Green is the New Black
- Marnie Cooper
- Jun 3, 2024
- 11 min read
Updated: Jun 25
At the heart of the fashion industry lies a fundamental dichotomy between fast fashion and slow fashion. While fast fashion aims to produce as cheaply and quickly as possible leaving a wake of disposable waste from inefficiencies, slow fashion represents a counter movement rooted in the idea that quality outweighs quantity and will stand the test of time.
The rapid production-to-market model of the apparel industry, known as fast
fashion, is often outsourced to undeveloped countries, leading to environmental harm and exploitative practices such as forced labor, hazardous working conditions, and poverty wages. Fast fashion provides consumers with immediate access to affordable trends through quick and inexpensive mass production of fashion trends but ignores the significant environmental and ethical implications, especially for people of color and women in marginalized communities with the where fast fashion is produced. Audrey Halim, in her undergraduate research paper for the University of California, points out how brands and consumers fast fashion choices “perpetuates environmental racism, particularly in sacrifice zones where marginalized communities bear the brunt of pollution and exploitation.” (Halim 2023). In contrast to fast fashion, there is a growing trend of slow fashion emphasizing quality over quantity particularly through sustainability and ethical production practices. Sustainable materials and fair labor practices is a necessary transition for the sustainability of marginalized communities working to produce fashion. The shift toward slow fashion with a circular supply chain in the fashion industry holds promise for improving conditions for marginalized communities and the environment by reducing waste and promoting fair labor practices.
Fast fashion refers to a business model characterized by the rapid production and mass-market distribution of inexpensive clothing to meet the latest trends. This approach relies on accelerated production cycles, with fashions designed, manufactured, and brought to market in just weeks of their initial concept. While it would be reassuring to believe that corporations universally prioritize ethical treatment of women and people of color in business practices, the reality is far from a uniformly accepted and practiced standard. To remain competitive apparel manufacturers must play the sourcing game and that means labor-and-materials become crucial components to the bottom line. These dynamic underlines an assumption that, in the pursuit of profits, ethical considerations may get the back burner to the economic considerations in the business of apparel manufacturing. Fast Fashion prioritizes immediacy and affordability in order to caterer to consumers need for novelty and instant gratification at the expense of disadvantaged communities. Emma Williams, a senior account executive for Amazon, LLC. points out in her scholarly analysis of fast fashion, “Cheap labor, cheap, materials, and cheap real estate are often found in developing countries where fast fashion is produced. The use of subcontractors and sweatshops allows fast fashion brands to minimize production costs and maximize profits.” (Williams 2022). However, this practice although beneficial for the brands and the consumers comes at a high price for the developing countries where fast fashion is produced and for the laborers who work in the unregulated conditions who are paying the unrecorded high price for fast fashion. In an article for the non-profit organization Advocating for California Garment workers Oquera declares “cut and sew factories receive orders from large manufacturers often working for big brands, who are willing to produce items for little pay and with unrealistic manufacturer deadlines.” (2022). The fashion brands reliance on women and people of color; paying minimal wages for their labor to maximize profit, the complex environmental and ethical issues embedded in the industries relentless and ruthless pursuit of speed and profit. The image in Fig. 1 showing people of color foraging around in piles of discarded fashions while fires burn in the background supports the claim that the rapid production-to-market model of the apparel industry, offering consumers immediate access to affordable trends, presents environmental consequences for the laborers, often people of color. As seen in the image both new and used clothes are shipped from Europe and China to Kenya, where they are sold as second-hand clothing, but a significant portion end up in landfills and waste disposal sites due to the large volume generated. People of color and women are affected by the waste coming from the production of fast fashion.
