Drawing on his role at De Beers, where he leads programme management in the consumer and brands division, heads sustainability at Forevermark, and sits on the Board of CIBJO, Wesley Hunt offers a global perspective on the industry’s direction. He discusses the growing divergence in sustainability performance, the importance of credible ESG frameworks, and the increasing pressure on companies to demonstrate transparency and accountability.
From your perspective, how is the jewellery sector evolving in its approach to sustainability, particularly as expectations from consumers and stakeholders continue to rise?
Great question. I believe there are a number of shifts taking place within the jewellery sector in its approach to sustainability:
a) Companies that, over the past few years, have made unsubstantiated sustainability claims are beginning to recognise that they will be held accountable if they continue to do so, and are starting to adjust their positioning accordingly.
b) Companies that have been reluctant to embark on their own sustainability journey are, in some cases, finding reassurance in the reduced sustainability focus in the US and are therefore choosing to take limited action.
c) There is a widening gap between those companies (e.g. Kering) that are genuinely advancing their sustainability journey, and those that are disregarding the requirements – which will inevitably become more pressing due to generational expectations and forthcoming legislation.
d) Those companies that have not sufficiently communicated their sustainability progress to date are likely to increase their efforts, which will in turn lead to a greater use of Life Cycle Assessments. The pace of this shift may, however, depend on how quickly legislation evolves and whether companies are effectively held accountable for unsubstantiated claims.
You have been closely involved in shaping ESG frameworks for the industry, including the recently published ESG Measurement Guidelines – how do you see these influencing transparency and accountability across the jewellery value chain?
Thank you for recognising this. I hope that these CIBJO ESG Measurement Guidelines will support companies – particularly SMEs, which represent the majority of our industry – in taking the first step on their sustainability and broader business resilience journey.
I recall initially finding sustainability quite daunting, but once I began to engage with it, I realised it is ultimately a series of logical steps. These tools are therefore designed to help businesses overcome that initial uncertainty and build resilience, should they choose to do so.
From a transparency and accountability perspective, this work builds on the efforts of companies that have already invested significant time in tracing their products through the value chain. It also extends further, examining the impact of these journeys – often positive – on the communities involved, as well as beginning to assess the carbon footprint associated with these supply chains.
In a category where provenance and trust are central, how do brands effectively translate responsible sourcing and ESG commitments into meaningful brand narratives?
To date, trust has been central to purchase decisions, while provenance has often been viewed as a “nice to have”, largely due to the complexity of jewellery supply chains. As a result, trust has typically been associated more with the brand itself.
However, evolving ESG expectations will require a clearer understanding of the environmental footprint of products, and provenance will increasingly need to be shared. One important consideration is that, given the complexity of the jewellery pipeline – including the mixing of gold and precious stones – provenance may often be communicated at a company level rather than traced fully back to individual mines.
As this information becomes more widely available, brand narratives will evolve to more credibly reflect environmental impact, across both man-made and natural products. This will help create a more level playing field and address the prevalence of greenwashing observed in recent years.
Only then will sourcing and ESG commitments meaningfully strengthen brand narratives.
Through your work with Forevermark, how do you approach embedding sustainability into both product integrity and the broader consumer proposition?
I have been fortunate to work with Forevermark at different points since 2005. Given that traceability and sustainability have been central to its proposition from the outset, it has been relatively straightforward to communicate the processes that were embedded early on.
In practical terms, this has meant that, as sourcing has become increasingly important, Forevermark has limited its diamond supply to De Beers Group diamonds, and its gold to suppliers adhering to recognised standards such as those set by the RJC.
This has enabled us to integrate these principles consistently into both consumer-facing communications and internal practices.
As a member of the Board of CIBJO, how do you see the role of international organisations in aligning standards and driving long-term progress across the global jewellery sector?
Until 2019, I was not involved with trade organisations. Since then, I have come to appreciate the important role that international organisations play in laying the groundwork for legislation globally.
For example, when we first developed the Laboratory-Grown Diamond Guidelines, there was little – if any – formal legislation to guide appropriate conduct towards consumers or the retail trade. While some companies have prioritised short-term commercial gains in this area, those taking a longer-term view – both from a consumer and industry perspective – have aligned with many of these recommendations.
This influence also extends to national legislation and diamond bourse guidelines, which aim to create a fair and balanced framework for different commercial models within their respective regions, including both natural and laboratory-grown diamonds.
