The Price Of Fast Fashion: How Consumerism Fuels The Climate Crisis And Threatens Human Rights — Human Rights Pulse (2024)

The urgency of the matter is especially prevalentin thecontextofwater consumption, chemical pollution, carbon emission, and the utilisation of vulnerable citizens as highlighted by researchers from the University of Manchester through theNature Review Earth and Environment 2020(NREE) study.

EMERGENCE AND SUCCESS OF FAST FASHION

Fast fashion is an innovation in SCM that allows fashion retailers to increase clothing production.Clothing designs can then bemoved quicklyfrom the catwalk to stores,allowing mainstream consumers to purchase trendy clothing at an affordable price. This form of fashion is heavily commercialised through the growth of social media and website advertisem*nt.

Leaders within this market includeZara, Topshop, and H&M, with H&M raking in an unmatched $25 billion in revenue, followed by Zara’s parent company Inditex Group gaining an annual revenue of $18 billion. Both companies have dominated the fast fashion industry for several years through the utilisation of lightweight and cheap material within the manufacturing process, allowing for an affordable end product with a significant profit margin.

These business models work incredibly well, as the constant introduction of new products encourages customers to frequently visit a brand and inevitably make more purchases. Purchase increase is founded on exclusivity: the idea that items may not be available for long. However, this mentality has created a ‘throw-away’ attitude, adding to the modern-day environmental crisis.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAST FASHION

The consequences of high consumer demand have always been apparent, as proven by the intrinsic link between current environmental deterioration and the growth of fast fashion. Prior to the NREE study, theEuropean Parliamentdiscussed the ‘throwaway’ culture created by fast fashion and condemned the ideology that such clothes are viewed as perishable, and nearly disposable. The belief that these items should beworn a few timesbefore being discarded has led tonearly 85% of textilesending up on landfills each year. The damage is just as shocking in the UK, and Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) has confirmed thatUK households sent300,000 tonnesof clothing to landfills in 2016 alone, equating toroughly£140 millionworth of clothing. Faced with such statistics, if the ‘throwaway’ culture continues,one-quarter of the total impactof climate change will be due to clothes consumption by 2050. This is not including the overt effects of manufacturing and transporting these articles.

Arguably, the most damaging aspect of fast fashion is SCM, resulting in a horrendously high water-consumption rate. Withclothing production doubling since 2000, the fast fashion industry consumes roughly79 billion cubic meters of waterper annum, making it the second-largest water consuming industry in the world. This usage can be linked to the current water scarcity suffered by major suppliers of cotton, such as India and Pakistan. Worryingly, this consumption rate is set toincrease by 40% by 2030.

The fast fashion industry also has a huge effect on global CO2levels. Currently, fashion contributes to10% of humanity’s carbon emissions,as making one pair of jeans produces as much greenhouse gases as driving a car over 80 miles. The industry is responsible for1,715 million tonnes of CO2emissions per annum- more energy than aviation andmaritime shipping combined. This condition is not helped by the current trend of utilising air cargo over shipping, a structural change that will increase carbon emissions by 100% in the coming years. Studies have suggested that this dilemma could be mitigated by consumers using a single item of clothing for nine months or longer,reducing each customer’s carbon footprint by 30%.

THE SOCIAL DETERIORATION CAUSED BY FAST FASHION

Fast fashion is a threat to human rights as much as environmental preservation, with companies implementing inadequate labour conditions and low wages that detrimentally affect workers’ quality of life. These violations have generated significant response from human rights activists likeFEMNETwho work towards greater transparency in the fashion industry to combat exploitative working conditions.

Several fast fashion companies operate on the notion that“the higher and faster the demand of clothes is, the more they will have to work”. With dire factory conditions and the workforce predominantly consisting ofchildren and forced citizens, such excessive consumer demand disadvantages the most vulnerable within society. This conclusion is supported by the fact that97% of fast fashionis being produced in developing countrieswith poor labour and human rights protections, where in-factory abuse and negligence are concealed.

Fast fashion also affects those outside the industry, with chemically-infused lakebeds leaving communities with no source of food or income. An example of this is theAral Sea, the fourth biggest lake in the world. This particular lake has since shrunk by 90% in the last 50 years due to fast fashion water consumption and chemical contamination. Freshwater sources are diverted from streams in order to irrigate cotton crops, causing dried-up lakebeds filled with cancerous pesticides.

WHAT CAN BE DONE

Though fast fashion has a detrimental effect on both the environment and human existence, several committees and movements have proposed provisions to help mitigate the social and environmental damage caused by fast fashion.

Slow fashion is widely accepted as the most sustainable alternative, with activists such asLibby Peakeof the Green Alliance confirming that “slow fashion is the only sustainable future for the industry and the planet”.Dr Patsy Perry(a member of the University of Manchester research team) is convinced that “a transition away from fast fashion towards slow fashion requires a slowdown in manufacturing volumes, the introduction of sustainable practice throughout the [SCM] and a shift in consumer behaviour to reduce the amount of new clothing being purchased and increase garment lifetime”.

Slow fashion movementsencourage sustainable practicesas well as ethical working conditions through focus on the quality and longevity of articles, whilst standing up for disadvantaged workers and farmers. One such movement is theBetter Cotton Initiative, which encourages sustainable farming cultivation as well as additional resources for farmers and workers to ensure human rights protection.

The House of CommonsEnvironmental Audit Committee (EAC)recognised the need for such change and made several proposals, including a1p clothing chargeto fund better recycling and a ban on incinerating recyclable clothing. These proposals aimed to tackle the current issue of waste as80% of disposed items are incinerated or remain in landfills, and only 20% of items are reused or recycled. Sadly, the Governmentrejectedall proposals.

Despite this setback, the public can enact some change. In line with theEthical Sustainable Fashion movement, consumers can buy fromsmaller businessesthat prioritise recycled cotton and nylon, which are easily biodegradable. Thrift-shopping is another solution for waste management. If everyone bought one used item instead of one new one per annum, the amount of CO2emissions saved would beequivalent to removing 500,000 carsfrom the road each year.

Substantial change will take a long time, however, mitigating the harm caused by fast fashion requires a complete change in how people shop and what factors are prioritised when choosing retailers.