Economic, Social And Environmental Implications Of Fast Fashion
Fashion shoppers spent about £3. 5 billion on Christmas party clothing this year but 8 million of those sparkly items will be on their way to landfill after just one wear. In a world of accelerating demand for apparel, people have a huge desire for new clothing after wearing garments only a few times. Nowadays, business models are made on the premise of “Fast Fashion”, producing trendy clothing quickly and are cheaply available to consumers. Fast fashion brands such as H&M and Zara produce new clothing at a much faster rate, releasing a new season in every 2 weeks, compared to the conventional seasons by traditional fashion houses, in order to respond to the latest trends. This linear fashion habit of purchasing, wearing and quickly discarding garments, delivers negative economic, social and environmental implications to the world. Therefore, when it comes to Fast Fashion, the society must have a mixed economic system, which involves both the people and the government to receive the best outcomes in terms of economic growth, human development and environmental preservation. In order to allocate finite resources and to meet the needs of its people, societies have three basic economic questions to be answered: What products should be made and how much of each should be produced, how it is produced and for whom it is produced. Fast fashion garments are mass-produced in large manufacturing plants around the globe. Brands decide to release more fashion styles, however only limited quantity of each garment is produced to alert shoppers that they might miss their chance of not buying something earlier because new stock is arriving in a few days. This idea is pioneered by a brand called Zara to increase their sales.
The production of garments lie predominantly on synthetic fiber including nylon and polyester, which cost far less compared to natural fiber. Low quality fabrics are used to make clothes degrade faster, hence encouraging people to keep buying more. Moreover, labor plays an important role in terms of meeting large production quotas. These garments are manufactured in developing countries such as India and Cambodia where population size is large and jobs are in high demand. The idea of Fast Fashion increases the number of people who are able to get the products and prioritizes fairness instead of wealth because through Fast Fashion, everyone has access to runway trends and look-alike designer goods at an inexpensive cost. The production of Fast Fashion clothing has affected the planet and its people negatively. In Punjab, India, decades of overuse of pesticides in the cotton production have resulted in slow accumulation of toxins, which are contributing to health problems in rural communities. Due to this reason, a large number of young children in Punjab are born with mental and health disabilities (Morgan, True Cost). Recent attempts have been made to change the current situation and one of which is the rise of ethical brands. Ethical brands are brands that source their products from ethical factories and sources. Kotn is a sustainable brand that produces clothing with “Organic Labels” to ensure that the garment is more than 95% organic. They make use of natural fabrics, naturally-derived or plant-based fibers, such as hemp, organic cotton, linen and more. These fibers break down easily, therefore compostable. Furthermore, ethical brands defend fair wages, working conditions and workers’ rights. People Tree is an ethical brand that has a “Craft Mark”, which celebrates crafts including hand knitting and hand embroidery, thus providing employment for people in developing countries at 30 percent higher prices. Ethical brands encourage slower production schedules. For this reason, they manufacture garments that are out-of-trend, producing one of a kind or minimalist looks.
Despite being out of trend, these brands cover a range of issues such as working conditions, fair trade and sustainable production. When it comes to fast fashion, societies need to be in the middle of the economic continuum, where free markets and government intervention coexist, in order to reduce negative implications of Fast Fashion. In the fashion industry, large companies merge for the maximization of profit from their products and reduce competition from smaller companies. Economically, the government aids in increasing economic growth by ensuring the success of new small businesses start-ups because these businesses contribute to local economies by bringing growth and innovation to the community. Further, government intervention help preserve the environment by creating environmental regulation, making sure that garment industries are responsible for the toxic waste that they produce. Additionally, human right abuses occur in sweatshops. In India, women are physically abused (pushed to the floor, punched, hit on the breast) for not meeting production quotas. They are being paid very low, $12 a month and working thirteen hours a day with no breaks. Thus, there must be government intervention to regulate minimum wages, to prevent workplace violence and to assure safe and healthful working conditions for workers. To conclude, the government has a crucial role in the market economy by controlling the production of private sectors and making sure that industries abide by the law. Environmental regulations are made by the government to help protect the environment as well as reducing risks to worker health and safety.
The government protect the rights of workers by regulating wage and retirement plans, yet societies are still given enough freedom for fashion designers and startup companies to grow. Therefore, in terms of Fast Fashion, societies must have mixed economic system to develop better economic growth, human development and environmental preservation.
