Expert Talk with Desirée Binternagel: Choosing Gold Consciously, Recycled Gold and Fairtrade Compared

Sustainability in jewelry begins with one of the most valuable materials of all: gold. But not all gold described as "sustainable" has the same impact.

While conventional gold mining is often associated with significant environmental damage and social risks, various alternatives have emerged in recent years - including recycled gold, post-consumer gold, Fairtrade gold, and Fairmined gold. All of them promise greater responsibility. But they represent different approaches, goals, and effects.

What exactly distinguishes these models? What social and environmental impacts do they actually have? Where do their strengths lie, and where are their limits? And how can jewelry brands, designers, and consumers make informed decisions when it comes to origin, transparency, and responsibility?

In this Expert Talk, Desirée Binternagel discusses the differences between recycled gold and fairly traded gold - and why conscious material choices in the jewelry industry should be viewed with increasing nuance.

Desirée Binternagel is one of the most distinguished voices in the German-speaking world when it comes to responsible precious metals and transparent supply chains. As Managing Director of Fairever GmbH, she has been committed for many years to Fairtrade and Fairmined gold as well as credible, traceable sourcing solutions. 

Through her experience in high-end fashion and the precious metals trade, she combines entrepreneurial thinking with a clear commitment to fairness and responsibility. Her academic background in American Studies, with a focus on social inequality and gender, continues to shape her perspective on global supply chains to this day. 

At Fairever, she works to make responsibly sourced gold tangible for jewelry brands, female designers, and female consumers—with transparent, practical solutions that create real impact.

The following statements reflect the interviewee’s personal assessment.

Desirée: >This distinction is important because the terms are often used interchangeably in the market – even though they stand for very different forms of sustainability.

Recycled gold is, first and foremost, gold that has already been in circulation and is returned to the production cycle. It can come from scrap gold, jewellery, dental gold, or industrial residues. Chemically, gold always remains gold – without any loss of quality. However, the term says nothing about where the material originally came from or under what social or ecological conditions it was once mined.

Post-consumer gold is a clearer subcategory of recycled gold. Here, the material actually comes from end-consumer products that have already completed their life cycle – such as returned jewellery. This is generally the cleanest and most traceable form of recycling in the gold sector because it comes closest to the idea of a true circular economy.

Fairtrade gold and Fairmined gold start at a completely different point: namely at the source. Both standards refer to newly mined gold from artisanal and small-scale mining and combine material sourcing with clearly defined social and ecological criteria. These include, among other things, occupational health and safety, organised and formalised structures, the prohibition of child labour, transparent supply chains, environmental requirements, and additional financial resources for communities and development.

The key difference is therefore:

Recycled gold primarily stands for circularity and resource conservation.

Fairtrade and Fairmined gold also stand for responsibility toward the people at the beginning of the supply chain.

Both can be part of a responsible sourcing strategy – but the impact is not the same. Sustainability in jewellery should therefore not be measured solely by whether gold has been recycled, but also by what actual change is associated with it along the supply chain.<

Desirée: >For me, the core of responsibly sourced gold clearly lies in the social dimension. Because the greatest invisibility in the jewelry industry often does not concern the material itself, but the people who mine it.

A key point is a living income. Many people in artisanal and small-scale mining do not work there by choice, but because there are only a few realistic income alternatives in their regions. That is why we must honestly ask ourselves: does the gold price at the source make a life in dignity possible? Is it enough for food, education, healthcare, and future prospects? Models such as Fairtrade and Fairmined address exactly this issue—with minimum standards and additional premiums that can be used collectively.

Workplace safety is equally important. In many regions, artisanal and small-scale mining and risk are still closely linked to this day: lack of protective equipment, unsafe shafts, hazardous substances, inadequate protection. For me, responsible sourcing means not accepting these conditions as “normal,” but actively helping to improve them.

Another important aspect is organization and co-determination. Where mines operate cooperatively or are formalized, structures emerge in which people are not just raw material suppliers, but actors with rights, a voice, and future prospects. That is precisely a prerequisite for long-term development.

And finally, child labor, equality, and the participation of women are also essential for me. Anyone who talks about fairness must also talk about who has access to income, responsibility, and opportunities for development.

That is why, for me, responsibly sourced gold is always more than just a material issue. It is a question of dignity, justice, and genuine responsibility along the entire supply chain.<

Desirée: >The most important principle is: Don’t trust terms, trust evidence.

Especially in the jewelry sector, wording is often used that sounds good but is hard to verify. Anyone who truly wants to ensure that gold meets sustainability criteria needs a documented supply chain – and ideally an independent certification or solid proof of origin.

With Fairtrade or Fairmined gold, this is comparatively clearly regulated because there are defined standards, audits, and traceability systems for it. Here, I would always ask specifically:

Where does the gold come from?

Which body is certified?

How are separation and documentation ensured in the supply chain?

With recycled gold, it is worth taking a closer look at the definition. Not everything communicated as “recycled” is automatically equally transparent. It makes a difference whether a material comes from genuine end-consumer sources or whether it involves internal production scraps or non-specific material streams. Both can be legitimate – but they should be clearly identified.

