Repainting Sustainability In The Art Market
AN EXCLUSIVE REPORT BY C-LECTIVE FINE ART LLC
Jamie Randel | Lead Researcher & Marketing Analyst, San Francisco, CA
Fine art preserves the culture of the world. It has often taken a lead role in communicating ideas and motivating change by shining a light on societies’ issues. While artists have endeavored to highlight the sustainability issues facing our planet and society, it's evident that institutions can and should do more in the face of a worsening climate crisis.
Museums, galleries, auction houses, and art fairs all contribute carbon emissions (CO2e) that have a significant impact on the environment through reliance on comprehensive climate controls, packaging materials, and fuel-heavy shipping methods. While these operations excel at protecting art, they reveal a difficult contradiction: the art world’s commitment to preservation often comes at an environmental cost. There are a number of impact mitigation practices in use today, from artist practices, patron travel to and from art exhibitions, and storage. C-lective's point of view is that it's time for further advancements. The art world can and should lead society in advancing sustainability, not just by implementing selected mitigation measures, but by continuing to explore new breakthroughs.
The art world has always transformed moments of crisis into moments of creativity. Sustainability should be no different. Meaningful progress will require more than incremental improvements. It will require reimagining how art is exhibited, stored, transported, and experienced. One promising opportunity lies in rethinking how art moves through communities by emphasizing local experiences that strengthen regional ecosystems, reconnect artists and patrons, and create meaningful impact closer to home. We believe that’s a powerful place to start.
The Art World's Sustainability Blind Spot
Many institutions tout their green credentials and have been diligent in adopting best practices from other industries as they deploy carbon offsetting programs, packaging waste reduction, green energy sourcing and other measures. Looked at with a critical eye, however, these measures no matter how sincere, appear more as a menu of mitigations to a high impact footprint rather than a comprehensive rethinking of the model. To do that, a clear-eyed assessment is needed.
Presently, a barrier many art institutions face regarding keeping emissions low is the necessity to store art at specific temperatures and humidity levels. The standard requirements for storing art are approximately 70ºF and 50% relative humidity, which require heating and cooling systems to operate continuously, consuming massive amounts of energy, especially in large museums and galleries.8 Furthermore, displayed art is often lit with traditional lighting systems that emit excess heat, warming exhibition spaces. This puts even more strain on the climate control systems to maintain optimal temperatures, increasing energy consumption further.8
Packaging in the art market also comes with a host of environmental issues. Excessive packaging waste, high volume of single-use plastics and materials, and hard to recycle chemically treated wooden crates are common practice. Their immediate disposal fills landfills and releases harmful toxins into the environment.
Ultimately the largest contributor to art institutions' carbon footprint is transportation, which inevitably combines multiple ecologically harmful practices i.e. climate-controlled transport vehicles and travel specific packaging. In 2016, the transportation sector passed the power sector as the largest emitter of greenhouse gasses in the U.S.1 Currently, art shipping is heavily reliant on air freight which far surpasses all other modes of transport in emissions. For instance, shipping medium weight artwork (100 lbs, crated) from New York City to London emits 221.49 kg CO2e per the 3,470 miles via air freight.1 In direct comparison, the same medium weight artwork shipped via sea freight over 3,462 miles only releases 7.06 kg CO2e.1 To put this into perspective, the emissions from that one air freight journey is roughly equivalent to the electricity usage of a home for seventeen days.3
Road freight also has a lower carbon footprint than the more frequently relied upon air freight: shipping a medium weight artwork (50 lbs, softpacked) from New York City to Los Angeles emits 14.54 kg CO2e over 2,790 miles via consolidated road freight shuttle.1 Whereas the same journey via air freight with medium artwork (55 lbs, with strongbox) emits 86.05 kg CO2e over the 2,451 miles.1 The problem becomes all the more acute when air freight alone makes up 75-95% of the total amount shipped by a typical commercial art gallery.4
Where Real Progress Begins
We believe that taking meaningful action towards greener ways of operating is critical for all organizations. Art institutions, organizations, and networks have “a profound influence on the wider art market and its supply chain, shaping the ecosystem in which artists, galleries, and collectors operate and forming the dynamics of how artworks move from studio to sale.”4 This becomes a dual responsibility to reduce their own operational footprint and to use their influence and creativity to enable progress, collaboration and alignment across the sector.4
