Dissertation 19/20 by Chloe Palmer

Chloe Palmer

An investigation into how fast fashion brands use sustainability as a marketing strategy

Figure 1: Stella McCartney Winter 2017 Campaign (Harley Weir, 2017)

BA (Hons) Fashion Media and Marketing 2019 - 2020

Submission declaration

An investigation into how fast fashion brands use sustainability as a marketing strategy

Submitted by CHLOE PALMER to Plymouth College of Art as a research project towards the degree of BA (Hons) FASHION MEDIA AND MARKETING 2019-20. I certify that all material in this research project which is not my own work has been identified and that the final word count from introduction through to conclusion is 6328 words.

SIGN HERE………………………….................................................................... 2

Abstract With the current state of the environment declining, the fashion industry is now becoming more in demand than ever to be more sustainable and ethical. This dissertation will explore how the fashion industry is having a negative effect on the environment as well as the sustainable practices fast fashion brands currently have in place and how they are promoting them, whether it presents the brand in a positive light or not. The main fashion brands investigated are: H&M, Missguided and Reformation. As sustainability is not limited to just environment itself but also the treatment of workers, this paper has investigated the conditions of these brands workers and whether it is satisfactory in terms of laws.

Greenwashing is another issue within the fashion industry. This paper will explore whether brands are genuinely green or could be playing themselves up to compete with their competitors. Whether itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s a complete lie or brands are simply leaving certain information out, with sustainable practices starting to be an expectation for fashion brands, could this tempt them to greenwash? How consumers can identify whether a brand is greenwashing is also explored and whether this will encourage more fashion brands to be more transparent.

In order to become more sustainable fashion brands are beginning to resource more recycled materials including organic cotton and recycled plastic. This dissertation has researched into clothing retailers; Leviâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, Patagonia and TALA to explore the technologies and resources they use to make their products and whether recycled or upcycled products really have a positive effect on the environment and within the industry and how these resources and technologies could be used industry wide.

List of Contents

Abstract

List of Contents

List of Illustrations

Acknowledgements

Introduction

Chapter 1: Fast Fashion

Chapter 2: Greenwashing

Chapter 3: Current Technologies

Conclusion

References

List of Illustrations Figure 1: Weir, H., (2017). Stella McCartney Winter 2017 Campaign.[Online]. Available at https://www.stellamccartney.com/experience/en/discover-the-winter-2017-cam paign/[Accessed on 31/01/2020 at 23:13]

Figure 2: H&M Group., (2020). Screenshot from H&M Group’s Sustainability website. [Online]. Available at https://hmgroup.com/sustainability/people.html. [Accessed on 29/01/2020 at 11:47]

Figure 3: Missguided., (2019). £1 bikini campaign. [Online] Available at https://fashionunited.uk/news/retail/missguided-faces-backlash-against-1-pou nd-bikini/2019061943784. [Accessed on 24/01/2020 at 13:18]

Figure 4: UK Government., (2019). Screenshot of National Minimum Wage. [Online]. Available at https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates. [Accessed on 26/01/2020 at 12:32]

Figure 5: Reformation., (2020). Screenshot of Reformation’s Climate Credit categories. [Online]. Available at https://www.thereformation.com/categories/climate-credits. [Accessed on 31/01/2020 at 15:52]

Figure 6: Patagonia., (2020). Screenshot of Patagonia’s Materials and Technologies website.[Online]. Available at https://www.patagonia.com/materials-tech.html. [Accessed on 30/01/2020 at 11:14] Figure 7: wearetala Instagram., (2019). TALA ‘Form’ Instagram campaign. [Online]. Available at https://www.instagram.com/p/B6Idrxrpy8y/. [Accessed on 31/01/2020 at 20:04].

Figure 8: Everlane., (2018). ReNew campaign.[Online]. Available at https://www.everlane.com/renew. [Accessed on 30/01/2020 at 20:35]

Acknowledgements

Firstly, I would like to thank Alanna Morgan for her endless help and support throughout this dissertation, from finding helpful articles to answering my never ending questions, thank you. Alongside Kirsty Smith for sending me motivational GIFs and emails everyday to keep me motivated. Secondly, thanks to my parents for their endless support during my entire degree and to my brother, Alex for taking the time to proofread and help me with this dissertation.

Introduction

As of 2020, the state of the environment is rapidly declining and the clothing and textile industry is the second biggest polluter in the world behind oil (McFall-Johnsen, 2019). Therefore, sustainability is becoming more prominent and important within the fashion industry and more fashion brands are starting to take actions to become more sustainable and ethical. This dissertation will investigate how fashion brands use sustainable practices and ethics to positively promote and market their products as well as the brand itself. Moreover, this paper will look at the current technologies brands are using, what actions brands are taking to become more sustainable and how fashion brands are promoting their ethical movements to their consumers and influencing purchasing decisions.