My advice to brands and designers is therefore: Choose only materials whose origin and logic you can clearly explain yourselves. If, in a customer conversation or on the website, you cannot clearly say where the gold comes from, how it was verified, and why you chose it, then the basis is usually not yet robust enough.

Three questions almost always help:

1. Is the claim independently verifiable, or is it just a marketing claim?

2. Is the supply chain traceable all the way back to the source – or does it end with the intermediary?

3. What impact do I want to achieve with my material choice: circular economy, social impact at the source, or both?

From my perspective, this is exactly where credible responsibility begins.<

Desirée: >Recycled gold has clear strengths, and I believe it is important to acknowledge them. Gold can be melted down and reused again and again without any loss of quality. That makes it, in principle, a highly circular material. If gold that already exists remains in circulation, that makes sense—especially from the perspective of resource conservation and material efficiency.

Post-consumer gold, in particular, can be a strong solution in this context because it genuinely comes from an already used product cycle.

The limitation arises where recycled gold is presented as a complete answer to the problems of the gold sector. Recycling alone does not solve the social challenges in mining. It does not improve working conditions, create living incomes, or automatically change the reality in those regions where gold is still being mined today.

In addition, global demand for gold will not be met by recycling alone in the future either. Gold will continue to be newly mined—for jewellery, technology, investment, and other applications. The question, therefore, is not only how we keep existing gold in circulation, but also under what conditions newly mined gold is produced.

Another point is communication. The term recycled gold is often used very positively, without it being clear what exactly lies behind it. That is why precision is crucial.

I would summarise it like this:

Recycled gold is an important building block for more responsible sourcing. But it is not automatically the most comprehensive solution. A credible future for the industry emerges where circular economy and responsibility at the source are considered together—not in opposition.<

Desirée: >From my perspective, the greatest challenge is oversimplification. Recycled gold is often communicated as an easy-to-understand sustainability promise. In reality, the topic is far more nuanced.

For end customers, “recycled” usually sounds automatically like “especially sustainable.” But without additional explanation, it often remains unclear what kind of recycling is meant, how cleanly the material streams are separated, and what that actually allows us to say about origin and impact.

On the supplier side, the challenge often lies in separation, documentation, and definition. Gold is traded, processed, and melted down in large material streams. Without clear processes and reliable evidence, it becomes difficult to substantiate claims transparently and in a way that can be understood.

For brands, the challenge then lies in the right communication: How do you explain recycled gold honestly without downplaying what it is — but also without creating expectations it cannot fulfill?

I think this is exactly where the industry needs more maturity. Good communication does not mean providing the simplest possible answers, but clear and honest ones. Recycled gold makes sense. But it does not automatically replace responsibility toward the people and regions where gold continues to be mined.

If brands make that transparent, everyone benefits in the end: customers, who can make more informed decisions; suppliers, who can work with clearer requirements; and the industry as a whole, because sustainability becomes more credible.<

Desirée: >What I want above all is more nuance and honesty in the debate.

The industry should stop presenting individual solutions as a blanket answer to everything. Neither recycled gold nor fair trade gold alone will fully solve the structural challenges. What we need is an understanding of sourcing that recognizes the strengths of both approaches and combines them in a meaningful way.

When it comes to recycling, I would like to see clearer definitions and greater transparency about what exactly is described as recycled gold. Post-consumer streams in particular should be tracked more clearly and documented more transparently so that consumers can better understand the differences. Because recycling does not automatically mean that problematic origins are excluded: without complete documentation, gold from conflict zones or other critical contexts can also be included in the recycling stream.

At the same time, I hope that fair trade gold from artisanal and small-scale mining will no longer be seen as a niche, but as a natural part of responsible sourcing. Millions of people around the world depend on small-scale mining for their livelihoods. Anyone who wants to make the gold sector more sustainable must therefore also start where gold is actually being mined today.

In addition, from my point of view, there needs to be more binding requirements for transparency and supply chain documentation. As long as origin and impact are disclosed mainly on a voluntary basis, sustainability too often remains a matter of marketing rather than responsibility.

In the long term, I hope for an industry in which material decisions are not judged by what is easiest to communicate, but by the impact they actually have – on the environment, on people, and on trust.<

Desirée: >My first piece of advice is: Always start at the source.

The key question is not just which gold is used, but where it comes from and under what conditions it was extracted or processed. Origin is not a side note – it is the foundation of any credible sustainability decision.

The second piece of advice is: Think about sustainability holistically.

Recycling is important. Fair extraction is important. Material choice only becomes truly responsible when you understand that different models have different impacts. If you focus only on the circular economy, it is easy to overlook the people at the source. If you focus only on extraction, you overlook the importance of circular systems. Both belong together.

And the third piece of advice is: Actively demand transparency – and practise it yourself.

Companies should be able to openly say which materials they use, why they have chosen them, and where the limits of their solution lie. Consumers and designers, in turn, should ask targeted questions and not be satisfied with general sustainability promises.

In the end, it is not about having the perfect answer. It is about making informed and responsible decisions – and having the courage to take a closer look.<