RE:FASHION - Sustainable Fashion Project by Claire Nicolson

ROBERT GORDON UNIVERSITY CB4172 SUSTAINABLE FASHION PROJECT

RE:FASHION CLAIRE NICOLSON - 1702463 WORD COUNT: 2612

SUSTAINABLE FASHION IS...THE INNOVATION WHICH FOCUSES ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS OF A GARMENT THROUGHOUT THE DESIGN AND THE ENTIRE LIFECYCLE OF THE PRODUCT. (FLETCHER & GROSE 2012)

CONT ENTS 12

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.3 RE:CYCLE END OF LIFE STATEGIES

3.0 ARITZIA SUSTAINABILITY AUDIT

2.1 RE:DUCE SLOW FASHION

4.0 REFERENCES

2.2 RE:USE SECOND-HAND FASHION

5.0 APPENDICES

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.0 INTRODUCTION This project has been conducted to appraise the range and scope of sustainability within the modern fashion industry. The way in which we consume clothing has been changed by the rise of fast fashion retailers. Almost overnight we became used to consuming fashion recklessly, buying more, yet paying less, than ever before (Seigle 2011). Influenced by the advancements in technology and live inspiration, we now demand four-times the amount of clothing items than those in 1980, totalling almost 2 million tonnes of brand-new apparel being consumed per annum in the UK - of which approximately 300,000 of will end up in UK landfill (Anguelov 2016; Seigle 2011; House of Commons 2019). Critically assessing existing academic literature surrounding the topic of sustainable fashion consumption, this project will focus on the consumers responsibility to "reduce reuse and recycle" their clothing.

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW UN SDG 12: SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION

The United Nations (2020) has listed sustainable consumption and production as one of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG's) that aim to promote a more sustainable economy to benefit both people and the planet. Although these goals aren't specific to the fashion, there are ways in which the industry currently negatively impacts upon this SDG. According to a Morgan & Birtwistle (2009) study, one in five young females acknowledged purchasing a new fashion item every week. In order to meet consumer demand and stay relevant within the market, retailers have been forced to require low cost and flexibility in design, quality, and speed to market (Bhardwaj & Fairhurst 2010). Therefore, major chain stores are offering garments designed to be worn fewer than 10 times (Mcafee et al 2004). However, as consumers we hold the power to change the norm by encouraging companies, especially large and transnational, to adopt sustainable practises.By reducing the amount we consume, reusing clothing by buying second-hand or upcycling garments and recycling them appropriately when they are at their end of life, the Centre for Sustainable Fashion (2019) predict that textile waste generation will be substantially reduced by 2030.

“SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION IS ABOUT DOING MORE AND BETTER WITH LESS, TO SEPARATE ECONOMIC GROWTH FROM ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION AND CONTRIBUTE SUBSTANTIALLY TO POVERTY ALLEVIATION AND THE TRANSITION TOWARDS LOW-CARBON AND GREEN ECONOMIES.” (UNITED NATIONS 2020)

2.1 RE:DUCE

90% of clothing sold is made with cheap cotton or polyester, both of which have been linked to significant health problems in their manufacturing processes (Khan & Malik 2014). Textile dyeing is responsible for additional hazards as untreated water waste is often disposed of into the local water systems, releasing toxins that can seriously affect the health of animals and nearby residents (Khan & Malik 2014). Occupational health and safety standards in these countries are often not enforced due to the

SLOW FASHION The fashion industry has become accustomed to fast-fashion, leading to an increase in the following of fashion trends (Pookulangara and Shephard 2013). In turn this has encouraged the overconsumption of garments and has resulted in three out of five fast fashion items going to UK landfills or incinerators every year (Clean Clothes Campaign 2019). Additionally the competition and lack of transparency in supply chains has driven down both social and environmental standards within the industry, particularly in the low and middle income countries (LMIC) in which these garments are produced (McKinsey 2020). Approximately

"OUR PRIMARY IDENTITY HAS BECOME OF CONSUMERS, NOT MOTHERS, TEACHERS OR FARMERS BUT OF CONSUMERS. WE SHOP AND SHOP AND SHOP." (LEONARD 2008)

lack of infrastructure and poor organisational management

(Anguelov 2016). This results in respiratory hazards due to poor ventilation and musculoskeletal hazards from repetitive motion tasks (Bick, Halsey & Ekenga 2018). Reported health outcomes from working in these conditions have included lung disease and cancer, damage to the nervous systems, accidental injuries, overuse injuries and death (Sant'Ana & Kovalechen 2012; Gebremichael & Kumie 2015). Recurring reports of devastating disasters are blunt reminders of the poor health and safety hazards faced by garment workers in LMIC and are putting companies under pressure from eco-conscious consumers to act in a more sustainable and ethical manner. Slow Fashion is a socially conscious movement that shifts consumers' mindsets from quantity to quality (Fletcher 2010), encompassing both slow production and consumption. Slow production does not exploit natural and human resources to expedite manufacturing speed (Fletcher 2010), while slow consumption entails a longer product lifespan from manufacture to discard (Jung and Jin 2014).

