The fashion industry has been declared by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development as the second most polluting industry in the world [1]. Surprised? ‘Fast Fashion’ encourages a quick turnaround with maximum profit, whilst damaging the environment in the process. Oxfam found that buying new clothes in the UK produces more carbon emissions per minute than driving a car around the world six times [2].
Other means of media have also set out to expose this industry; documentaries, like ‘The True Cost’, and ‘Alex James: Slowing Down Fast Fashion’, explore the industry’s hand in worker exploitation, pollution, pesticide contamination, disease and death.
So why hasn’t anything been done about this? The EAC made 18 recommendations to the government, including tax reforms rewarding companies that reduce their carbon footprint, and penalising those who don’t [3]. But the government refused them, despite much criticism, and many companies believing that the government is failing to aid the fashion industry to become more environmentally sustainable. The government’s action was to implement the Environmental Bill 2020, which will supposedly ensure a cleaner, greener and more resilient country for the next generation.
However, these local legal regulations often cause a ‘spill-over’. Their goal of maximum profit requires companies to move their manufacturing to less developed countries, where environmental regulation and liability are weaker or absent altogether. This relocation also endangers workers, as shown by the collapse of a Dhaka garment factory in 2013, killing 1,100 people and injuring 2,000. The International Labor Organization established core labour standards that participating countries abide by, but not all countries agree on these, creating issues with human rights and economic self-interest. There have been some effective standards put in place for supply chains that are multi-jurisdictional, but these are voluntary certifications by private organisations- they require opt-in by companies with no legal penalties.
Perhaps, then, we should focus on consumer pressure. It is much ‘trendier’ nowadays to be green, thanks to influencers like Lucia Musau, campaigners such as Greta Thunberg, and movements such as Extinction Rebellion. This is where the power of change lies, in the contract between consumer and business, in order to encourage ethical practices. However, sustainable and eco-friendly fashion is not affordable to those who are less well-off. Charity shops provide a good alternative, but the purchasing and reselling of charity shop items for higher prices on apps like Depop are making this option inaccessible as well, even to those that depend on them. It seems that change is still needed, and the solution is yet to be found.
UNCTAD, ‘Sustainable African design in focus on Women's Day’ (UNCTAD, 8 March 2019) <https://unctad.org/news/sustainable-african-design-focus-womens-day> accessed 1 December 2020
Oxfam, ‘Fast fashion produces more carbon emissions per minute than driving a car around the world six times’ (Oxfam, 30 August 2019) <https://oxfamapps.org/media/press_release/fast-fashion-produces-more-carbon-emissions-per-minute-than-driving-a-car-around-the-world-six-times-oxfam/> accessed 1 December 2020
Environmental Audit Committee, Fixing Fashion: Clothing Consumption and Sustainability (HC 2017-19) 1952