Abe Asher, a journalist whose reporting on politics, social movements, and climate change writes “Those who are exposed daily to hazardous chemicals in facilities, often unsafe with little or no ventilation, endure further exploitation through pay-by-piece policy.” (Asher 2023). One of the most pressing concerns is the environmental toll of fast fashion in developing countries, where people of color and women are often employed to produce garments for Western markets hungry for the latest trends at the lowest prices, without fully comprehending the implications for the individuals who reside in these communities and work to produce fast fashion. Professor Lin at the Chinese University of Hong writes in a research article, “The fast fashion production process involves the intensive use of water, energy, chemicals, leading to reduced natural resources, soil contamination, and pollution.” (Lin 2024). The disposal of unsold or discarded garments adds to the mounting problem of textile waste, with landfills overflowing and burn piles releasing harmful toxins into the atmosphere. In addition to environmental factors affecting these communities, the unfair and relaxed labor practices of an unchecked labor market is subject to exploitation and dangerous working conditions. In a research paper published on the National Library of Medicine, Singh and Khalsa report “Thousands of workers are engaged in textile industry worldwide. Textile industry involves the use of different kinds of dyes which are known to possess carcinogenic properties. Solvents used in these industries are also associated with different health related hazards including cancer.” (Singh 2016). The pressure to meet fast turn around and compete with other subcontractors for the jobs at the lowest price leaves workers with increased exposure to detrimental health risks in poor working conditions. The corporate entities driving the immediate design-to-door product life cycle operate from luxury design offices, shielded from the harsh daily realities of manufacturing conditions. In ivory towers of self-interest and profit-driven motives, these entities implement policies and practices that not only perpetuate environmental injustices but also disproportionally impact disadvantaged communities, particularly people of color.
Environmental racism means marginalized communities, particularly people of color, low income, many of whom are women working and raising children, bear the environmental consequences of corporate profits. Artist, writer, and activists A. Flower Halim writes in their well published article, “The Nature of Environmental Racism and Sacrifice Zones”,
“These communities often find themselves in sacrifice zones, areas designated from industrial activities such as garment production and waste disposal. These zones, characterized by high levels of pollution and limited access to resources, like clean water, green spaces, or infostructure, become dumping sites for textile factories, landfills for second-hand clothes, or toxic chemical waste.” (Halim 2023).
The placement of manufacturing sites for fast fashion primarily in minority communities perpetuates environmental racism and the colonialism that facilitates these decisions. Francine Vito, a sustainable fashion blogger, writes, “Institutional racism is the reason why people of color don’t have the same access to opportunities and power in decision making, resulting in these groups having lower incomes, less social mobility, and higher exposure to health hazards and toxins.” (Vito 2023). Environmental racism within the fashion industry underscores the urgent need for sustainable fashion practices that prioritize ethical considerations and empower the needs of these vulnerable communities. Residents and workers in these communities face significant health risks, including respiratory infections, skin conditions, and reproductive disorders due to the hazardous pollutants present in their environment. The presence of such pollutants also leads to a decrease in property values and economic opportunities, compounding the challenges faced by these communities. Isabella Berto of the University of Venice in Italy points out the disparity between “the luxury design offices where corporate entities oversee the fast fashion production process and the harsh realities experienced by manufacturing workers”, emphasizing the detachment of decision-makers from the adverse effects of their practices on marginalized communities. (2022). From excessive waste generation, air pollution, unsafe working conditions, and exploitative labor practices, the negative impacts of fast fashion extend far beyond the allure of affordability and trend on demand.
At the heart of the fashion industry lies a fundamental dichotomy between fast fashion and slow fashion. While fast fashion aims to produce as cheaply and quickly as possible leaving a wake of disposable waste from inefficiencies, slow fashion represents a counter movement rooted in the idea that quality outweighs quantity and will stand the test of time, for example fair trade goods are often built to last. Sustainable fashion promotes the idea that the producer is as important as the product and works to provide ethical and environmentally stable practices that support the communities where they are produced by building niches in sustainable materials and reduce waste through innovations in design and manufacturing processes. By exploring into a greater understanding of this dichotomy in fashion, slow fashion comes out ahead with an alternative approach to clothing in a profound shift in values and priority for the industry.
