The 20th
anniversary
edition
March 14 & 15, 2025
at UNESCO • Paris

You have been at the forefront of environmental activism for many years. You notably led Zero Waste, and since 2023, you have been coordinating the advocacy efforts of the association En Mode Climat, which fights against fast fashion and overproduction in the textile sector. You also recently launched the Observatoire du principe pollueur-payeur. What assessment do you make of these years of commitment? What results have you achieved?

Flore Berlingen: The common thread throughout these years of advocacy has been the problem of over-exploitation of our planet’s resources and its consequences, both environmental and social. From this, I have developed a strong conviction that we cannot address this issue with just one tool or lever. We need to combine them through an exercise in ecological planning, placing democratic debate at the heart of this process. Said this way, it might seem like a consensus-driven approach, but in reality, it is a very different logic that dominates today—the one that treats environmental issues primarily through the market and economic instruments.

Promoted by the OECD since 1972, the “polluter pays” principle has not achieved its intended goals and, according to you, would allow industrialists to pollute with impunity— for a price! You launched the Observatoire du Principe Pollueur-Payeur. What is its mission, its actions, and its funding?

The "polluter pays" principle has become a central pillar of both French and European law, and especially of environmental public policies, through mechanisms such as compensation, various forms of taxation, emission trading markets, and extended producer responsibility schemes.

This prominent position requires us to examine its application closely: Do polluters really pay? And do they pay enough? Does it grant them more power or influence? And what are the social and democratic implications of mechanisms inspired by the "polluter pays" principle? Is environmental justice taken into account? These are the questions that the Observatoire seeks to address—it's a vast program! The association is still very young, and we are happy to welcome anyone who would like to contribute to this work or support us financially.

In one of your books, Recyclage, le grand enfumage, you accuse "recycling" of not questioning disposability and the economic interests linked to it. Does the circular economy seem to you like a credible path to slowing down the impacts of production processes?

In that book, I wanted to highlight how recycling has been manipulated to perpetuate activities and business models based on disposability across various sectors: not only in retail, but also in fast food, fast fashion, and more. This type of consumption cannot become sustainable through the circular economy, despite what some promotional discourses continue to suggest.

Moreover, it's important to remember that the "slowing down" of impacts and consumption that circular economy practices may offer is often completely negated by the ongoing growth dynamics in other areas!

That being said, we must certainly include and develop all activities related to reuse or recycling within the framework of a resized, material-based economy.

What are the solutions and pathways for resilience to the damage caused by our consumer society and the production methods it entails?

In my view, we need to work—collectively discuss—on both capping and prioritizing. By capping, I mean regulating the extraction or production of virgin raw materials, particularly plastic. This is a topic currently being discussed in international negotiations. At the same time, alongside these limits, it is essential to prioritize needs and uses. Today, we apply the same rules and laws to any form of production, whether it’s meeting a vital need, providing enjoyment, or even redundancy. Polluter-pays mechanisms, such as compensation obligations, are applied equally regardless of whether the production or project serves the public good (like building a hospital) or very private interests (like building a luxury hotel complex).

How do you see your engagement in the years to come? Does politics interest you?

These topics remain a deep passion for me, and my (healthy) anger remains strong in the face of the shortcomings or contradictions of public action. So, I see myself continuing to contribute to its progress, whether from the outside through criticism and proposals, or from the inside if the opportunity arises.