Ship or replace — making relocation sustainable
International relocations often involve a fundamental question—should employees ship their household goods, replace them on arrival or rely on furnished housing and rental? In this edition of Reloverse, we explore the carbon, cost and human impact behind each choice, drawing on real case scenarios and sustainability reporting.
Counting the carbon
For a typical move, shipping a 20ft container between the UK and US generates around two tonnes of CO₂e. Replacing the same contents on arrival can create up to 5.5 tonnes of CO₂e once manufacturing, supply-chain freight and disposal are included. Furniture rental is often promoted as a greener option but its footprint depends on repeated logistics cycles, warehousing energy and the churn of inventory. For assignments of six months or more, these factors can quickly outweigh the one-off impact of shipping.
Industry data shows that permanent transfers are now the most common form of relocation so in most cases the shipment is one-way. For the smaller share of fixed-term assignments where goods are returned or shipped onwards, the transport footprint doubles but still remains lower than repeated replacement at every move.
Every new sofa, bed or table comes with emissions from raw materials, manufacturing, packaging and transport. Disposing of usable items at origin adds to landfill and increases methane emissions. Shipping avoids these impacts by extending the useful life of goods that have already been produced.
Rental realities and employee experience
Furniture rental is often marketed as sustainable because items are reused across multiple tenants. The reality is more complex. Each cycle involves transport to and from warehouses, cleaning, refurbishment and over time, higher replacement rates. If stock is moved between cities, the environmental impact grows quickly. These hidden factors mean that for anything beyond short-term stays, the footprint can exceed the one-off shipment of owned goods.
Warehouses themselves carry an environmental cost. Lighting, heating and cooling large spaces consume energy year-round, and each delivery or collection adds transport emissions. Over the course of a year, this repeated activity can surpass the footprint of a single shipment.
The employee experience also matters. Personal belongings bring comfort and familiarity, especially for families. Rental furniture can feel temporary and impersonal, reducing the sense of home at a time when stability is important. For some, replacing everything at destination adds stress, time and cost that distract from the purpose of the assignment. Shipping allows assignees to settle faster, with routines and surroundings that feel recognisable. Personal possessions also provide grounding during transition, helping families feel anchored in a new country when everything else around them is unfamiliar.
Families often describe arriving at a property with only rental furniture as unsettling. The absence of familiar belongings makes the environment feel temporary, just when stability is most needed. For children in particular, small items such as their own bed or desk can make a big difference in how quickly they adjust.
Policy decisions and practical guidance
Global Mobility policies need to balance sustainability, cost and employee experience in ways that are consistent across every assignment. For long-term moves of a year or more, shipping is usually the lowest-impact option, particularly when combined with “discard and donate” programmes to reduce volume. Short placements of just a few months may be better served by furnished housing or rental, provided the inventory is genuinely local and not repeatedly transported. Assignments of six to twelve months still tend to favour shipping unless rental suppliers can demonstrate low logistics emissions and minimal churn. Buying new is rarely defensible once manufacturing, supply chains and disposal are factored in. Shipping extends the life of existing goods, keeps them in circulation and supports a more sustainable model of mobility. This is also a circular approach: shipping keeps items in use and out of landfill, and when paired with discard and donate programmes it reduces both carbon and waste. With route-level emissions already tracked through Santa Fe’s sustainability reporting, Global Mobility leaders can shape policies based on evidence rather than assumption. Cash allowances may appear simple but they can create unnecessary distraction. The time and effort spent replacing furniture often detracts from the purpose of the assignment.
Few rental providers currently publish data on the emissions linked to their inventory cycles. Information on delivery distances, warehouse energy sources, refurbishment processes, reuse rates and inter-city transfers is rarely disclosed, making it difficult to assess the true footprint of rental claims. Until that information is available, sustainability claims should be treated with caution. The same principle applies to air freight, which carries a far higher footprint than sea freight. Clear policy guidance that reduces reliance on air shipments delivers immediate, measurable carbon savings.
Case example — shipping versus replacing in practice
A recent relocation project for a large multinational highlighted the difference between shipping and replacing in measurable terms. The family faced a move from Europe to North America with the option of transporting a 20ft container of belongings or starting again at destination. Shipping generated around two tonnes of CO₂e, while replacing the same contents would have produced more than double once manufacturing, supply chains and disposal of existing items were factored in. The financial difference was also significant—shipping cost between £6,000 and £9,000 compared with £15,000 to £23,000 for replacement. Beyond the numbers, the assignees valued the continuity of having their own furniture and possessions, which gave stability and comfort during the transition.
The family also reported that familiar furniture and possessions helped their children adapt to a new school more smoothly. Having a recognisable home environment reduced stress during the first months of the assignment, easing integration into a new community.
Fruzsina Hodson, Senior Destination Services Manager at Santa Fe, explains: “We see a clear link between familiarity and faster adjustment. Families that can recreate their home environment settle more quickly and feel less stress. Sustainable choices and positive employee experience often go hand in hand.”
Closing reflections
Relocation policies are changing as organisations introduce furniture allowances and increase short-term assignments with little or no shipping. Much of this change has been driven by cost and convenience rather than evidence of lower emissions, and it risks embedding policies that appear efficient but are not sustainable in practice. These shifts are often driven by cost or speed rather than proven reductions in emissions. The data shows that shipping remains the more sustainable option in most cases, particularly when supported by initiatives that cut excess volume. Rental and furnished housing can play a role but only in very specific circumstances and for shorter stays. Buying new almost always carries the highest environmental and financial cost. Shipping, by contrast, halves the footprint, saves money and reduces waste—a practical step that supports wider sustainability goals.
With regulators, shareholders and employees placing greater emphasis on sustainability, household goods decisions are becoming a business-critical issue. Clear, evidence-based policies on shipping and rental are part of a wider responsibility to deliver measurable reductions in emissions.
What matters now is how organisations embed these insights into practice. That means building guidance that is clear, evidence-based and consistent across geographies. It means engaging suppliers to provide the data needed to assess rental emissions honestly. And it means linking sustainability goals with employee wellbeing, recognising that the most sustainable choice is often also the one that makes families feel more at home.
Relocation decisions are never just about logistics. They affect carbon footprints, budgets and most importantly, the people behind every move. By aligning policies with real-world data, Global Mobility leaders can make choices that are better for the planet, better for the business and better for employees. Let’s continue the conversation on how this can shape your global talent strategy.
If you’re looking for a partner that understands how to support inclusive, compliant and effective international relocations for all employees, we’d love to help. Simply drop an email to reloverse@santaferelo.com and we’ll get back to you.
Global Mobility made easy — Assignment Management, Compensation & Expenses, Corporate Immigration, Corporate Moving, Destination Services for corporate clients, and International Moving for personal customers.
