Many businesses have made the shift to digital-first marketing strategies.

Email campaigns, social media ads, downloadable brochures, and targeted content marketing have become standard practice across industries.

It’s easy to see why – digital is often faster, more cost-effective, and easier to measure. Yet, while digital transformation offers undeniable advantages, businesses may overlook the environmental and strategic costs of going “digital only.”

For senior leaders, sales managers, and marketers under pressure to deliver results while meeting ESG goals, it’s worth re-evaluating whether a digital-first mindset is always the best path forward.

The Efficiency Argument: Why Digital Wins on Speed and Budget

Digital marketing enables rapid deployment. What took weeks to design, print, and distribute can now be executed in hours. Sales teams can access live decks, PDFs and proposal templates instantly. Updates can be made in real-time without incurring reprint costs. Marketing teams can A/B test messages, track user engagement, and optimise spend all with the click of a button.

The savings are significant in terms of cost. There is no printing, postage, or warehousing. Digital platforms provide flexible options for businesses of all sizes, often with scalable pricing and detailed analytics.

But in this pursuit of speed and savings, many businesses quietly eliminate print materials. And that might not be as sustainable or strategically wise as it first appears.

The Environmental Assumption: Is Digital Always Greener?

One of the strongest arguments for abandoning print has been environmental. After all, printed materials use paper, ink, and energy to produce, and transportation adds to the carbon footprint.

However, the environmental impact of digital infrastructure is rarely factored into the equation. Cloud storage, data centres and the devices we use to consume digital content require significant energy. Emails and PDFs don’t come free of cost to the environment, especially when scaled across thousands of users and frequent campaigns.

Research by the environmental charity Energy Saving Trust and various academic bodies has shown that data transmission, digital waste, and always-on infrastructure can meaningfully contribute to carbon emissions.

In some cases, printed materials, especially those produced locally, on recycled stock, and with sustainable inks, may have a smaller net environmental impact, particularly when used sparingly or for long-term purposes.

Strategic Impact: When Print Still Performs

Print marketing also has strategic advantages that are often underappreciated in today’s digital-first mindset. A well-designed brochure or leave-behind piece can make a powerful, tangible impression in a way a web link or PDF cannot. In trade shows, direct mail campaigns, or high-value sales meetings, physical materials often convey trust, permanence, and quality.

For sales managers, physical leave-behinds can help open doors and leave a lasting reminder. For marketers, high-impact print collateral can elevate and differentiate a brand from the endless stream of digital content customers scroll past daily.

Finding the Right Mix: A Monitored, Purposeful Approach

Rather than weighing digital versus print in absolutes, forward-thinking businesses are adopting a more nuanced, monitored approach.

Using data to identify which assets should be digital (dynamic content, time-sensitive promotions, broad outreach campaigns) and which warrant print (premium communications, internal culture tools, client leave-behinds) allows companies to maximise impact while controlling costs and mitigating environmental harm.

Sustainability teams can also work with marketing to track the true environmental cost of each campaign type, allowing informed decisions and the creation of sustainability benchmarks. Meanwhile, centralised digital asset management systems can ensure printed pieces are used efficiently and only when needed, reducing unnecessary waste and duplication.