Environmental and human rights activists have been sounding the alarm on the fashion industry for decades now, but it has not been enough. According to the Center for Biological Diversity, the industry has grown 400% in the past 20 years alone. The fashion industry accounts for 10% of the total global carbon emissions, making it the third largest contributor behind energy and agriculture.
Fast fashion has entered a new era with the rise of companies such as Shien, an exacerbated form of the practice pioneered by brands like Zara and H&M. The brand is not only destroying the environment by producing massive amounts of synthetic clothing, but its poorly regulated production plants produce extreme waste as well. To add fuel to the fire, fast fashion is not only of environmental concern, but of human rights concerns as well—accusations of unpaid and child labor surround practically all the world’s major department stores today, with reasonable evidence. It is undeniable that fast fashion is a problem, but raised awareness of the issue has had limited and sometimes negative effects in mitigating the success of these brands.
Thus far, the approach to combating the poor environmental and labor practices in the industry has been exposing its flaws. A prime example of this is the recent documentary titled “Brandy Hellville: The Cult of Fast Fashion,” which uncovers the horrors of the Italian-owned fashion brand, Brandy Melville, that has dominated the global fashion industry over the past decade. While the brand has problems unique to itself, which are depicted, the underlying message of the documentary targets fast fashion. The exposé features the city of Acara, Ghana, home to the largest dumping ground of disposed clothing, in other words a landfill for the west. The documentary highlights the eerie parallelism that the city of Acara, once the largest slave trading port in the world, remains in the cycle of exploitation, this time in the form of environmental damage. The documentary received attention on social media and started up conversations about the brands we support and the cost of fast fashion.
You would think that a successful exposé on brands like Brandy Melville would likely cause a decrease in the store’s popularity, but the opposite occurred. Sales for the department store ironically increased, showing the problem with this approach to combating fast fashion; rather than hurting the brand, the documentary provided it publicity, which turned into success. It is obvious that people do not care about the wrongdoings of the fast fashion industry if it means they can participate in the newest trend at low prices. Brandy Melville is successful because they sell clothing that is trendy and cheap, not because they are ethical.
Here is the problem. Fast fashion is convenient; it’s time to make it inconvenient. Without an economic or legal incentive, these brands will not face pressure from consumers, and they will not change their practices. Likewise, without incentives more compelling than morality, consumers will not stop the demand for fast fashion. It is time that governments all around the world, but especially in developed nations, implement environmental standards to mitigate the practice of fast fashion, as well as taxes on these companies. Most of the major department stores have conveniently made their production plants in countries with weak labor and environmental standards, limiting the effect that legal attacks can have on bringing down brands, but it is not impossible. Implementing import taxes, increased sales taxes, and stricter environmental safety laws as well as prioritizing fair labor practices in trade are just a few examples of how governments can incentivize department stores to change harmful practices. It is time to put pressure on the complacent governments that have the ability to topple fast fashion.