First and foremost is utilizing energy efficient technologies, examining modern standards, and thinking more deeply about location. Implementing renewable energy powered climate controls is explicitly the best option. Changes to improve a building's operational energy efficiency are practical and effective: for example, installing air circulation systems or an LED lighting system can improve the issue of room climate, as they emit significantly less heat and thus don’t impact temperature. One notable change for galleries and museums to make is broadening the temperature and humidity range their art is kept at, as has been determined more modernly it is safe to do so. The International Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works’ (IIC/ICOM-CC) Declaration on Environmental Guidelines state that art can actually be safely stored and displayed between 45-55% relative humidity with an allowable drift of ±5%, yielding a total range of 40% minimum to 60% maximum, and a temperature range of 59-77ºF, with fluctuations minimized.6 Gradual seasonal adjustments are safe to manage within this range. Rather than enforcing rigid standards, the IIC/ICOM-CC guidelines prioritize energy efficiency and customized microclimates for focused sustainability.6
Reducing plastic use is an essential change all participants in the art world should continue to advance. Numerous reusable and plastic alternatives have been developed for packing and transportation needs. The Gallery Climate Coalition has initiatives that include non-archival and biodegradable packaging to replace traditional plastics.7 Notably as materials with organic composition will disintegrate quicker than plastics, [though] they are not always suitable for long-term protection of art in storage.7 This tension highlights the importance of finding practical, responsible approaches to reuse within the art ecosystem. At C-lective, we make an active effort to reuse all packaging materials whenever it is safe to do so, maintaining the integrity of original packaging provided by our artists and incorporating it throughout future deliveries and storage. While greener practices may require additional care and consideration, we believe investing in more responsible systems is a worthwhile trade-off compared to the environmental impact of continued waste.
Lastly, a significant way for art institutions to reduce their carbon footprint is transitioning from air to sea and road freight. The difference in emissions is substantial and some of the large, global galleries have found success in making this switch,8 proving the feasibility and reduction in large quantities of tonnes of CO2e emitted. The use of sea freight produces less than 2% of the carbon dioxide equivalent of traveling similar distances by air.7 A case study by global fine arts logistics firm Cadogan Tate investigated the climate impacts of sea vs air freight by transporting 31 Gary Hume paintings and sculptures from a London to a New York gallery. The findings concluded that choosing ocean transport over air resulted in a 96% lower carbon footprint.2 Almost 24 tonnes of greenhouse gas were saved; the equivalent of 16,500 people driving two miles each way to visit an art gallery.2
Of course, no freight option is perfect and container ships still have plenty of room for improvement in terms of sustainability. Low-grade diesel fuel is dirty and non-renewable and hull maintenance treatments are often toxic to marine life.5 Shipping lane dredging, release of ballast water, and improper disposal of waste are also damaging to marine ecosystems.5
Although transporting one tonne of artwork by road produces one-tenth of the climate impact of transporting it the same distance by air,5 road freight is also an imperfect shipping method. Fossil-fueled road transport, particularly heavy goods vehicles like long-distance shipping trucks, is responsible for significant carbon emissions and air pollution.5 Sustainability in art will require accepting that there may not always be perfect solutions, only opportunities to make better ones. The industry’s ability to adapt, innovate, and rethink long-standing practices will be essential in shaping a more responsible future for how art moves around the world.
More Sustainable by Design
Rather than attempting to bolt-on climate mitigation measures to an logistically complex business model, C-lective focuses on the local community, employing economies of scale and efficiencies into its community building and art engagement methods. Rather than retrofitting sustainability later, C-lective was designed to operate more sustainably from the start.
The most impactful solution for art institutions to reduce emissions may be the most straightforward: transport art less. This doesn’t mean never moving art at all, of course, but rather more mindfully, more streamlined, and most critically, more locally. Accordingly, C-lective’s member art deliveries take place over a single day and go straight from our in-studio storage to Bay Area homes to minimize our own annual transportation emissions. Working solely with local artists and clients isn’t always possible for all scales of galleries and museums; for large institutions with globally dispersed collections, they will likely never fully mitigate their environmental impact.
