The way we dress means something very different to each person: fashion is what conveys signals of culture, sexuality, identity, and even religious beliefs to those around us. Yet despite this diversity, in the twenty-first century, the pattern in which we, as a collective society, consume clothes forms a common pattern of overconsumption: regardless of the unique style of an individual wardrobe, in the twenty-first century, the vast majority of people have been influenced into an upward trend of overconsumption by the media and the spread of fast fashion culture.

The Design of the Fashion Industry

Prior to the 21st century, the fashion industry was segregated on the basis of class and financial status. Although clothing was used as a means of conveying one’s status, one’s exterior presentation was not entirely a choice, because the affordability of certain brands was reserved only for those who could afford ethically made, high-quality clothing. Large companies such as Prada, Gucci, and Miumiu changed their collections seasonally, yet despite the large selection of styles, the high prices of accessories deterred an overconsumption crisis. These designer brands were catering to a minuscule demographic of elites. Clothing that was available to members of the middle and lower classes did change occasionally, but unless an individual had some degree of disposable income, they were not invited into the leisure culture of changing their style with the change of the seasons.

The first period in history where the rise of — so-called “fast fashion” could really be observed as a notable movement was in the mid-2000’s to the early 2010s. Prior to this period, the lower and middle classes relied heavily on outlet stores, where they could purchase stock clothing that was heavily generic and showed little variation from season to season. Companies like H&M and Gap catered to people outside of the upper class by providing them with stylish necessities at prices that were affordable in comparison with elite, artisan fashion brands. But this new variability of affordability within the fashion industry created a very obvious social class difference, where the availability of clothing as an artistic expression of one’s personality was reserved for the wealthy. There was still no leeway for people outside of this category to participate in the art of fashion. This problem of class division within the fashion industry could only be solved through innovation, and that innovation was fast fashion.

Globalization gave small fashion brands the ability to easily take advantage of international trade, and use cheap overseas labourers to quickly produce products for non-wealthy consumers. After being deprived of access to the industry for so many years, people in lower socioeconomic status brackets began spending large amounts of their incomes on large quantities of clothing and accessories. Companies like H&M, Forever 21, Ali Express, and now newer online companies such as Shein and Fashonnova, gave customers the ability to buy record-breaking amounts of products for historically low prices.

Fast fashion changed the purchasing patterns of the general population, but more importantly, it influenced how corporations interacted in the market. Consumption levels are higher than they have ever been in history, and many consumers now expect the low prices that they pay for cheap products made by unpaid labourers overseas to be the standard prices for ethically made products as well. This leads to the problem of small businesses losing revenue to companies like Shein, who rely on cheap labour and materials

This transition from classist fashion to the democratization of fashion may pose an abundance of ethical, health, and environmental risks, yet sales are skyrocketing at historically high rates. The fast fashion business model is deemed democratic because it responds almost immediately to the demands of consumers. Products are inexpensive and of cheap quality; but this is because they are not designed to last, but only to be bought. Because of the inexpensive nature of fast fashion, new products filling new trends are readily available in short periods of time: a season of styles is no longer lasting three months before new collections are on the market. Rather, the combination of a constant bombardment of online media marketing and unethical labour overseas, allows companies to publish hundreds of new clothing items every few weeks. This, and carefully stargazed marketing is designed to increase the consumers’ hunger for more, and increase the rate at which they purchase, in addition to the amount that is purchased per order. It’s impossible to sell ethically made products at such low prices, which is why when you purchase a dress for as low as $5 from a company like Fashionova, you can guarantee that it was made by a labourer who was severely underpaid. From a western marketing perspective, this manufacturing behaviour makes fast fashion companies a superior business model that cannot be rivalled, because for other companies to still generate a profit while competing, they cannot pay their employees' fair wages.

Marketing, Pandering, and Consumer Behaviour

The business model of fast fashion was not designed for the wealthy, who already had access to ethical, “slow fashion.” Fast fashion was marketed as a protest in opposition to the traditional fashion industries. It made being “trendy” and “chic” affordable and accessible to those who were inherently excluded from the fashion market, which is why it was so easily sold as a movement of empowerment to minimize the gaps between social classes. But the reality is that the fast fashion model is just an extremely successful example of big corporations taking advantage of the poor and disenfranchised to maximize their profit at unimaginably high levels. It’s ironic, really, that these companies target poorer people to consume products made by the poorest and most disenfranchised people on the planet.

