Leaving Green Libraries Behind (01 of 10)

Burning the Green: Libraries, Sustainability, and the Fight for Authentic Change

Home > Critical notes > Leaving Green Libraries Behind (01 of 10)

[This post marks the beginning of a series that challenges the status quo of "green libraries." While this first piece sets the stage with a critical lens, the posts to come will dive deeper into the concepts introduced here].

Introduction

Green collections, green services, green journals, green awards, green spaces, green committees...

Over the past two decades, libraries —those spaces where human knowledge and memory are curated and shared— have increasingly adopted the label of "green."

The term "green library" became a symbol of environmental consciousness within the field of librarianship. Images of solar panels atop roofs, recycling bins scattered throughout, expansive glass facades bathing interiors in natural light, and lush gardens wrapping around walls dominated the conversation, promising an eco-friendly future.

Yet, over time, this label has faced significant backlash.

Originally, these "green" efforts aimed to reduce environmental impact, gaining momentum as a progressive response to the climate crisis. On the surface, such a shift seemed commendable — it actually raised awareness among the libraries in the world. However, beneath the eco-friendly veneer lies a troubling reality: many "green libraries" have engaged in what is now widely recognized as greenwashing. This practice substitutes genuine transformation for superficial gestures, avoiding the deeper systemic changes required to address the urgent environmental degradation our planet continues to face.

In essence, libraries, like many other institutions, have marketed themselves as environmentally conscious while often prioritizing image over substance.

Is this enough? Are "green libraries" truly driving ecological transformation, or are they merely offering a comforting illusion — a superficial solution that skirts the deeper ecological and social challenges at hand? Shouldn't we be critically deconstructing and subverting the concept of "green libraries," questioning whether this outdated term oversimplifies the complexities of sustainability within library contexts?

The "Green Library" Movement and Greenwashing

The concept of the "green library" emerged in the early 2000s, coinciding with the rising popularity of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification system and other sustainability benchmarks. Around the world, institutions sought to align themselves with this burgeoning movement by adopting energy-efficient lighting, incorporating recycled materials, and promoting their commitment to ecological sustainability. Hailed as pioneers, "green libraries" were positioned as beacons of hope, setting an example for other cultural institutions aspiring to environmental consciousness.

However, as time passed, cracks began to appear in this seemingly progressive narrative.

The "green" label, once seen as a badge of honor, has increasingly revealed itself as outdated and, in many instances, counterproductive. While it was initially conceived in an era when environmentalism was gaining traction, the term has since been co-opted and diluted. Its original intent —to embody sustainable practices and a genuine commitment to reducing ecological impact— has been overshadowed by shallow gestures more concerned with optics than meaningful change. This phenomenon, known as greenwashing, has become a pervasive issue in environmental discourse.

Greenwashing refers to creating a false impression or providing misleading information about how environmentally friendly a company or institution's practices, products, or services truly are. It has become a catchall term for empty attempts at sustainability, where substance is sacrificed for the sake of appearance.

In libraries, greenwashing often manifests in the form of token eco-friendly initiatives, all while the institutions continue to engage in practices that harm the environment. Many of these so-called "green" solutions overlook the broader ecological impacts of constructing and maintaining these institutions — from the carbon footprint of building materials to energy consumption and the reinforcement of consumerist practices. Ultimately, these efforts create a feel-good illusion of sustainability without making tangible progress toward ecological transformation.

Why do libraries gravitate toward greenwashing? The answer lies in its simplicity. Solar panels and recycling programs are visible, tangible, and relatively inexpensive ways to project environmental responsibility. These initiatives contribute to an image of progressiveness and eco-awareness without compelling institutions to grapple with the more demanding aspects of true sustainability.

Greenwashing allows libraries to bask in the illusion of being "green" without addressing the more difficult challenges of reducing resource consumption, rethinking construction practices, or embracing a minimalist ethos. By adopting these surface-level solutions, libraries sidestep uncomfortable but necessary conversations about ecological justice, extractivism, and the systemic structures that perpetuate environmental degradation.

