Hey, AJ readers, Steve here. I have a couple questions for you guys. That pack above is from Osprey’s coming-soon Archeon line, which is constructed with recycled materials and uses a PFC-free DWR treatment. After decades of reviewing gear, and given what we know about climate change, overconsumption, and the clear imperative to reduce and reuse, I think Adventure Journal should be more proactive in seeking out and covering companies that are trying to find solutions, as incremental or imperfect as those solutions might be. Historically, though, real-world buying decisions haven’t taken sustainability much into account, and AJ readers have often responded to greener gear reviews with a collective yawn.
We don’t cover a lot of gear, and the only gear we do cover is what we think offers something new and better or that will last a long time. But the world has changed.
Sustainability no longer means sacrificing performance, and most outdoor enthusiasts understand the need to accelerate solutions. Business as usual can’t be business as usual, and I believe we have a responsibility to be more, um, responsible in our coverage. But we also have limited resources and aren’t going to work on stories no one’s going to read.
So, what do you say? Do you want more coverage of companies seeking solutions? Should we put our spotlight more on gear that makes a difference? Or not?