Sustainability within the fashion industry is not limited to the environmental impacts of the products being made and consumed, it also includes the treatment of employees and their working environment. The United States Department of Labour states that “Organizations cannot be sustainable without protecting the safety, health and welfare of their most vital resource: workers.” (United States Department of Labour, 2017). This paper will explore what brands choose to publicise and communicate to their consumers and competitors about how their workers are treated and discuss their working conditions and the impact this has.

However, the fashion industry is not entirely to blame for the negative impacts it is having on the environment, consumers play a big part in the number of fashion products consumed and what happens to them when they are no longer serving their purpose. This dissertation will look into consumer behaviours, their views on sustainability within the fashion industry and

whether brands being sustainable and ethical has an effect on the consumer’s choice to shop with those brands.

In chapter one, this dissertation will explore how and why the fashion industry is having a negative effect on the environment, looking specifically at plastic pollution, carbon emissions and water waste. Alongside this, the essay will look into how fast fashion brand H&M have become renowned for being sustainable and ethical and will investigate whether the practices they have in place are really sustainable and innovating the fashion industry. In addition, this chapter will investigate the consumer reaction to Missguided’s ‘£1 bikini’, the motives behind this strategy and the ethical repercussions of this product.

Chapter two will investigate the benefits greenwashing brings to fast fashion brands and their promotional strategies as well as how it can be identified. Furthermore, the chapter will explore how greenwashing is unethical and the effects it has on consumers. The main focus of this chapter will be on how fashion brands H&M and Reformation promote their sustainable practices.

Chapter three will explore the different technologies and innovations brands are employing to make their brand more sustainable and ethical and how the sharing of these technologies could have a positive impact on the fashion industry and the environment. This chapter will look at brands Levi’s, Patagonia and TALA to explore their different initiatives and how they can progress further within the fashion industry. Additionally, the materials that negatively affect the environment and how their sustainable alternatives positively contribute to the fashion industry will be investigated.

Chapter 1: Fast Fashion

The aim of fast fashion is to provide up to date trends and products to consumers at a low price as quickly as possible which causes concerns on the environment as shortcuts are having to be made by the brands in order to do so. Fast fashion brand Missguided’s CEO, Nitin Passi, supports this definition by stating “Speed is our main USP”. The fashion industry is criticised for increasing levels of textile waste, the use of toxic chemicals, water pollution and their negative impact on the environment.

In recent years, most fashion brands have been working towards becoming more ethical and sustainable. From cutting down plastic usage to investigating new sustainable materials, any small step is a step in the right direction to helping the environment. High street retailer, H&M, is one fashion brand that has become the most renowned for being open and transparent about their sustainable and ethical practices. Their website has in-depth information about the innovations and practices that are currently taking place at H&M Group, along with the working conditions of their employees and it educates the consumer on how they can be more sustainable. For example, it states: “95% of cotton and 57% of all materials H&M use are either recycled or sustainably sourced” (H&M Group, 2018). By being transparent with their consumers, they are able to build trust and an honest reputation but are also able to encourage and lead their market into following the same actions they are taking to build and innovate a more ethical and sustainable fashion industry. H&M has also implemented innovations including a recycling system, where consumers can bring in old clothing and textiles in exchange for a voucher. Brands use this incentive in the hope that it will give the consumer the will and motivation to recycle their old clothing rather than just throw it away as well as guaranteeing repeat custom with a small discount. In 2018,

H&M collected 20,649 tonnes of textiles for reuse and recycling through this innovation which equates to 103 million t-shirts (H&M Group, 2019).

Figure 2: Screenshot from H&M Group’s Sustainability page on their website. (H&M Group, 2020)

Furthermore, sustainability can also be applied to the treatment and working conditions of employees. H&M are open with their consumers about the working conditions of their textile workers, explaining the living wage and how they implement it and their business rights. Within H&M’s yearly sustainability report, they inform the reader of goals that have been set and achieved within the previous year and explain how this goal has been achieved. However, the information provided is not as transparent as other information H&M Group have provided about other aspects of sustainability. H&M are broad with their information and do not provide precise or exact data. H&M Group works with 655 factories and 930,000 textile workers around the world (H&M Group, 2019). By working with a large number of different factories and workers could mean that H&M Group is not able to provide consumers with the exact and precise information because it may not be known to them or could be too broad and complex to explain and provide information on so many different workers and working conditions. H&M claims they are careful and efficient

with who they choose to work with and have even gone as far as to produce a “Sustainability Commitment”. H&M Group produced this commitment to make sure the factories and supply chains they choose to work with follow the requirements that H&M Group require, in relation to the treatment of their employees and their working conditions. This report allows H&M to be transparent and honest with their consumers whilst being able to clearly state their minimal working requirements for their supply chains.