Companies utilizing the fast fashion business model purposely pander to underprivileged westerners, particularly in North America, because they are aware that in order to keep up with the fashion scene, there is no alternative but to purchase from fast fashion companies. But for a moment, let’s be very honest; fashion is not a necessity for a person’s livelihood, and the majority of the western population can indeed afford to make sustainable, long-lasting purchases if they were willing to sacrifice their addiction to over-consuming cheap and trendy goods. Of course, fashion corporations are aware of this, which is why they invest large sums into marketing new products, while diversifying their merchandise to appeal to a wider range of consumers. In our modern, online era potential customers are constantly bombarded by numerous advertisements a day each time they are active online. And these marketing strategies have proven to be immensely effective judging by the growing amount of buyers that are lured to companies like Shein, Fashionova, Ali Express, and more each month.

Environmental and Ethical Concerns

In addition to customer over-consumption, the environmental and ethical concerns risen by the fast fashion industry are also significant. As already noted, in order to price clothing garments at the historically low prices offered by fast fashion companies, it is not possible to pay labourers fair wages while still making a profit. To avoid ethics lawsuits in western nations, fast fashion companies use the international trade market as a legal loophole: these companies have their products manufactured in poorer, developing nations like Bangladesh, Pakistan, and China, where it is legal to pay workers unliveable wages for their labour. The items made overseas are then shipped through their clothing brand to the consumer, leaving the clothing brand with the majority of the profit. Meanwhile, the labourers are often paid minuscule percentages of the value of a garment for their wage. To the naive consumer, the growing purchasing of items from fast fashion companies is the very thing that perpetuates unpaid labour and modern slavery. While it is true that in many developing nations these practices are legal, these unethical practices are sustained because many developing nations rely on GDP generated by foreign, predominantly western, consumption. Ending such practices cannot be a responsibility simply thrust upon international human rights advocates, because as long as unpaid labour is financially supported and proven efficient, it will remain at large.

Dr. Patsy Perry of Manchester University and an international group of colleagues determined that the globalist nature of the fast fashion industry means that clothes (and other products) are shipped around the globe multiple times before they are even completed and ready to be sold. The research team indicated that an estimate of 3% of garment transportation shifted from ship to air cargo and that this practice results in over 100% more carbon emissions than if the garments had been transported by ship only. So, why don’t these companies take this fact into consideration, and change their practice to protect the environment? The answer is very simple: the industry is called “fast fashion” because it is fast, and eliminating air transport would delay the manufacturing process, delaying the rate at which consumers could receive their products as a result.

The international research team also indicated that fast fashion companies consume unnecessarily large amounts of water while emitting huge amounts of carbon dioxide, textile waste, and other harmful chemicals. The chemicals that are used in the manufacturing process and in the design of the clothing products themselves aren’t only harmful to the environment, but also to the labourers making the clothes, and the customers who wear the clothes. An example of this would be that in Canada, 38 products from the clothing site “Shein” have been banned due to containing dangerously high amounts of lead.

Although we’ve already explored consumer behaviour in the fast fashion market, I’d like to revisit the topic in relation to how consumption patterns negatively impact the environment and the livelihood of labourers. A survey questionnaire asked 335 college-aged students about their consumption patterns in the fast fashion market. The results of the study showed that there was a positive relationship between fast fashion, overconsumption, over-disposing, and hoarding; as well as a negative relationship between fast fashion and participation in recycling. What this means is that young adults who purchase from fast fashion companies are more likely to buy excessive amounts of clothing than other demographics, as well as hoard unnecessary clothing that they may not even be using, and then throw out the clothes when they no longer want them, rather than recycle them. On the contrary, individuals making the majority of their purchases at alternative brands not following the fast fashion business model were found more likely to recycle their clothing and make purchases in alignment with what they needed, rather than what they wanted.

The consumer as an individual is the true holder of power in this industry: it is the valuable customers who give their money to these companies and sustain them in doing so. Even with the existence of fast fashion companies and their excessive marketing practices, consumers are not being forced to over-consume. It is an act of free will. Globally, consumers purchase 80 billion pieces of new clothing every year, equating to $1.2 trillion for the fashion industry. In addition to this, about 8 pounds of clothes per American per year are not kept for long-term usage, but disposed of, where they end up in landfills. This is a total of 3.8 billion pounds of clothing disposed of in landfills every year. Since many of these products are manufactured from artificial materials like polyester and nylon, they are also not biodegradable. These products are manufactured in developing nations, where, as we’ve already established, labourers work in hazardous conditions. The cheap materials used to make these clothes typically contain large amounts of dangerous chemicals, and workers have direct contact with the substances on a daily basis. The reality is that the health of overseas workers is being sacrificed in the name of cheap and fast production.

Roughly 90% of clothing sold in the United States is made with cotton or polyester, and the majority of clothing sold within this 90% is not what can be considered high fashion (which we can conclude falls under the remaining 10%). Being a synthetic textile that is created from oil, polyester has significant health impacts on public health and the environment while being manufactured. From a similar angle, cotton is derived from the cotton flower, therefore requiring large volumes of water to grow, and many toxic pesticides to protect it from invasive species. In other words, both organic and synthetic materials result in toxic waste bombarding workers and the surrounding environment, which is hazardous to communities residing in close proximity to manufacturing plants. But the toxic emissions do not end with the creation of the textiles: dyes are used to colour the textiles, and when wastewater is discharged into local water systems, metals and toxins are released into drinking water, impacting the health of animals, the ecosystem, and people.

