concerned for – and it comes as traceable, ethically mined gems are more accessible than ever.

“If you start to grow diamonds in a lab, you’re not only taking away a job, but you’re also closing down communities and closing down countries,” said Urica Primus. “How will [miners] survive, how will they sustain themselves, their livelihoods, their families?” Primus, 30, is from a mining family in Guyana, a poor country that has a history of fuelling profits overseas. Natural resources – gold, diamonds, minerals, oil and gas – are its largest export, which about 18% of the population rely on for employment.

Primus started extracting from her own small-scale pit in Tamakay, a gold and diamond-mining region, at 18.

Today she is president of the Guyana Women Miners Organisation.

Many small-scale mines are remote, in areas Primus calls “raw bush – just jungle and trees”. Miners live with the hazards of attack and robbery, women with additional risks of sexual assault. But mining is a crucial source of income, development, funds for education. Companies that care about ethics should invest in improving standards, not disappear, she said.

“These companies have made millions and millions of dollars from mining. Now, what percentage of the profits are they willing to give back and support the development of the industry that has basically kept them alive for decades?” she said.

Her concern is not only for miners, Primus said:“It’s the government’s ability to finance development of the country by way of the contributions and GDP received from the mining industry … the entire ecosystem of mining will be impacted by that shift.”

The rise of “ethical” marketing for lab-made gems also comes when there are certified fair-mined gems and gold products on the market. “If you haven’t tried that approach of supporting miners in ethically mining gold, then how do you know it’s not going to work?” Primus said. “If your first option is to globally put millions of people out of a job, then something is wrong.”

Synthetic diamonds are physically identical to mined ones. They are created in a lab from a tiny diamond “seed”, built up either in a high-heat, high-pressure chamber or from circulating gases, broken down into atomic parts. They are dramatically cheaper – around a third of the price of a mined equivalent.

Internationally the market for synthetic stones is growing. The pandemic devastated mined diamond sales, but even before 2020 they were in decline – production had fallen by about 5% each year since 2017. The labgrown market, while still only a small portion, has grown, up 15-20% in 2019, according to the Bain Diamond Report.

It concluded that the mined market faced two major disruptors: the growth of lab-grown gems; and consumers’ increased focus on ethics and sustainability.

“They’re framing it in terms of ‘this is an ethical decision’ when in my opinion it’s the complete opposite,” said Cristina Villegas, mining director of development nonprofit Pact. “It’s just completely walking away from the social aspects of sustainability.”

Villegas works with small mining communities. “When you walk away, prices drop, you’re abandoning whole communities,” she said.

Diamonds’ reputational problems hit overdrive in 2006 with the movie Blood Diamond. In the years since, NGOs and journalists have highlighted challenges in mining, including child labour, environmental degradation and dangerous conditions.

Sam Johnson, spokesperson for Novita Diamonds, which sells labmade stones , said business increased about 400% in the last 18 months, and many customers cite concerns about child labour or ethical implications of mined diamonds. “Lab-grown diamonds [are] created in a hi-tech laboratory with hi-tech equipment. There’s no children involved,” he said.

But experts say the coverage can stigmatise mining communities. Mining and society expert Prof Saleem Ali said large parts of the sector have reformed – but public perception hasn’t: “We should try to solve the problem rather than just kind of ‘cutting the umbilical cord’ so that you just don’t have to deal with the problem.”

Villegas argues that about 80% of diamonds are now traceable – and points to other certifications, like Fairmined Gold. “If you’re going to claim ethics, why not lean into the reform efforts?” Villegas asked.

While it generated outsized headlines, Pandora’s own purchasing shift will be small. In 2018, under 1% of its stones were mined. But the largest jeweller in the world is influential. Announcing the switch to lab-made, Pandora said it aimed to “transform the market”. The Pandora CEO, Alexander Lacik, said of the move: “We are applying the marketing muscle. We’re going all in.”

Asked whether the framing of lab-made as more “ethical” was misleading, Mads Twomey-Madsen, vice-president of corporate communications & sustainability at Pandora, said: “Well, we actually haven’t made that claim.” He said the focus was on environmental sustainability, and making the company carbon neutral.

Those selling synthetic stones also argue that they are expanding the pie, rather than taking a slice. Pandora said synthetic stones are cheaper, and will create a new market for diamonds. “Bear in mind that we will not even make a dent in the market for mined diamonds, because the amount we use was so small that I doubt that you’ll be able to see any ripple effects of that,” Twomey-Madsen added. If the market does expand, Ali said, “it doesn’t have to be a zero-sum game”.

The claim lab-made gems are more environmentally sustainable is complex. A report commissioned by the mined diamond sector concluded mined produced less CO2 than synthetic – but failed to include the full impact of creating a mine. Pandora said if produced using 100% renewable energy, its lab-made stones would create just 10% of the emissions of a mined diamond.

Ali said synthetic diamond companies are on firmer footing with environmental claims: lab-made diamonds have potential to be generated with 100% renewable energy. “On the social side I think they need to be very careful,” he said. “They do not provide as many jobs as the mined diamond industry does. And they do not provide them in places where they are needed most.”

Spotlight | Environment

en-gb

2021-08-06T07:00:00.0000000Z

2021-08-06T07:00:00.0000000Z

https://theguardianweekly.pressreader.com/article/282041920177101

Guardian/Observer