Annually, since 2001, H&M release a sustainability report which provides readers with key information about the brands economic, environmental and social impacts caused by their everyday activities. H&M also promote their achievements of the year and their future goals around the subject. Issuing a sustainability report is not compulsory, however, H&M Group has decided to do so, the sustainability report provides their consumers with transparency and is an accessible platform for consumers to educate themselves and understand the innovations and practices H&M Group have in place. The sustainability report is presented corporately and professionally which may be intimidating for consumers to read. This could question the motives behind why H&M produce a sustainability report. By releasing a report in the first place when it is not a requirement within the industry, could portray to consumers that the brand is going above and beyond to show their efforts within sustainability and the environment. Although it is known that H&M is a sustainable and ethical clothing brand, it is not necessarily clear to what extent they are sustainable and ethical. In 2017, it was reported that “91% of consumers would agree to the legal terms and conditions without reading them” (Cakebread, 2017). The likelihood of a consumer actually reading the 109-page report is therefore unlikely, which could be a known fact to H&M, which is why they could be perceived by consumers to be more sustainable and ethical than they actually are. With other fast fashion brands like Pretty Little Thing not stating any sustainable practices, this puts H&M in a better light to be portrayed as a more sustainable fast fashion brand. In order to help

consumers have a clear understanding about how ethical a brand is, a minimum requirement should be in place for all fashion brands to explain and show their sustainable and ethical practices for consumers to view. In 2018, trend forecasting website LSN interviewed Fashion Institute of Technology psychology professor Doctor Daniel Benkendorf about how fashion brands can promote their sustainable practices, where he stated: “Websites are the perfect tool to enable the public to find out about sourcing, labour practices and the production stream while clearly telling the stories of the people who are involved in the processes.” (Benkendorf, 2018). If all fashion brands were to provide this information it could help consumers choose where to shop and help educate them about the sustainability of different brands without being misled.

The work fast fashion brands are doing will have little to no impact unless consumers educate themselves about the environmental state and how they can become more sustainable. Although brands like H&M provide consumers with this information in relation to their own brand, they do so through a professional and corporate document which can be very long-winded for a consumer to read and take in. Despite H&M having the majority of the information presented on their website in an easy to read format for their consumers, it is down to the consumer themself to read and educate themselves about the brand’s values, ethics and movements. Ideally, the consumer should educate themselves about the brands they are buying from and about the current state of the environment and how the fashion industry is impacting it, and what the consumer can do to contribute to helping the planet. However, this could be challenging for the consumer as reliable educational resources and information are not always accessible to them.

In regards to minimal requirements, some brands and institutions have taken radical actions to achieve sustainability goals. An example of this is Copenhagen Fashion Week, in January 2020 they set brands minimal

requirements in terms of a scoring system in order to be able to showcase at the fashion week. The points were obtained through interlinked focus areas; strategic direction, design, smart material choices, working conditions, consumer engagement and shows. Additionally, brands must also follow 17 requirements within these focus areas, including pledging not to destroy unsold clothes, using certified, organic, upcycled or recycled textiles in at least 50% of all collections, using sustainable packaging and zero waste set designs for the shows (Copenhagen Fashion Week, 2020). By having these requirements in place, it encourages more brands to meet sustainability goals and think about more aspects of sustainability rather than just the material the clothing is made from. It could also make brands more motivated to be sustainable to be able to showcase at fashion week.

Although fast fashion brands are having a negative effect on the environment by providing cheap and unethically made clothing, it is the consumers that are purchasing from these brands who could also be contributing to the damage. “Disposing of clothing and household textiles costs the UK alone around £82 million a year,” according to a study by recycling charity Wrap (Butler, 2018). Recycling Charity Wrap also showed data from HMRC that “1,130,000 tonnes of clothing were purchased in 2016, which was an increase of almost 20,000 tonnes since 2012” (Wrap, 2017). Statistics like this have the capability to deceive

consumers,

using

large

quantities

and

imperceivable

measurements. Fashion Institute of Technology psychology professor, Doctor Daniel Benkendorf told LSN:

If you just tell people how many gallons of water they’re saving by buying an alternative product, that’s interesting, but if you can tell them the story of a person involved in the production process, that’s even more powerful. (Benkendorf, 2018)

By not providing perceivable measurements or contextualising units, consumers may not be as likely to be able to comprehend the point the brand or institution is trying to emphasise to them. Fast fashion can also be known as throw away fashion, due to consumers discarding the garments after minimal use as a result of their relatively low cost. “In the past 15 years, the average number of times a garment is worn before it fails to be used has decreased by 36%” (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2017). With so many fast fashion brands providing consumers with low-cost products, the concept is becoming familiar to consumers. This could potentially have a psychological effect on the consumers being that, because it is seen so often, consumers are not always recognising the negative effects of this fast and low-cost consumption.

