Are artificial flowers actually more sustainable than fresh cut flowers? The short answer is: It depends.
Flowers are part of our everyday lives. Seasonal, regional flowers are especially valued – for example, freshly picked from a farm in Switzerland during the summer. In this context, cut flowers can be a practical choice. The situation is different with roses, tulips, or lilies, which are available year-round. These flowers usually come from global supply chains with short life cycles. This is precisely where the discussion about artificial flowers begins – not as a replacement for all flowers, but as a long-term alternative for specific situations.
What studies about the cut flower industry show
Several scientific studies have examined the environmental impacts of cut flowers throughout their entire life cycle. A review article in Journal of Cleaner Production shows that the largest part of emissions is caused by energy-intensive production, cooling and especially by transport – particularly air freight.
Roses sold in Europe often come from Kenya, Ethiopia, or Ecuador. Tulips are sometimes produced year-round in heated greenhouses. A life cycle analysis by Fairtrade Max Havelaar and the Migros Cooperative Federation shows that in the supply chains examined, fertilizers and pesticides were frequently used during cultivation, followed by continuous refrigeration from cutting to sale. Flowers are not subject to the same legal regulations as edible crops. Consequently, the use of pesticides and herbicides in flower cultivation is significantly higher, which can lead to local soil and groundwater contamination.
Added to this is the very short lifespan. A bouquet of flowers usually only stays fresh for a few days. After that, it is disposed of – and the whole process begins again. This repetition plays a central role from the perspective of sustainability research.
A closer look: the rose
The rose is one of the most extensively studied flowers. In a model-based scenario analysis, Anthesis concluded that a single fresh rose transported by plane can cause significantly higher CO₂ emissions than a high-quality artificial rose. In certain scenarios, the CO₂ emissions of the artificial rose were up to 70 percent lower.
The crucial difference lies in the lifespan. A fresh rose is used only once. An artificial rose is produced once and remains in use for years. If one considers the CO₂ emissions per year of use instead of per purchase, the assessment shifts significantly.
What sustainability really depends on
Research clearly shows that sustainability cannot be reduced to "natural" versus "artificial". Crucial factors include origin, production method, transport, lifespan, and frequency of replacement.
Artificial flowers perform particularly well when used long-term – without regular replacement. This approach also aligns with the European Commission's assessment models. The Product Environmental Footprint considers the environmental impact across a product's entire life cycle, not just at the point of purchase.
A personal note
At Silkhaus, we see artificial flowers as an answer to today's lifestyles. For people who appreciate long-lasting products. For everyone who doesn't want the weekly hassle, is allergic to real flowers, or has spaces that deserve atmosphere without constant attention – such as vacation homes or rarely used rooms.
Artificial flowers aren't about choosing one or the other. They represent a conscious decision. When sustainability is considered in terms of time, use, and everyday life, long-lasting floral solutions become a logical option.
An artificial rose: produced once, enjoyed for years.