Green practices lie at the core of the slow fashion movement, reflecting a commitment to environmental responsibility and sustainability. In contrast fast fashion although not a movement but a phenomenon within the fashion industry driving brands to engage in rapid production cycles, using cheap materials prioritizing profits over sustainability with a more for less mindset. Whieldon, et.al., who are sustainable analysts for S&P Global write, “According to the UN, it is responsible for about 20% of global wastewater,9% of the microplastics that end up in the ocean annually and as much as 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions every year.” (Whieldon 2023). In the race to keep up with ever- changing trends, fast fashion brands often disregard the environmental implications to the marginalized communities where it is produced leading to the fashion industry as one of the top three polluters on the planet. Rachel Brick, et.al., writes for Environmental Health on the topic of environmental justice that “Approximately 85% of clothing Americans consume, nearly 3.8 billion pounds annually, is sent to landfills as solid waste, amounting to nearly 80 pounds per American per year.” (Bick 2018). Conversely slow fashion emphasizes longevity of finished goods over trendiness and transparency in the product life cycle. By prioritizing sustainable materials, ethical production practices, and consumer awareness slow fashion seeks to minimize environmental impact, promote social justice, and foster a deeper connection between consumers and their clothing. While fast fashion offers affordability and nearly immediate trends, it comes at a steep cost to both the people and the planet, however slow fashion advocates for a green future for the fashion industry.
Consumer awareness not only drives demand for sustainable fashion but also brings to light the importance of fair-trade agreements and equitable policies. Fair trade agreements, also known as FTA’s, ensure that producers, particularly in developing countries, have equitable pay. Kanaji Rajpuk, an intellectual and technology lawyer specializing in fashion law writes, “FTAs work towards reducing or eliminating tariffs and trade barriers among member countries. This simplifies cross-border operations for fashion companies leading to cost savings, delivery times and improved market access.” (Rajpuk 2023). By supporting fair trade practices, consumers contribute to the empowerment of marginalized communities and support ethical practices within the fashion supply chain. “However, trade agreements can be hindered by tariffs on eco-friendly materials driving up the price of goods and making it more difficult for brands to choose sustainable materials.” (Rajpuk 2023). That being said brands and consumers advocating for fair trade agreements and trade policies on trade tariffs for sustainable materials is essential in creating a more sustainable and ethical fashion industry. The more consumers become more conscious and aware of how fair-trade agreements and equitable policies are interconnected with their fashion choices slow fashion will have a real chance to drive a new standard in fashion for quality over quantity and improve the environment and working conditions for people of color and women who work to produce fashion.
Developing countries, like India and Bangladesh where a majority of fast fashion is produced, have an opportunity to improve their economies, safeguard their environment, and support positive development with sustainable fashion practices and policies. “By embracing slow fashion developing countries can foster growth through green manufacturing jobs, niche industries, and developing eco-friendly materials.” (Lin 2024). The long-term environmental stability sustainable fashion practices provide the support and security marginalized communities of people of color and women need in order to grow and be healthy members of their communities.
An innovative approach to fashion production is circular fashion which minimizes waste and maximizes resources efficiently through the entire life cycle of a garment. Unlike the traditional linear model of fashion production which follows a line of make-use-waste supply chain, circular fashion is resourceful with an efficient use of materials and resources that supports regeneration. It focuses on designing fashion with a heritage mindset by using materials that are durable and construction techniques to enhance quality to last for generations. Circular fashion encourages sustainable practices, for example reuse and recycling, as is seen in the growing secondhand market, allowing fashion to be repurposed, reused, or repaired. According to Huang in a report for Frontiers in Business, Economics, and management, “The second-hand market is seen as a practice that can effectively contribute to the circular economy by extending the life of fashion items and reducing waste”. (Huang 2022). However, the rapid production pace of fast fashion often impedes its transition to the secondhand market. Items are churned out at such a rapid pace they do not have time to reach the secondhand market and end up in landfills or clogging water ways. According to the Fast Fashion Global Market Report “The global fast fashion market will grow from $106.42 billion in 2022 to $122.98 billion in 2023 at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 15.6%”. (P.R. 2023). Despite the efforts to divert clothing from landfills through donation or recycling programs, the sheer volume of fast fashion, poses a substantial challenge to achieving a truly circular fashion economy. Encouraging quality over quantity is critical in the transitioning towards a circular fashion model and closing the loop on fashion production and consumption.