Figure 3: Missguided £1 bikini campaign. (Missguided, 2019)

In the summer of 2019, fast fashion brand Missguided made the headlines with their £1 polyester two-piece bikini which was advertised during the ITV2 reality show, Love Island. All sizes of the bikini, from size 4-24 were selling out within 45 minutes after each restock. In defence to the negative conversation, CEO of Missguided, Nitin Passi released a statement via the fashion brands website, stating: 15

It cost us more to produce than 1 pound and we're absorbing the costs so we can offer it at an incredible price as a gift to our customers. There has been no compromise with this bikini - it is sourced to the same high standards as all of our other products. (Nitin Passi, 2019). If Missguided were not making a profit from the £1 bikini, then we could question the motives for the strategy in the first place. Although Missguided claim to not have made a profit from the £1 bikini alone, the strategy was a great marketing ploy. By advertising the £1 bikini during UK Love Island with an average viewing of 4 million in 2019 (ITV, 2019) and 43% of Love Island viewers being under the age of 30 (Smith, 2019) Missguided were able to approach their target audience directly. However, the price of the bikini is cheaper than Missguided’s delivery costs, which start from £2.99. By having the bikini as cheap as £1 and costing less than the delivery charges, this could encourage consumers to purchase more from the brand to justify the expenditure. This strategy could be seen to be encouraging consumers to overshop, by putting the product at such a low price point encourages consumers who could have 15 bikinis in their wardrobe to purchase the product when it is not needed. “The UK disposes of 350,000 tonnes of clothing into landfills every year” (Koyo and Schleeter, 2017). This statistic emphasises the severity of the issue surrounding overconsumption and the impact of throwaway fashion. Fast fashion brands offering clothing at such a low price somewhat removes the value of an item, which could lead it to be uncared for by the consumer, resulting in throwaway fashion.

However, it is not just the effects fast fashion has on the environment that is the issue. In order to be able to sell products at such a low cost, it is likely that fast fashion clothing is made by garment workers who are from poorer communities and paid below the living wage. Missguided, Boohoo and River Island are just a few of the fast fashion retailers who contract sweatshop labour practices in the United Kingdom. In parts of Leicester, garment workers are paid as little as £3.50 per hour (O’Connor, 2018). This presents a problem 16

in which, by contracting these cheap factories and underpaid workers, these fast fashion brands are exploiting these garments workers by being able to profit from selling products at an extremely low price point, which comes at the expense of the workers in terms of fair employment laws. Refer to Figure 4. Evidence shows these workers are being exploited because they can be made to believe they have very minimal options when it comes to employment. Many of the garment workers are from Eastern Europe or India and have very little understanding of the English language. Some employers could be taking advantage of this by making the workers believe they are doing them a favour by offering them skills they didn’t have before (O’Connor, 2018) .

Figure 4: Screenshot from UK Government website. (UK Government, 2019)

Having contracted factories within the United Kingdom, these fast fashion brands are able to produce and distribute new and on-trend garments as quickly as possible. The founder of the online retailer, Missguided, Nitin Passi stated “Speed is our main USP and the UK is as quick as you can get,” (Nitin Passi, 2014). This is an indication that, by having factories contracted in the UK, fast fashion brands, such as Missguided, are able to keep up with the demands of an increased turnaround for their products. This is a beneficial factor for the brands who rely on a heavy supply-demand basis as they are able to turn around products at a faster pace and avoid the implications around exporting of products from other countries. 17

Chapter 2: Greenwashing

As there is becoming an increasing demand for fashion brands to become more sustainable, the appeal for brands to exaggerate their sustainable and ethical practices and mislead their consumers could be more tempting for fashion brands. “Greenwashing is a term used to describe how a brand or company can make consumers believe that they’re doing more to protect the environment than they really are,” (Cambridge Dictionary, 2019). This can be done by making unsupported or misleading claims about the environmental benefits of a product or service. In regards to fashion, brands may do this by stating false information regarding how their products are made or what they are made from or by tweaking their own sustainability reports. According to a 2015 study, “66% of global consumers say they’re willing to pay more for sustainable brands” (Nielsen, 2015). As the environment becomes a bigger issue within the fashion industry, more brands may be feeling pressured by consumers to be more environmentally friendly, which could be causing brands to greenwash in order to boost the brand's public image.

In 2007, researchers at TerraChoice, who have been acquired by the UL, a global safety organisation discovered what they termed “The Seven Sins of Greenwashing”. These sins are as follows: ● Hidden Trade-Off - labelling a product is green based on a small set of aspects when other aspects are not addressed. ●

No Proof - making an environmental claim without providing easily accessible evidence on either the label or product website.

● Vagueness - using terms that are too broad to be properly understood. ● Irrelevance - stating something that is technically true but not a relevant point. ● Lesser of Two Evils - claiming to be greener than other products in its category.

● Fibbing - Environmental claims that are false. ● Worshipping False Labels - implying that a product has a third-party endorsement that doesn’t actually exist (Sins of Greenwashing, 2017). “UL are a global leader in testing, inspection, certification, auditing and validation with their certification mark appearing on 22 billion products annually in the United States” (UL Marks and Labels, no date). This research is useful for consumer development, as it allows them to recognise potential greenwashing in brands. This research could also encourage brands to stop greenwashing and actually become more ethical and sustainable because if their consumers have this knowledge, greenwashing will become more prominent and easier to identify. For example, as previously stated in Chapter One, fast fashion brand H&M produces an annual Sustainability Report, which compiles together all the brand’s sustainable and ethical achievements and goals from the past year into a readable document. Consumers may see the summary of this report and be misled into believing H&M are 100 percent sustainable because the brand has mainly focussed on the positives of what they are doing rather than what they could improve on.