"THE PHILOSOPHY OF SLOW FASHION REFLECTS IN OUR EVERYDAY CONSCIOUS CHOICES" (WATSON & YAN 2013)

Therefore, a slow fashion consumer can be defined as a consumer who chooses to purchase high quality, versatile clothing that allows them to build a wardrobe based on the concept of clothing created out of care and consideration (Watson and Yan 2013). However, the future adoption of Slow Fashion among consumers will not come without its challenges. As this solution encompasses the aspect of premium, Slow Fashion requires an acceptance of higher pricing. According to a Business Insider (2019) survey, 60% of respondents said affordability is the biggest factor when deciding whether

to purchase items from a brand and the younger generations which are often depended on to adopt sustainable strategies are notorious for sourcing cheap product alternatives to get the most for their money; a spending habit that has been passed down by their parents and teachers who were shaped by the recession (Dorsey & Villa 2020). These statistics will not be helped by the looming recession post-COVID-19 as many will inevitably have less disposable income to spend, but it is hoped that sustainable consumption will remain a focus after the pandemic as we experienced positive environmental changes as all types of activity suddenly shut off due to global lockdowns (Ricchetti and Palma 2020; Mckinsey 2020).

2.2 RE:USE

SECOND-HAND FASHION A second-hand fashion business model reduces resource use and waste, and uses customers as primary partners and suppliers (Gopalakrishnan and Matthews, 2018). Research by WRAP (2017) in the UK shows extending the average life of clothes (2.2 years) by nine months of active use per item would lead to a 5-10% reduction in each of the carbon, water and waste footprints. While extended use does not make the garment a fully ethical one as it doesn’t address the conditions in which the garment was made, it certainly helps reduce the impact the garment has on the environment. The younger generation are familiar with the idea of buying second-hand fashion and selling items is

becoming a common way of consuming fashion as many retailers have turned to offering second-hand options to close the loop and become more sustainable (Bick, Halsey & Ekenga 2018). According to Baram (2020), 55% of 16-24-year-olds claimed to sell their unwanted fashion items, while 50% said they have bought fashion second-hand. Thus, young people have helped fade the stigmas associated with the consumption of second-hand fashion. Previously, people wearing "hand-me-downs" would be labelled as "too poor" to afford new clothing (Ryding et al 2018). In fact, the perception has changed so radically that even the language we now use to describe this market has changed. Consider how ‘charity’, ‘thrift’ and ‘used’ have morphed into ‘pre-owned’, 'pre-loved’ and 'vintage (Ryding et al 2018). The affordability of second-hand products is a key driver in a

consumer's decision to purchase preloved, which has increased the demand for second-hand luxury. In recent years, high-end retailers such as Harrods, Selfridges and Farfetch have launched innovative services where consumers can sell their used designer goods in return for store credit, giving others the option to buy the product for a price much cheaper than standard retail (Baram 2020). Despite this, the price tag associated with recycled luxury is still not accessible to many consumers.

to the post-modern views of secondhand fashion consumption. Collaborating with former Vogue editor, Bay Garnett, Oxfam launched their second-hand pop-up shop in Selfridges earlier this year (BanksWalker 2020). Selecting all items of clothing and designing the space herself, Garnett included elements of luxury within the collection but everything remained at standard Oxfam prices. Thus, giving the consumer a luxury in-store experience without the daunting price tag (Selfridges 2020). This is an example of modernising the current secondhand market in a way that will engage all types of consumers and the adoption of similar techniques by other high-street or charity shops has the potential to shape the future of sustainable fashion consumption.