Current Solutions

There are a number of procedures that fast fashion companies could take to have more ethical practices, such as limiting the number of natural resources that they consumed, developing recycling methods within their companies, and reducing the amount of synthetic, non-biodegradable fibre products. However, the implementation of sustainable practices into the production cycle would erase the efficiency that initially distinguished fast fashion companies from mass production outlets. Additionally, sustainable production also increases the prices that consumers had to pay for products of questionable quality. If the fast fashion industry chooses to adapt to ethical and environmental demands, the nature of fast fashion and what makes it appealing to the over-consuming culture of the modern era will be erased. The reality is that fast fashion is not compatible with the environment, ethics laws, or sustainability, and in order to fix the problem of overconsumption and waste, consumers must stop financially supporting fast fashion companies.

As a consumer, you must ask yourself: do you really need to buy 20 $5 t-shirts in every colour, when you could just purchase two or three in your most frequently worn shades? Do you need 20 pairs of shoes in every style in existence, or can you buy several high-quality shoes that can be dressed up or dressed down depending on your outfit? Do you need to follow social media fashion trends, or can you be equally, if not more presentable by maintaining your own unique style? If you only want to spend a range of $5–10 on a clothing item, why are you so opposed to visiting your local thrift store, borrowing an item from a friend, or purchasing a subscription to a clothing library?

In the modern capitalist market, companies maintain power and affluence through continued consumer support. If a company is partaking in practices that are harmful to our planet, our societies, or ourselves, in order to make a change, we the consumers need to reduce our consumption. Clothing is not strictly entertainment, and it is vital to the sustenance of the earth for consumers to begin acknowledging the impact that their purchasing patterns have on themselves, society, and the environment. Clothes are functional products. Sure, when you begin to value the quality and ethics of a product over its low price and trendiness, you will have to pay higher prices, but the reality is that these higher prices aren’t what drain your wallet, but rather, the toxic practice of over-consumption.

If you’re the type of person dead set on changing your wardrobe every month and don’t believe that reducing your carbon footprint is doable, there are still more sustainable alternatives to fast fashion industries. Collaborative consumption like clothing libraries or online trades are new alternatives for doing business, and can even be viewed as a critique of ownership-based consumption. These new business modules reduce the environmental impact of fashion by allowing clothing to be reused past the lifecycle that an individual consumer uses it for, and allowing customers to trade their items online amongst themselves. Back in 2014, collaborative consumption was a newer concept based on pre-21st century culture, and was described as “people coordinating the acquisition and distribution of a resource.”

Ending unethical business practices and lowing environmental pollution is not a responsibility that falls only to business owners, but also to consumers. It is ineffective to demand that the very businesses we support change their structure to create more ethical and sustainable practices, meanwhile rewarding these companies’ bad behaviour with billions of dollars of revenue. Collectively, we the consumers must begin to make our purchases selectively, wisely, and based most heavily on functionality rather than for entertainment. The consumers are the entity from which big corporations thrive: they exist to meet our demands, so in order to change the nature of their existence, we must change our demands.

Sources

Anguelov, N. (2021). The dirty side of the garment industry: Fast Fashion and its negative impact on environment and Society. CRC Press.

Niinimäki, K., Peters, G., Dahlbo, H. et al. The environmental price of fast fashion. Nat Rev Earth Environ 1, 189–200 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-020-0039-9

Bick, R., Halsey, E. & Ekenga, C.C. The global environmental injustice of fast fashion. Environ Health 17, 92 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-018-0433-7

Zamani, B., Sandin, G., & Peters, G. M. (2017, June 18). Life cycle assessment of clothing libraries: Can collaborative consumption reduce the environmental impact of fast fashion? Journal of Cleaner Production. Retrieved December 29, 2021, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652617312982?casa_token=we8HdmU9LJEAAAAA%3ACpbBnfrT-ctsA2DBMvNBRQn7i9Y1fUT46Dzi_y85ZOjPJeHjR4lcJSZJlFh60LpXKiy4QklPhQ

Davis, N. (2020, April 7). Fast fashion speeding toward environmental disaster, report warns. The Guardian. Retrieved December 28, 2021, from https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2020/apr/07/fast-fashion-speeding-toward-environmental-disaster-report-warns

Cowley, J., Matteis, S., & Agro, C. (2021, October 1). Experts warn of high levels of chemicals in clothes by some fast-fashion retailers | CBC News. CBCnews. Retrieved December 29, 2021, from https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/marketplace-fast-fashion-chemicals-1.6193385