If fast fashion disappeared… — TFR (2024)

In an ideal world, workers who work at garment factories are paid with living wages. They are adults and they are provided with sufficient food and water. In an even more ideal world, people only buy clothes when necessary while fashion companies launch collection twice a year with affordable price. Perhaps, in the most ideal world, fast fashion companies cease to exist.

However, it is just a pipe dream.

Fast fashion, dare we say, is one of the biggest contributors to the world’s economy. Tadashi Yanai, the richest man in Japan, earns his fortune from clothing brand Uniqlo. Amancio Ortega, the third richest man in the world who surpassed Bill Gates as the richest man in the world in 2015, earns his fortune from Inditex, the company behind Zara, Pull&Bear, Stradivarius.

If we boycott the industry, it will affect the entire ecosystem from corporate, retail and manufacturer workers. The impact on the labour, be it child labour or sweatshop labour, will be devastating since the reason why majority of them wind up in the industry in the first place is because it’s the only available option.

How are they going to feed their family if they lose their only source of income?

Buying from local or independent brands is not a viable solution in the long run if consumers keep on disposing clothes. Sustainable or eco-friendly brands are alternatives but they also pose a challenge. Majority of sustainable brands come with hefty price tag. In Pulse of The Fashion Industry 2019 report, 35% of consumers are resistant towards sustainability because of the price. They assume that anything with ‘made responsibly’ tag is more expensive.

The underlying problem is that there are too many products out there. Factory produces too many, brands launch too often and consumers throw things away too soon. In 2018, Burberry was caught red-handed burning their unsold products worth up to £28.6 million (approximately $36.9 million) in order to prevent the products from being stolen or sold with huge discount.

Although minimising product quantity seems like a reasonable answer to this problem, we have to remember that not all brands have their own factories. Large companies usually subcontract their production to factories. Factories impose minimum order quantity (MOQ) to meet the production quota in order to pay their workers and make profit. The more they produce, the cheaper the products cost.

Above all, supply exists because there’s demand. There is a growing appetite for fashion, particularly in Asia Pacific where the number of middle-income household is growing exponentially.

While consumers hold the key to demand change in the industry, the solution to fast fashion problem is not as simple as telling people to stop buying, because here is another dilemma. If the consumers lower their demand, it might lead to job cuts. It will lead to the downfall of entire ecosystem mentioned above. It subsequently creates a domino effect to other industries. At this point, the industry is too big to fail.

What are the possible solutions?

Government, corporations, suppliers, distributors, manufacturer, consumers, media and NGOs are equally responsible in the sustainability effort.

From consumer and brands - The most obvious solution for consumers at this moment is to buy less and invest in better pieces. Consumers have the power to push the industry forward when they stand together and demand better practice in the industry.

Looking at the current offerings in the market, there are sacrifices that consumers have to make if they want to be fully eco-friendly. There are material and design constraints in sustainable brands. Therefore, the options for clothing style and design are not as wide as non-sustainable brands.

Brands either tackle the issue from graphics, prints and colour on fabric or invest in technology and research.

From government - Government has to work with NGOs, companies and manufacturers to create industry standard practice. There is a grey area in Indonesia’s home-based manufacturing or industri rumahan. The constitution covers employee’s benefits and rights in general workplace but home-based manufacturing has different set of practice compared to corporate manufacturer.

Workers at home-based factory are paid according to the number of products they sew. The more the worker produce, the more they get paid. This kind of system boosts productivity compared to monthly fixed wages but there is no contract that legally bound the workers. Workers can leave anytime they want. This is where government should step in and introduce a guideline that trains and protects both workers and factory owners.

From corporation and manufacturer - Companies have to collaborate with manufacturers to conduct in-depth market research and thorough product development before producing large quantity of products. It is better to see sold out sign on a product rather than sale sign. Dead stock plays a detrimental role in waste and cashflow.

From suppliers and NGOs - It’s not just about ‘who make our clothes.’ The question could go back to who grow the cotton, who pick the cotton, who deliver the cotton, who dye the fabric?

Tracing back supply chain down to every detail in each process is an almost impossible task. There is raw material for fabric, buttons, zippers, leather and every other fashion category. On top of that, there is no way a supplier is capable of doing everything. Suppliers and NGOs have to collaborate.

Investors

Pulse of The Fashion Industry report stated, ‘investors can serve as a catalyst for change toward better ways of doing business if they prioritise sustainability in their investment decisions.’

Technology

Indonesia is left behind in terms of manufacturing technology. Automation and artificial intelligence, for instance, have been hot topics in e-commerce industry but it hasn’t caught up in fashion.

The answer to the challenges in tracking supply chain, minimising product quantity, gathering market data and innovating new type of material lies in technology.

Material wise, technology innovation in fabric has to support the issue. There are characteristics of natural fabric that cannot mimic the flexibility, flow and weight of man-made fabric. Hence, the design constraint sustainable brands face.

• All things aside, if everyone is launching sustainable brand, where is the essence of sustainability when there are way too many products in the market?

• Carbon emission from online delivery, paper and plastic packaging are part of the problems. Packaging adds value to a brand but if consumers discard delivery boxes, the earth is not going to be better - not to mention the carbon emission from same day delivery that utilises Go-send service from Go-Jek.

• If a company wants to call itself sustainable, it has to take stationeries supplies, electricity, water and waste management into account as well. The way a company operates has to represent the message it is selling to the audience.

The consequences of sustainability - if successfully applied in every aspect - are the heftier price and fewer collection launch. The latter might be a problem to consumers since they are used to seeing new things every seconds.

Sustainability isn’t only about using recycled material, it is also about how the material can be reused, recycled and decomposed.