By only focusing on the positive practices a brand is implicating could be a sign of greenwashing, which refers back to TerraChoice's Seven Sins of Greenwashing, ‘Hidden Trade-Off’. H&M provides in-depth detail about the materials they source, such as organic cotton or recycled polyester and the percentage of this resource they use across their products. For example, 95% of their cotton is sustainably sourced (H&M, 2019). On their website, H&M promote their goals for reducing their water usage and provide information on their collaboration with WWF to implement their goals however, do not promote or report their progress. When discussing with LSN about how brands can be more transparent, psychology professor Doctor Daniel Benkendorf stated: “This is where transparency is really helpful. It is not good enough to slap a leaf on a label and tell me it’s green. A company needs to prove to me how it’s green, and provide consumers with more information.”

(Benkendorf, 2018). This suggests that if a brand is going to be genuinely sustainable and ethical, then the brand itself should be open and transparent with their consumers about all their methods, not just the ones that portray them in a positive light.

Fashion retailer, Reformation are an example of a brand who strive for transparency who are open with their consumers about the initiatives and practices they have in place, whether it positively represents them as sustainable or not. In early 2019, Reformation were honest about only paying 22 percent of their garment workers a living wage (Slater, 2019). Although this number is low, the fact Reformation were open about it and provided clear action on how they would get this number to 100 percent could be seen positively to consumers because the brand was honest. Since then, Reformation has reported that as of September 2019, 95 percent of their factory and distribution teams earn a living wage (Reformation, 2019). By communicating this information from the start publicly shows Reformation’s progress and proves their determination to improve and progress as a brand.

Reformation provides a list of the factories they work with on their website and share the process of how they audit and monitor the requirements they expect from a supplier. Along with this information, the brand invites consumers to tour their sustainable factory in Los Angeles on the first Friday of every month. This initiative allows consumers to see first hand the process that goes behind making garments which could educate them and make them more conscious about sustainable fashion, potentially resulting in them wanting to shop more sustainably.

Figure 5: Screenshot from Reformation’s climate credit categories. (Reformation, 2020)

Not only do Reformation promote sustainability within their brand but encourage their consumers to be more sustainable by providing them with incentives. Reformation are trying to encourage consumers to switch to wind energy as opposed to fossil fuels as wind energy does not release any carbon emissions. In exchange, Reformation are offering consumers an £80 voucher. The brand also offer consumers to purchase climate credits. This innovation can inspire consumers to effectively offset carbon that the average person produces doing certain activities. The profit made from these purchases goes directly to clean energy and carbon reducing projects around the world. Reformation offer different packaging for the carbon credits, which can be given as gifts or for individual use, for example, the brand offer a ‘Wedding package’ which offsets carbon produced from this type of event.

These

incentives may encourage consumers to shop with the brand because Reformation are offering them with new and unique concepts to be sustainable and give back to the environment. 21

Chapter 3: Current Technologies

More fashion brands are competing with each other to become more sustainable by experimenting with new technologies and innovations to implement their ideas and goals. Fashion brands are investing in reducing chemicals, waste and carbon emissions in manufacturing and using recycled materials. Waste within the fashion industry is becoming more prominent, therefore more fashion brands are investing in extending the life cycle of their textiles and garments, often through recycling, reusing or upcycling. As well as considering what products are made of, the process of how they are made will also need to be considered. In order to make products within the fashion industry, chemicals, water and energy is needed, but it is down to the brand itself to think of ways they can reduce the amount of this they use to be more sustainable. For example, “making a singular pair of denim jeans uses 70 litres of water, 1.5KWh of energy and 150g of chemicals throughout its life” (Fletcher, 2012). If more fashion brands were able to make more changes to the process used to make their products and use more organic or recycled materials, which would help reduce the amount of energy and water used, the fashion industry could potentially become more sustainable and less harmful to the planet.

According to the 2018 report produced by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, “the fashion industry is responsible for producing 20% of global water waste and 10% of global carbon emissions” (The United Nations, 2018). One well-known brand to tackle this issue is Levi’s, with their ‘Water>Less’ jeans collection which was announced in 2011. This collection uses over 20 water-saving finish techniques that achieve average water savings of 28% to 96% between styles. Currently, over 67% of Levi’s products are made using the Water>Less facility and by 2020 Levi’s aims to have 80% of their products being made using the technique. So far, Levi’s has saved

more than 3 billion litres of water and recycled more than 2 billion litres (Levi’s, 2019). Levi’s CEO, Charles Bergh, states on Levi’s website, “To date, we use more than 20 water-saving finish techniques, and we share our methods with others to inspire industry-wide progress” (Levis, 2019). By Levi’s sharing their technologies with other brands, they are leading the way to a more sustainable fashion industry by providing other brands with guidance and information on how they can be more sustainable. Levi’s also work with I:CO, who are a recycling company, to collect clothing and footwear for recycling or reuse. This initiative encourages consumers to think about how they dispose of unwanted clothing and provides them with an option to dispose of them in a sustainable way.

