For decades, the global diamond industry was dominated by mined diamonds supplied through powerful legacy players such as De Beers and other major mining groups. Natural diamonds were positioned not only as luxury items, but also as symbols of rarity, permanence, romance, and status. Their value came from more than beauty alone – it came from scarcity and the emotional story attached to owning something formed deep within the earth over billions of years.
Then technology changed everything.
Lab-grown diamonds entered the market and rapidly evolved from a niche scientific innovation into a commercially viable luxury product. Using advanced methods such as High Pressure High Temperature (HPHT) and Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD), manufacturers were able to create diamonds in laboratories that are chemically, physically, and visually almost identical to mined diamonds. To the naked eye, consumers could not tell the difference.
At first, lab-grown diamonds were marketed as a modern alternative to mined stones. Companies positioned them as more affordable, more sustainable, more ethical, and more transparent than traditional diamonds. Younger consumers, particularly Millennials and Gen Z, responded strongly to this messaging. For many buyers, lab-grown diamonds represented a shift away from traditional luxury norms toward technology-driven and environmentally conscious consumption.
As demand accelerated, the market grew rapidly. Lab-grown diamonds moved from being a fringe product into mainstream jewellery retail, capturing an increasingly significant share of the global diamond market. What began as an innovation soon became a direct challenge to the traditional diamond industry.
That is when the identity crisis began.
Lab-grown diamond companies argued that a diamond is fundamentally a diamond. Their reasoning was simple: lab-grown stones possess the same crystal structure, hardness, chemical composition, and optical properties as mined diamonds. Scientifically, they are real diamonds. Because of this, many brands began marketing their products simply as “diamonds,” sometimes without prominently distinguishing them from natural stones.
However, the natural diamond industry saw a serious threat emerging. If consumers no longer clearly understood the difference between mined diamonds and laboratory-created diamonds, the rarity and premium value attached to natural diamonds could weaken dramatically. The concern was not purely scientific – it was economic, emotional, and strategic. Natural diamonds derive much of their value from scarcity and geological uniqueness. Lab-grown diamonds challenged that entire narrative.
This tension led to an industry-wide pushback.
One of the most vocal organizations in this battle became the Natural Diamond Council. The council began advocating for stricter advertising standards and clearer terminology in jewellery marketing. Importantly, the Natural Diamond Council did not argue that lab-grown diamonds were fake. Instead, its position focused on transparency. The organization argued that consumers deserved to clearly understand whether a diamond was mined naturally or created in a laboratory before making a purchase.
As part of this effort, the council filed complaints against several jewellery brands over what it considered misleading advertising practices. Companies such as Skydiamond, Lark & Berry, Novita Diamonds, and Linjer became central to the debate. The complaints focused on advertising language that used terms such as “diamonds,” “real diamonds,” “mined from the sky,” or “sustainable diamonds” without clearly and prominently stating that the stones were laboratory-created.
The turning point came when the UK’s Advertising Standards Authority began ruling on these complaints. In 2024, the regulator ruled against Skydiamond after the company promoted its products as “diamonds made entirely from the sky.” The ASA concluded that consumers were not being sufficiently informed that the diamonds were laboratory-created rather than naturally mined.
The debate intensified further in 2026 when the ASA issued additional rulings involving Novita Diamonds and Linjer. The regulator found that advertisements using the word “diamond” without clear and immediate qualification could potentially mislead consumers. In effect, the ASA established a stronger expectation within the industry: if a diamond is lab-grown, advertisers must say so clearly and upfront.
What makes this issue so significant is that it extends far beyond jewellery.
At its core, this debate is about truth in advertising, consumer trust, luxury branding, and the economics of perception. Luxury goods are rarely priced based purely on utility. Their value is often built on storytelling, heritage, symbolism, exclusivity, and emotional meaning. Natural diamonds have historically embodied rarity and permanence, while lab-grown diamonds have positioned themselves around innovation, accessibility, and sustainability.
The clash between these two narratives is reshaping the diamond industry in real time.
On one side, the natural diamond industry is fighting to preserve the premium attached to natural rarity, protect mining economies, and maintain decades of carefully cultivated luxury positioning. On the other side, lab-grown diamond companies are attempting to normalize a new definition of luxury – one driven by technology, affordability, and modern environmental values.
Ultimately, the battle is no longer just about gemstones.
It is about who gets to define the future meaning of the word “diamond.”