The current fashion production model is to produce high volumes of fashion trends to market as quickly as possible for the lowest possible price. The fast fashion model is responsible for generating an enormous amount of waste and pollution that is affecting people of color and women in the developing countries where fast fashion is being produced. As the current fashion production model prioritizes rapid production of trends at the lowest cost, fast fashion continues an unsustainable cycle, disproportionately impacting people of color and women in developing countries where it is produced, further exhausting resources and degrading the environment in these communities. It could be said that it’s a “rite of passage” for developing countries to make the leap to become industrialized as many countries have in the past. (Williams 2022). However, The short term gain in profits and economic growth is incomparable to the long term devastation these countries and communities will have to bear with the destruction of their natural resources, the inhuman treatment of their laborers, and the long term health effects from toxic chemicals and hazardous pollutants. By adopting fair trade agreements that enforce ethical practices and support policies that favor sustainable materials, developing countries have an opportunity to regenerate and contribute to produce slow fashion.
In conclusion the transition from fast fashion to slow fashion is a necessary next step to thwart environmental racism and turn the tide on the consequences in these marginalized communities where fashion is produced. It is collectively up to the consumer to declare ‘green is the new black’ and demand sustainable fashions, the brands to respond responsibly with transparency, and the policymakers in these countries to adopt fair trade agreements that support eco-friendly materials and practices. The collective actions of all will secure a greener future for fashion that is not only sustainable but is also socially responsible.
Works Cited
Asher, A. (2023). Los Angeles’s Garment District Is Still Home to Severe Exploitation.
Berto, Isabella. (2022). The Phenomenon of Environmental Justice Within the Textile and Apparel
Industries in Southeast Asia.
Bick, R., Halsey, E., & Ekenga, C. C. (2018). The Global Environmental Injustice of Fast Fashion.
Environmental health: a Global Access Science Source, 17(1), 92.
Halim, A. (2023). The Nature of Environmental Racism and Sacrifice Zones.
Huang, X. (2022). “How Is Fashion Going: Structured Literature Review for Circular Economy in Fashion and
Textile Industry”. Frontiers in Business, Economics and Management, vol. 3, no. 3, 2022, ISSN:
2766-824X.
Lin, Y. (2024). Blame and Responsibility Assignments in Fast Fashion-Triggered Environmental
Injustice: A Case Study of Eco-Documentaries. Environmental Communication, 1-21.
P.R. Newswire. (2023).17. Feb. Fast Fashion Global Market Report. P.R. Newswire.
301749153.html
Singh, Z. & Chadha, P. (2020). “Textile Industry and Occupational Cancer”. National Medical Library.
Published online 2016 Aug 15. doi: 10.1186/s12995-016-0128-3.
Rajpuk.T. (2023) Tarrifs, Taxes, and Textiles: Understanding the Impact of Trade Policies on Global
Fashion Supply Chains. Fashion Law Journal.
Vito, F. (2023). Environmental racism and colonialism in fashion.
Whieldon, E., Costello, L., & Rossi, S. (2023). Fast on fashion slow on sustainability: Clothing
companies and the circular economy.
companies-and-the-circular-economy
Williams, Emma. (2022). Appalling or advantageous? Exploring the Impacts of Fast Fashion from
Environmental, Social, and Economic Perspectives,13.1.
Comments