The fully local, low-transport model is exactly what community-rooted organizations like C-lective are designed to support. Buying local art requires significantly less shipping mileage throughout the artwork’s journey—from artist to gallery to collector’s home, or from artist to museum to the audiences who experience and enjoy an exhibition. C-lective has intentionally focused on representing and discovering artists from the Bay Area and Northern California region, reducing the need for long-distance transportation and packaging while fostering meaningful connections between artists and members who are all within driving distance of one another. By keeping artwork within a more localized ecosystem, C-lective helps reduce unnecessary movement while strengthening the community relationships at the heart of collecting.
Supporting local art has benefits that go far beyond reducing environmental harm. Supporting local businesses and art is an investment into the vibrancy of community and contributes to a thriving and diverse cultural landscape. Fortifying local institutions has a ripple effect in supporting your community of creatives and helps make the local art community more tangible and accessible as more people participate in it.9 C-lective conscientiously hosts thought-provoking and engaging events in our studio clubhouse that welcome people from a variety of backgrounds to connect over and engage with art and one another. Broadening the opportunities available for people in all engagements of art is key to ensure the social sustainability of a rich local art scene.
The bottom line is that art is culture, and art institutions have a responsibility to protect, celebrate, and contribute to the betterment of society—and, by extension, the environment. Art can be a powerful catalyst for social change because it creates a platform for diverse voices, cultivates empathy, and brings important societal issues to light. While carbon emissions from sources like art shipping may represent only a small fraction of global transportation impacts, the arts sector has the potential to create a disproportionate positive impact by using its public platform and creativity to share stories, inspire awareness, and advance more sustainable practices.5 Art has the power to revolutionize public education around sustainability in art market practices,10 but meaningful change will only happen when we work collectively to establish new standards, encourage action, and foster greater understanding within our industry and communities.
Works Cited
ARTA. “The Impact of Art Shipping on The Environment.” Galleryclimatecoalition.org, galleryclimatecoalition.org/usr/library/documents/main/arta_sustainability_white_paper2020.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2026.
Chivers, Danny. “The Climate Benefits of Ocean vs Air Transport of Artworks.” Galleryclimatecoalition.org, galleryclimatecoalition.org/usr/library/documents/main/the-climate-benefits-of-ocean-vs-air-transport-of-artworks.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2026.
EPA. “Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator.” United States Environmental Protection Agency, Nov. 2024, www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator.
GCC. “Art Fair Toolkit For Environmental Responsibility.” Galleryclimatecoalition.org, 2024, galleryclimatecoalition.org/usr/library/documents/main/gcc_art-fairs-toolkit_sep24.pdf.
GCC. “Environmental Considerations of Sea and Road vs. Air Freight.” Gallery Climate Coalition, 2026, galleryclimatecoalition.org/ssc/environmental-considerations/.
International Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works. “Environmental Guidelines – IIC and ICOM-CC Declaration.” Iiconservation.org, 2014, www.iiconservation.org/archives/about/policy-statements/environmental-guidelines.
Kraczon, Kim. “Plastic Alternative Packing Materials Research.” Galleryclimatecoalition.org, 2021, galleryclimatecoalition.org/usr/library/documents/main/gcc_alternative_packing_materials_final.pdf.
Lin, Cheryl. “Cracks in the Canvas: The Art Market’s Sustainability Challenge - Global Research and Consulting at Berkeley (GRC).” Global Research and Consulting at Berkeley (GRC), 13 Dec. 2024, grc.studentorg.berkeley.edu/cracks-in-the-canvas-the-art-markets-sustainability-challenge/.
Orlando Museum of Art. “Supporting Local Artists: Why It Matters and How to Start.” Omart.org, 6 Mar. 2026, omart.org/news/how-to-support-local-artists/#.
Yale Office of Sustainability. “How Artists Are Incorporating Sustainability Into Their Work.” Yale.edu, 27 May 2021, sustainability.yale.edu/news/how-artists-are-incorporating-sustainability-their-work.