Is there an environmental impact of the Barbie movie?
Does the Barbie film nudge consumers to buy more plastic products? Did the film use excessive resources? Was there a shortage of pink paint?
This article skips the affiliated links as we explore questions and resources about the issues. So I won’t gain affiliate benefits from the links in this particular piece.
Barbara Handler (the original Barbie was named after her) tells Barbie in the trailer, “Humans get one ending. Ideas live forever.” We know something else for sure. Plastics also last for a seriously long time, impacting the environment.
Materials used in the film
Production designer Sarah Greenwood told Architectural Digest that the film’s construction caused a worldwide shortage of a particular shade of fluorescent pink paint.
Toys bring more plastic into the environment.
The Yale Environment Review revealed in 2022-2023, “Each year, 60 million Barbie dolls are sold, contributing emissions equivalent to burning 381 million gallons of gasoline.”
In 2014, the United Nations Environment Programme published Valuing Plastics: The Business Case for Measuring, Managing and Disclosing Plastic Use in the Consumer Goods Industry. Researchers revealed that “The toy, athletic goods and durable household goods sectors use the most plastic in products per US$1 million revenue… The toy sector has by far the highest intensity, at 3.9% of revenue,” looking at the “natural capital cost per $1m of annual revenue.” This natural capital intensity brings reputational, legal and business risks.
Retailers should emphasise the Barbie Loves the Ocean Collection, in which particular parts are made from 90% recycled ocean-bound plastic parts. What does this mean? Those sustainably intended pieces of plastic are “made from 90% plastic sourced within 50km of waterways in areas lacking formal waste collection systems.”
It is a step in a better direction. If consumers are going to buy Barbies, they may as well choose the lesser of two unsustainable products.