Hi everyone! This post will be slightly different from those that I have initially planned for Chapter 2. In this week’s seminar, Prof Taylor shared about “Luxury Pollution” and fast fashion was raised as a pertinent example. Since my blog focuses on the fast fashion industry, I would like to take this opportunity to pen down some thoughts and takeaways from the lecture.

At first glance, I took “luxury consumption” as what it meant literally – the consumption of luxury goods. However, contextualising this to the fast fashion industry and pollution, the word “luxury” contains undertones of purchasing more than what you need (i.e non-essential consumption). In doing so, this “denies essential consumption to others, while causing pollution that can be regarded as unnecessary [or] avoidable”. This “luxury pollution” or “luxury consumption” is often undertaken by the affluent and from the seminar, we saw how economic growth in countries is tied to consumerism. This further widens the divide between the haves and have-nots, especially since globalisation has distanced these affluent consumers from the social and environmental costs of their consumption. Drawing back to the fast fashion industry, one reason why the industry has not been “cancelled” may be due to the apathy of consumers to the impacts of their consumption habits. Even if they are cognizant of the detrimental impacts of the fast fashion industry, demand for clothes remains high as the impacts remain invisible to the consumers’ eye. For example, in an earlier post, I discussed how there have been social implications in the expansion of cotton monoculture such as forced labour in Uzbekistan and exposure to carcinogenic dust due to the desiccation of the Aral Sea. These social impacts remain far removed from consumers in the Global North who still purchase clothes made from Uzbek cotton.

Consumerism is closely linked to negative impacts on the environment and society, but there are still ways we can embrace more “virtuous” forms of consumption, as mentioned by Prof Taylor during the seminar. How can we decouple resource consumption from well-being or quality of life, and move towards more virtuous consumption? Applying a theoretical concept from Raworth (2017), this can be done by identifying a safe space for humanity to operate (i.e. applying the social doughnut concept and living within sustainable boundaries). However, on a more practical level, how can we apply Raworth’s concept? How can we define the boundaries of a safe space and are these boundaries static? While this may not help define boundaries, I think one way I can visualise this “safe space” better is to adopt new narratives or paradigms in the fashion industry – moving towards a circular economy instead of a linear one. I’ve previously written about this concept in a blog post in Chapter 1. As consumers, we can support the circular economy by purchasing from sustainable and ethical brands, revamping old clothes into new ones, or repurposing the fabrics – we need to be conscious consumers / buyers! That said, there may be some inertia on the consumers’ end to turn away from the allures of the fast fashion industry – how can we encourage more sustainable consumption habits? Should there be more regulations for the fashion industry – more stringent labour laws and environmental standards?

In the next post, I will discuss the “True Cost” documentary and pen some of my thoughts too. Until then, let’s keep running away from fast fashion!

Cheers,

Chermaine