Sustainability Needs Redesigning, Not Translating, for Japan

Why "Sustainability" Doesn't Land As-Is

Many overseas outdoor brands put sustainability front and center in their messaging. In my experience, though, translating that message straight from the home market into Japanese lands with less impact than the brand expects. The numbers back this up. In a PwC Japan survey of 12,000 people across Japan, China, the UK, and the US, the share who said they had bought a sustainable product in the past year and planned to keep doing so was 70% in China, 65% in the UK, and 57% in the US. Japan: 24%.

But the same survey found that 44% of Japanese consumers do consider sustainability when they buy. People here carry their own bags and save electricity, yet that awareness doesn't carry over into purchases, and many can't tell what actually counts as sustainable. So I read the 24% less as a difference in values and more as a missing bridge between practice and language.

The Practice Came Before the Word

The first brand through which I encountered the concept of sustainability was Fjällräven. This was before the pandemic, and as far as I can recall, hardly any other brand was putting sustainability at the front of its message back then. They used wax instead of fluorocarbons for water repellency, and they made natural materials, which degrade more slowly than synthetics, work in real outdoor use.

Footwear has a similar tradition. Traditional hand-sewn mountaineering boots come with a culture of resoling: you replace the sole, not the boot. In Japan, my sense is that this culture survived longer than in many other markets. You could say it was less about fixing the sole than about not wanting to give up a boot that had already molded to your foot.

Even without the word "sustainability," plenty of people here kept repairing and wearing the same things for years. The order, I think, is reversed from what overseas brands assume. The practice came first and the word arrived later. That is why a home-market message, simply translated, doesn't land.

"Lasting Comfort" Beat the Environmental Pitch

The research points the same way. Meiji University published a study in April 2026, combining an online survey of 600 Japanese women with a randomized controlled trial of 3,000 people aged 20 to 60. Traditional sustainability messaging, built around environmental and human-rights protection, had a negative effect on purchase loyalty. A new concept built around "sustained comfort" scored 50.5% on appeal, significantly ahead of fast fashion (46.2%) and traditional sustainability messaging (34.5%).

The same study found that durability had no significant effect. Being told a product lasts a long time does not move people. "Repair it and keep using it" is not enough as a message on its own. It has to be translated into something the body can verify: fabric that keeps its feel, a fit that stays familiar. I suspect the same instinct is behind resoling a favorite pair of boots.

The Bridge Is a Value People Can Make Personal

None of this means shrinking the goal of reducing environmental impact. What changes is the way in. For Japanese consumers, a closer value, such as a richer everyday life or the quiet satisfaction of taking care of your things, works better as an entry point, and whether the value feels personal is what decides it. If comfort lasts, the product is used longer, and the environmental load goes down as a result.

The bridge is not built by adding more environmental language. It is built by taking the practices Japan already has and recasting them as value people can feel for themselves. A brand entering Japan should settle this redesign early.