An Opportunity for Radical Transformation

Libraries, as spaces of knowledge and memory, are uniquely positioned to drive systemic change. They possess the potential to support critical research, shape public discourse, lead by example, discard useless labels (as "green"), and challenge entrenched models of endless growth and resource extraction.

True innovation in sustainability, however, requires more than adopting superficial green proposals. It demands a fundamental rethinking of our relationship with the environment — questioning the structures that perpetuate waste, pollution, and overconsumption. Solar panels and green roofs are not enough; libraries must look beyond cosmetic solutions to confront the deeper ecological crises facing our world.

If "green libraries" fall short of pushing for real transformation, what alternatives remain?

One promising path forward is degrowth. This model of sustainability challenges the pervasive notion of perpetual growth, shifting focus to reducing resource consumption and prioritizing ecological balance. For libraries, adopting a degrowth perspective could mean rethinking the drive for constant expansion: minimizing new construction, repurposing existing spaces, and sourcing regenerative, locally produced materials. It is an approach that privileges sufficiency over excess, advocating for less material waste and more meaningful impact.

Complementary to degrowth, libraries can embrace minimalism and regenerative design—practices that align closely with ecosystem health. Minimalism invites libraries to reconsider how space and resources are used, fostering intentionality and efficiency. Regenerative design, meanwhile, goes a step further by restoring and enhancing ecological systems rather than merely reducing harm. Such frameworks allow libraries to create environments that not only serve human needs but also contribute positively to the natural world.

These shifts represent an opportunity for libraries to redefine their role in a changing world. Moving away from the superficiality of "green" labels and toward more radical approaches can position libraries as genuine agents of transformation. To achieve this, institutions must have the courage to address the root causes of social and environmental crises, embracing strategies that prioritize systemic change over cosmetic appeal.

Towards Genuine Change

True sustainability cannot be achieved through token gestures or superficial greenwashing; it demands a radical shift in how institutions understand and engage with the natural world.

Libraries hold immense potential to be transformative agents of change. Beyond curating knowledge and memory, they can actively challenge the structures shaping our environmental futures. By embracing frameworks like degrowth and minimalism, libraries have the opportunity to reject the paradigm of endless growth and overconsumption, instead fostering a culture grounded in responsible resource use, ecological justice, and systemic transformation.

This begins with reimagining libraries as community-centric hubs for critical engagement and collective action. Prioritizing collaboration over aesthetics means actively involving communities in shaping library services and programs. Libraries can amplify local initiatives, advocate for eco-social justice, and nurture a participatory ethos that reflects the aspirations of the people they serve.

Genuine transformation also requires libraries to confront and dismantle colonial legacies embedded in their practices. This entails diversifying collections, uplifting Indigenous and marginalized narratives, and fostering spaces that honor and celebrate bio-cultural diversity. Acknowledging these histories isn't just about inclusion — it's about creating a foundation for equity and justice within library systems.

Education, advocacy, and resistance are core elements. Libraries can empower their communities through programming that promotes critical thinking and civic engagement, offering workshops on environmental justice, local history, or grassroots organizing. Moving beyond the traditional, they can create spaces for hands-on engagement — sustainable makerspaces, community art projects, or forums exploring the intersections of environmental and social justice.

Ultimately, the promise of “green libraries” lies not in their outward appearance, but in their ability to drive deep, real and meaningful change. By shedding the “green” facade and going beyond it, libraries can become leaders in environmental justice, guiding communities toward a sustainable and equitable future. It is time for libraries to abandon the fictitious illusion of being “green” and embrace their role as radical agents of ecological transformation.

About the post

Text: Edgardo Civallero.

Date: 06.12.2024.

Image: "Más de 15 marcas fueron denunciadas por prácticas de greenwashing". En Ambienta [Link].