Patagonia is another clothing brand whose main focus is to be sustainable and ethical. They are an outdoor clothing brand whose mission statement is, “We’re in business to save our home planet”.

The quality of Patagonia depends, to a large degree, on whether we can reduce our impact on the environment. This means auditing the materials and methods we use to make our products, taking responsibility for the entire lifecycle of our products and examining how we use resources at our buildings and facilities.(Patagonia, 2020)

Figure 6: Screenshot from Patagonia’s Materials and Technologies website. (Patagonia, 2020)

The statement above shows Patagonia think beyond the production of their products and the materials they use in-house but also about the products post consumerism. The brand shares with its consumers the thought process behind their innovations as well as the process behind making their products. As seen in Figure 6 Patagonia provide in-depth information regarding the materials and resources used to make their products on their website, which is accessible for consumers to see. These details inform the consumer about the products they are buying as well as how best to care for the garments after being consumed. In 2017, Patagonia introduced a new innovative scheme ‘Worn Wear’, where they will repair garments free of charge or reuse and recycle them when garments are beyond repair. This innovation allows both Patagonia and the consumer to take mutual responsibility of their garments and prevents consumers from throwing away worn clothing and encourages them to recycle unwanted or unusable garments and give them a new lease of life.

Newer brands are starting to innovate and inspire big fashion brands to be more sustainable and ethical. By having more information and insight compared to bigger and more established fashion brands, new, start-up brands are at more of an advantage and are able to build the brand as ethical and sustainable from the start. An example of this is influencer brand TALA, which was founded by social media influencer and Youtuber Grace Beverly in 2019, focusing on sustainable athleisure wear. TALA’s main aim is to produce sustainable and ethical clothing at a reasonable price and to reach as many people as they can. TALA’s garments are made from a range of recycled raw materials, upcycled materials and recycled PET water bottles. PET (polyethylene terephthalate) is a plastic which is used to make bottles, textiles and packaging. PET water bottles are 100% recyclable but around 70% of PET bottles are not recycled, resulting in them ending up in landfills or the ocean (Sustainability – Recover, no date). By using recycled and upcycled materials, TALA is helping to prevent clothing and textiles reaching landfill by

turning them into purposeful and reusable products. During the process of making their garments, TALA does not use chemicals which can conventionally be a high impact source of water pollution and carbon dioxide emissions (Sustainability – R ecover, 2019). As CEO, Grace Beverly already had a strong social media following before creating the brand, she already built a transparent and trusting relationship with her consumer as her audience already knew her personality and values through her Youtube channel and Instagram platform.

Figure 7: Image from TALA’s Instagram page. (TALA, 2019)

By being a brand created by an influencer, TALA is able to directly contact and connect with its consumers via social media. Through the use of her Youtube channel, Grace Beverly is able to be completely transparent with TALA’s consumers by being able to show them the process of the production and distribution of TALA garments and the factories the products are made in. This benefits the brand itself as it is able to build trust with the consumers in a way that potentially bigger, more established brands can’t, through the use of 25

Youtube videos that contain in-depth information about the garments and tours of the factories TALA’s garments are made in. As TALA is an influencer brand, consumers have already built a relationship with the CEO, Grace Beverly, through her Youtube channel and social media, which is another benefit to the success of the brand. Startup brands could be at more of an advantage when it comes to sustainability and transparency because they are more likely to be able to directly connect with their consumers through the power of social media whereas more established brands like H&M, for example, don’t always have a known face of the brand. TALA is a smaller brand that has the platform to be able to show their consumers the factories their clothing is made in, whereas brands like H&M are more likely to have their products made in different factories around the world, making it less accessible for them to distribute factory information to their consumer through the way TALA can. Despite their difference in distribution models, more established brands like H&M do have the opportunity to be more transparent in the same way startup brands do about their manufacturing.

Plastic pollution has been a big factor relating back to the fashion industry for many years. The focus is not only on the packaging waste but on the microplastics that are produced by textiles. In 2018, it was reported that “60% of the world’s garments contain polyester, which is the most common type of plastic in the world” (van Elven, 2018). The micro fibres from this textile can be released when synthetic materials are washed which then find their way into the water system and into the sea. A study from the National University of Ireland showed that “73% of Atlantic deep-sea fish surveyed had ingested microplastics” (Brown, 2018). Despite brands cutting down on the use of plastic packaging, which will have a positive effect on the environment, the replacement of polyester needs to be considered by brands to have a bigger impact. Recycled polyester would help brands implement this.

