Theme:
It is vital that we as a society who are caught in the Fast Fashion era vigorously inspect this sector, as it currently produces 10% of global carbon emissions and 20% of global wastewater. These effects amount to more than all international flights and maritime shipping, and so can not be downplayed.
It is great that certain fashion companies are waking up to the damaging effects of their production processes and are starting to make changes. Through this edition I question, are they making the right changes? and try to look a little deeper into their motivations, AKA are they for environmental reasons or say for increased brand loyalty through jumping on the bandwagon.
1) Does Fast Fashion have to die for the environment to live?
The process of Fast Fashion, rapidly creating clothes in large batches, may make corporations large sums of money, however in doing so it creates vast amounts of waste, particularly frighteningly from unsold products. The U.N have stated that every second, an astonishing truck loads worth of textiles is either burned or sent to landfill.
The Fast Fashion business model is based on large volume, any process based on large output and short life span is likely to be unsustainable. Combine this with certain brands, such a Stefano Ricci, who have stated that they would rather burn their clothes then dilute their garments value through discounts. Basically, they just don't give a shit. (Excusing my French!)
As stated in the UN report below, other fashion firms are making more environmentally friendly changes due to consumer demands. So yes, You sitting at home online shopping can make a difference!! Surveys such as the Nielsen’s are providing concrete evidence of this consumer transition. The younger generation are more consumption conscious than any that has gone before, with 53% of those surveyed between the ages 21 through 34 saying that they would give up a brand-name product in order to buy an environmentally friendly one. This is a positive sign, and hopefully will force further substantial change in the future.
An example of consumer driven demand is evident through the Burberry debacle. Where Burberry was called out for its mass burning of £38 million worth of stock in 2018. Due to public pressure since then Burberry has undergone vast changes, firstly through actively trying to make far less products, and secondly through trying to recycle those items that it doesn sell.
A more contentious issue is that of H&M, the Sweedish brand has committed to use only recycled or sustainably sourced material by 2030, and to offset its greenhouse gas emissions by 2040. These are brilliant targets and if spread industry wide, they would have a vast impact at limiting the fashion industries environmental effect. However, the problem still stands though that companies such as H&M are not backing away from their fast fashion ethos which ultimately when implemented sector wide will struggle to be sustainable.
Through conscious consumption we the people are pushing these firms in the right direction, but we can't stop at that. This is the first stage of a long battle, and even if H&M’s changes aren't up to the standard required, they currently are a damn sight better than Ricci’s fire pits. My advice where possible would be to look towards companies with the environment firmly lodged in their ethos, such as Patagonia who have just won the UN Champions of the Earth award ( https://www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/press-release/us-outdoor-clothing-brand-patagonia-wins-un-champions-earth-award ) or Finisterre a surfers brand from St Agnes, Cornwall.
2) VANS LAUNCHES 'SAVE OUR PLANET' COLLECTION TO PROMOTE ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS
Vans has recently followed in the footsteps of Weekday and Mango launching a new collection designed to promote environmental awareness, stating that it will donate up to £160,000 of the proceeds to the charity Sustainable Coastlines Hawaii. The range is made up of 4 different shoes, each having a colourful graphic of the world map alongside the slogan “Save Our Planet.”
Vans is making good headway through this new range and it is comedible that they are taking steps in the right direction. However, one can't help but sense that this feels a little like a marketing ploy to increase its brand loyalty, jumping on the environmental bandwagon, without actually leading to any significant change.
Maybe I am being a little overly cynical, however it does seem that Vans are donating a fairly small sum of money whilst simultaneously using a lot of plastic. Having worked for an Environmental Impact company over the summer who donate a specified percentage minimum per sale, I am very aware of corporate firms that do not specify pre sales how much they will donante per item.
Looking at this case in more detail, objectively Vans donating up to £160,000 seems a large sum, but when placed in context this does not seem so large. With Vans Parent company, VE Corp’s 2018 first-quarter revenue amounting to $3.05 billion.
Moving on I would also like to question the motivations behind Vans charitable support, having previously engaged in a similar charitable campaign supporting breast cancer. It seems to me as if they are trying to stay “on Trend” with everything they do, even their Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), leading me to question their trustability.
Alternatively, Van’s choice of charity, Sustainable Coastlines Hawaii, is an interesting choice as it is a charity confined to a very limited space, solely focused on protecting the Hawaiian Coasts. For a global brand to launch a campaign based on “Saving our Planet” and then to target such a limited area seems a little counter intuitive. Both of these reasons lead me to question whether Van's motivations were driven by environmental reasons or more so as a clever marketing ploy. Maybe Vans are acting under good motivations and I have dug too deep into this, however I must say that if they are acting under good intentions, then I feel they have missed a trick here.
As Orsola de Castro, co-founder and creative director of Fashion Revolution states, "Brands shouldn’t be making new products and simply donating anyway, that is just increasing the problem.”
3) Putting the brakes on fast fashion - UN environment programme
This report by the UN states the damaging effects of the fashion Industry, stating that the only TREND that actually matters is the need to radically alter our patterns of consumption. This report is fairly daunting, highlighting the many environmental effects and the human costs of the fashion industry. For example, Did you know that it typically takes 2000 gallons of water to make one pair of jeans?
The report is not all doom and gloom however, with it arguing that consumers are increasingly demanding change, and a selection of fashion companies and A-listers are listening. The report presents an extensive list of cool environmentally focused companies that are being hugely innovative, and trying to solve these issues. One of my favourites being Ecoalf from Spain which creates shoes from algae and recycled plastic as part of its “Upcycling the Oceans” collection.
I would highly recommend giving this article a read, with the key piece of advice being that
one should try to keep their clothing in use for longer, as well as reduce the amount of new items you buy. Achieving this through demanding less material goods and purchasing second hand or through rental. Following both of these will help to reduce the amount of resources you use, in turn reducing your environmental footprint.
Finishing remarks
Check out this cool Innovation that is happening in LA, with this startup who turns milk waste into clothing.
Alternatively for those of you who may be a little lazy to trawl through your local high street charity shops in the build up to Christmas, check out these Second hand marketplaces online: ThredUp Inc and Poshmark.
By Josh Morley-Fletcher, 4th-year International Relations student
Comments