"IN THE POSTMODERN WORLD, IT IS NOW CHIC TO RECYCLE LUXURY" (RYDING ET AL 2018)

Typical high street stores, such as charity shops, are often cluttered, meaning the shopping experience is difficult and unexciting (Sorensen and Jorgensen 2019). Fast Fashion shoppers are used to on-trend, unworn items that are accessible online or in neatly laid out stores, and while many admit authentic and rare options can often be found in the likes of charity shops, they often feel it’s not worth the time raking (Sorensen and Jorgensen 2019). In addition to this, findings show that many consumers, including those who regularly shop second-hand, perceive second-hand stores to have unpleasant smells and damaged clothing. According to Gopalakrishnan and Matthews (2017) second-hand stores must maintain a clean and well-merchandised store in order to attract these consumers. Fortunately, online platforms provide a more organised shopping experience for these types of consumers which are proving to be successful. In fact, Depop, who already had 2 million active users in May 2020, have only increased in downloads and users throughout the COVID-19 pandemic (Statista 2020). In addition to this, high street charity shops have also been seen adapting

2.3 RE:CYCLE

RECYCLING TEXTILES With our current culture of massconsumption comes the inevitability of having to throwaway old to make room for the new. While charity donations remain high, millions of tonnes of textile waste continues to enter the municipal waste stream, generally becoming contaminated or damaged and losing its reuse or recycling value (House of Commons 2019). The most sustainable way to tackle the issue of textile waste is to encourage the upcycling and repairing of garments to extend their lifetime (WRAP 2017). Currently within the UK there is a growing community of creative small-businesses who

upcycle old, damaged and discarded textiles which they often source from charity shops (House of Commons 2019). However, advancements in education within schools could be key to raising sustainability awareness and developing the skills required to make upcycling the preferred option to disposal for the general public, as unfortunately many people currently lack the ability (House of Commons 2019). A new approach is needed when dealing with postconsumer textiles, such as an increase in recycling centres. The availability of kerbside collection of used textiles has doubled since 2002 to over 30%, but is still only half of that for glass, plastics and metals (Morley, Bartlett and McGill 2009). To combat this, some retailers have set up ‘Take-Back’ schemes, encouraging consumers to return old clothing to the brand’s stores. The clothing can then be donated to a charity or sold to recyclers. These programmes are becoming increasingly popular, in fact The North Face alone processed 14,342 garments through its Renewed initiative between January 2018 and May 2019 (Wicker 2019).

While the options mentioned so far are of the consumer's responsibility, brand’s can also be liable for unsustainable disposal of textile waste. In the production stage, when garments are cut out as patterns, as much as 20% of the fabric can end up on the cutting room floor (Rissanen 2008). Some designers are experimenting with zero waste pattern cutting techniques in order to change this, however not all retailers are so environmentally conscious (House of Commons 2019). In 2018, it was reported that Burberry had incinerated up to £90 million of their unsold stock over the past five years. Initially, Burberry defended their actions claiming that the energy generated from burning products was captured, making it environmentally friendly. However, research shows that burning stock generates further

CO2 emissions and air pollutants, such as plastic microfibres, that can harm human health (Zazzara, Rapetti and Tyler 2020). The brand has since vowed to reuse, repair, donate or recycle all excess stock in future, but the UK Government remains to put any laws in place that will prevent the incineration of future textile waste (House of Commons 2019).

"THERE ARE 101 PROCESSES THAT GO INTO MAKING A GARMENT... HUNDREDS OF HOURS OF HUMAN LABOUR TOO. TO INPUT ALL OF THESE RESOURCES AND THEN TO SQUANDER THEM BY BURNING (RECOVERING ONLY A TINY PROPORTION OF THAT ENERGY) IS PURE MADNESS GIVEN THE BACKDROP OF ECOLOGICAL EMERGENCY THAT WE FACE." (SIEGLE 2018)

3.0 SUSTAINABILTY AUDIT

ARITZIA WEBSITE AUDIT Aritzia provide a clear report within their website outlining their current efforts to accelerate their journey to become a fully sustainable business. Although the brand has taken great steps in the right direction, the report lacks transparent information surrounding some key areas (see Appendix 1). The overall report reads passionately about social and environmental issues and the brand has provided evidence for a handful of their sustainability achievements over the past 10 years, such as a certification in Responsible Down Standard and partnerships with the ILO-IFC Better Work Programme and the Better Cotton Initiative. However, they do not promote their achievements or messages out with the sustainability report, which is only accessible through a discreet link at the bottom of their website. Instead, they use their websites main page to promote discounts such as their “Black Fiveday Sale”, where they extended Black Friday to a 5-day sale where everything was up to 50% off. These heavy discounts encourage the culture of mass-consumerism and findings show that e-commerce fashion deliveries from Black Friday alone were expected to be the cause of over 429,000 tonnes of carbon emission (Haqqi 2020). This contradicts their sustainability goals and could give the brand a reputation of “greenwashing”.