Figure 8: Everlane ReNew campaign. (Everlane, 2018)

Over the last few years, more fashion brands have started using recycled and upcycled materials to make their products including fashion brand Weekday, with 68% of their products being made from sustainably sourced materials and all of their swimwear made from recycled waste such as PET bottles and production waste like old fishing nets (Weekday, 2019). In 2018, clothing retailer Everlane launched an outerwear collection, ReNew, which was made from materials made out of 3 million recycled plastic bottles (Everlane, 2018). For years, recycled plastic was considerably lower in quality compared to virgin plastic. Due to consumer demand, suppliers were encouraged to improve the quality of recycled plastic to the point where it is equivalent to virgin plastic. Industrial recyclers have developed breaking down PET bottles into pellets called rPET which can be transformed into new bottles or extruded into new fibres (Segran, 2019). To be made into textiles PET plastic is collected, chipped, melted and then spun into yarn which can then be made 27

into products. PET decreases the amount of plastic waste that ends up in the ocean and landfills. However, recycled plastic is not as accessible as would be anticipated simply because bottles are not being recycled at a high enough rate. “In Europe, 58% of bottles are recycled” (Segran, 2019). This information could be interpreted that both the consumers and fashion brands themselves need to help the industry be more sustainable by being more sustainable themselves, particularly by recycling more.

In 2017, the non-profit foundation Textile Exchange challenged over 50 textile and clothing companies, including Adidas, H&M and Gap to increase their use of recycled polyester by 25% by 2020. In 2018, the goal was met, two years before the deadline, by increasing the use of recycled polyester by 36% and 12 more brands joined the innovation. By having a goal to meet, it can encourage brands to succeed and once the success of meeting a goal is complete, it can influence a brand to better themselves even more.

Conclusion

Whilst the fast fashion industry still has a long way to go until it is adequately sustainable, this dissertation has explored the innovations and practices currently taking place and how they are progressing sustainability within the fashion industry. This paper has questioned the motives behind fast fashion using their sustainable practices as marketing strategies and investigated how genuine these practices are.

Consumers are becoming more aware of the negative environmental impacts that fast fashion is having and are wanting to shop more sustainably. Research conducted by Love the Sales found that “1 in 10 britons have decided to shun fast fashion and instead opt for longer-lasting garments [...] and 13% of participants saying they care more about sustainability than they did at the beginning of the decade” (Houghton and Buller, 2020). As this information is starting to be more known to fashion brands, it is becoming more of a demand for them to be sustainable. Fashion brands including H&M and Reformation are starting to lead the way of a sustainable industry by being transparent with their consumers about innovations and practices they have been initiating along with their progress and goals. By producing sustainability reports, these fashion brands are able to present their ideas and practices in a way that is accessible for both consumers and competitors which can inspire and influence them to educate themselves surrounding these issues and what can be done to improve both the industry and the planet.

Although innovations regarding materials and resources are in place with the brands investigated in this essay and the majority of the fashion industry, the ethical and working conditions is an area that a lot of fast fashion brands seem to be shying away from. As discovered in chapter one, fashion brand 29

Missguided employ sweatshop labour practices, where workers are paid below minimum wage. After researching into the conditions and ethics of H&Mâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s workers, it was discovered that although H&M do disclose some information regarding this matter, they are quite vague and general about the subject, whereas in comparison Reformation are very open about the factories their garment workers work in and how they are treated. In order to make the knowledge of working conditions and ethics known to the consumer and to everyone, minimal guidelines should be laid out that all fashion brands must disclose information about all sustainable and ethical practices, whether they are having a positive impact or not.

This essay has explored the ways fashion brands greenwash and mislead their consumers to think they are more sustainable than they are. Despite some fashion brands still greenwashing, consumers are able to try and identify these brands through the help of research and knowledge of sustainability and the environmental impacts. As more consumers start to be able to identify greenwashing, brands could be pressured to be more honest and transparent leading to a genuinely more sustainable and ethical industry.

In summary, with the fashion industry being one of the biggest polluters to the environment, the fashion industry has no choice but to improve their resources by cutting down the use of virgin materials and using completely recyclable or biodegradable materials and investigating the process of how their products are made and reducing water usage and carbon emissions.

