Switching to synthetic gems may have environmental upsides but it could harm the very communities consumers worry about

(theguardian.com) - Diamonds have long been in the debt of marketing genius. Until the 1940s they were not a popular choice for engagement rings. Then, in 1947, a stroke of brilliance: De Beers’ “A Diamond is Forever” campaign. The slogan was a hit. The market transformed. Today diamond engagement rings are ubiquitous, winking from the windows of upmarket jewellers. Earlier this year came another glittering moment in diamond PR. Pandora, the world’s largest jewellery retailer, announced it would be switching entirely to lab-made diamonds. It generated positive headlines around the world, dubbed an “ethical stand against mined diamonds”. Pandora is not alone. In 2020 De Beers invested in a lab-grown line, launching a facility to churn out up to 400,000 diamonds a year. Other retailers tout their laboratory stones as “100% ethical and conflict free” or “an ethical choice”. It is a neat resolution for an industry shadowed by reports of exploitation, deftly crafted for millennial consumers concerned with the ethics of consumption. But the reality, experts and workers say, is more complicated. Switching en masse to lab-made gems may have environmental upsides, and relieve companies of reputational risks. But it could disfranchise the same communities that consumers are concerned for – and it comes at a moment when traceable, ethically mined gems are more accessible than ever.