References Brown, H., (2018). Fashion’s war on plastic pollution. [Online]. Available at https://www.drapersonline.com/product-and-trade-shows/textiles/fashions-war-on-pla stic-pollution/7029062.article. [Accessed on 03/12/2019] Butler, S., (2018). Is fast fashion giving way to the sustainable wardrobe? The Guardian [Online]. Available at http://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/dec/29/fast-fashion-giving-way-sustainabl e-wardrobe. [Accessed on 02/12/2019] Cakebread, C., (2017). You’re not alone, no one reads terms of service agreements. Business Insider [Online]. Available at https://www.businessinsider.com/deloitte-study-91-percent-agree-terms-of-service-wit hout-reading-2017-11. [Accessed on 10/12/2019] Cambridge Dictionary., (2019). Greenwash. [Online]. Available at https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/greenwash [Accessed on 05/12/19] Copenhagen Fashion Week., (2020). Copenhagen Fashion Week Sustainability Action Plan 2020-2022. [Online]. Available at https://copenhagenfashionweek.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/CPHFW-SUSTAIN ABILITY-ACTION-PLAN-2020-2022.pdf. [Accessed on 31/01/2020] van Elven, M., (2018). Recap: what fashion brands did for the environment & animal rights in 2018. [Online]. Available at https://fashionunited.uk/news/fashion/recap-what-fashion-brands-did-for-the-environ ment-animal-rights-in-2018/2018121840611. [Accessed on 10/12/2019] Everlane., (2018). Everlane ReNew [Online]. Available at https://www.everlane.com/renew. [Accessed on 31/01/2020] Fletcher, K., (2012). ‘Sustainable Fashion and Textiles’. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781849772778. H&M., (2019). H&M Group Sustainability Report 2018. [Online]. Available at https://sustainability.hm.com/content/dam/hm/about/documents/masterlanguage/CSR /2018_sustainability_report/HM_Group_SustainabilityReport_2018_%20FullReport.p df. [Accessed on 02/12/2019] Houghton, L., and Buller, A., (2020). Stat: Young Britons opt for sustainability over fashion trends. [Online]. Available at https://www.lsnglobal.com/news/article/25077/stat-young-britons-opt-for-sustainability -over-fashion-trends. [Accessed on 31/01/2020] Koyo, T., and Schleeter, R., (2017). Fashion at the Crossroads - Greenpeace International. [Online]. Available at https://www.greenpeace.org/international/publication/6969/fashion-at-the-crossroads/ . [Accessed on 11/12/2019]

Levi’s., (2019) Levi’s Sustainability. [Online]. Available at https://www.levi.com/GB/en_GB/features/sustainability. [Accessed on 16/10/2019] McFall-Johnsen, M., (2019). The fashion industry emits more carbon than international flights and maritime shipping combined. Here are the biggest ways it impacts the planet. Business Insider [Online]. Available at https://www.businessinsider.com/fast-fashion-environmental-impact-pollution-emissio ns-waste-water-2019-10. [Accessed on 02/12/2019] Nielsen, (2015). Consumer-Goods’ Brands That Demonstrate Commitment to Sustainability Outperform Those That Don’t. [Online]. Available at https://www.nielsen.com/us/en/press-releases/2015/consumer-goods-brands-that-de monstrate-commitment-to-sustainability-outperform/. [Accessed on 24/01/2020] Nitin Passi., (2019). One pound Bikini Statement - Missguided. [Online]. Available at https://www.missguided.co.uk/media-statement/one-pound-bikini-statement. [Accessed on 11/12/2019] O’Connor, S., (2018). Dark Factories: labour exploitation in Britain’s garment industry. Financial Times. [Online]. Available at https://www.ft.com/content/e427327e-5892-11e8-b8b2-d6ceb45fa9d0 [Accessed on 25/01/2020] Patagonia., (2020). Environmental Impact. [Online]. Available at https://www.patagonia.com/environmental-impact.html. [Accessed on 22/01/2020] Reformation., (2019). Sustainability Report Q3. [Online]. Available at https://www.thereformation.com/pages/sustainability-report-q3. [Accessed on 30/01/2020] Segran, E., (2019). Recycled plastic isn’t going to save us. Fast Company. [Online]. Available at https://www.fastcompany.com/90429087/recycled-plastic-isnt-going-to-save-us. [Accessed on 30/01/2020] Sins of Greenwashing (2017). [Online]. Available at https://www.ul.com/insights/sins-greenwashing. [Accessed on 10/12/2019] Slater, S., (2019). The ‘Greenwashing’ Hiding the Truth of Your Favourite Fashion Brands. [Online]. Available at https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/kzmw5a/the-greenwashing-hiding-the-truth-of-you r-favourite-fashion-brands. [Accessed on 30/01/2020] Smith, M., (2019). What kind of person watches Love Island? | YouGov. [Online]. Available at https://yougov.co.uk/topics/entertainment/articles-reports/2019/07/29/what-kind-perso n-watches-love-island. [Accessed on 05/12/2019] Stott, R., (2018). Are we too selfish to be sustainable? [Online]. Available at https://www.lsnglobal.com/big-ideas/article/22221/are-we-too-selfish-to-be-sustainabl e. [Accessed on 31/01/2020] Sustainability – Recover., (2019). Upcycled textile system. [Online]. Available at 32

https://www.recovertex.com/sustainability/. [Accessed on 11/01/2020] UL Marks and Labels (no date). [Online]. Available at https://marks.ul.com/about/. [Accessed on 10/12/2019] United States Department of Labour, (2017). Sustainability in the Workplace | Occupational Safety and Health Administration. [Online]. Available at https://www.osha.gov/sustainability/. [Accessed on 24/01/2020] Weekday., (2019). Sustainability Innovations. [Online]. Available at https://www.weekday.com/en_gbp/sustainability/innovations.html [Accessed on 30/01/2020] WRAP., (2017). Sustainable Textiles. [Online]. Available at https://www.wrap.org.uk/sustainable-textiles. [Accessed on 02/12/2019]