ARITZIA INSTAGRAM AUDIT Aritzia have a following of 1 million on their Instagram account, therefore have a wide reach of influence. However, their messages regarding sustainability are currently limited to 3 posts this year. Although the posts are informative, they get lost amongst the mass marketing of products and campaigns. Therefore, Aritzia’s Instagram is not effective in informing consumers of their sustainability practises or goals, or encouraging consumers to act eco-consciously with their fashion. They have a post promoting the launch of The Super (Re)Puff, which contains recycled down from post-consumer bedding and sleeping bags, as well as 87% recycled polyester. This was posted on 11 November 2020 and launched the following day. It is the brands first product that uses recycled materials.

ARITZIA SUSTAINABILITY RECOMMENDATIONS Aritzia should get their Denim Forum range certified by the Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS). Using over 80% organic cotton in all of their denim products, Artizia exceeds the minimum of organic fibres that GOTS require. Associated with this certification is the reduction of water waste and harmful chemicals, therefore, this would assure consumers that what they claim to already be doing is in fact true. In addition to this, Aritiza should integrate their sustainability messages into their Instagram and website to effectively communicate their efforts towards sustainability with their consumers. Doing so will also inform and encourage consumers to carry out more sustainable behaviours, such as washing and drying less and recycling or repairing rather than disposing to landfill. Research has shown that this kind of consumer engagement could contribute to a 347 million tonnes of carbon emissions reduction by 2030 (Rafi-Ul-Shan et al 2018). Finally, it would be beneficial for Aritzia to become transparent with their sustainability claims. For example, their claim to be carbon neutral. Only by reading within the lines can you tell that only certain areas within their business actually meet this statement. While this is still a great achievement and step in the right direction, the fact they have not explicitly stated that this does not include their courier and manufacturing partners, which account for the largest percent of carbon emissions, is misleading and can cause mistrust between them and their eco-conscious consumers.

4.0 REFERENCES ANGUELOV, N., 2016. The Dirty Side of the Garment Industry Fast Fashion and Its Negative Impact on Environment and Society The Dirty Side of the Garment Industry Fast Fashion and Its Negative Impact on Environment and Society. Florida: CRC Press. ARITZIA INTL., 2020. Corporate Responsibility: Sustainability. [Online]. Vancouver: Aritzia LP. Available at: https://www.aritzia.com/intl/en/aritzia/corporate-responsibility/sustainability.html. (Accessed 9 November 2020). BANKS-WALKER, H., 2020. A Second Hand Shop In Selfridges? It's Real, And It Sits Between Balenciaga And Gucci. [Online]. Peterborough: Grazia. Available at: https://graziadaily.co.uk/fashion/news/selfridges-second-handshop-oxfam/. (Accessed 9 November 2020). BARAM, C., 2020. Fashion & Sustainability: Inc Impact of COVID-19 - UK - September 2020. [Online]. London: Mintel Group Ltd. Available at: https://reports.mintel.com/display/989900/? fromSearch=%3Ffreetext%3Dsustainable%2520fashion. (Accessed 9 November 2020). BHARDWAJ, V. and FAIRHURST, A., 2010. Fast fashion: Response to changes in the fashion industry. The International Review of Retail Distribution and Consumer Research, pp. 165-173. BICK, R., HALSEY, E. and EKENGA, C.C., 2018. The global environmental injustice of fast fashion. Environmental Health, 17(1), pp. 92. BUSINESS INSIDER. 2019. Gen Z is leading an evolution in shopping and could kill brands as we know them. [Online]. Available at: https://www.businessinsider.com/gen-z-shopping- habits-kill-brands-2019-7?r=US&IR=T. (Accessed 9 November 2020). CENTRE FOR SUSTAINABLE FASHION., 2019. Fashion Futures 2030. [Online]. London: London College of Fashion. Available at: https://www.sustainable-fashion.com/fashion-futures-2030. (Accessed 1 November 2020). CLEAN CLOTHES CAMPAIGN, 2019., Fashion’s Problems: Waste and Pollution. [Online]. Amsterdam: Clean Clothes Campaign. Available at: https://cleanclothes.org/fashions-problems/waste-and-pollution. (Accessed 1 November 2020). DORSEY, J.R. and VILLA, D., 2020. Zconomy: How Gen Z Will Change the Future of Business―and What to Do About It. New York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc. FLETCHER, K., 2010. Slow Fashion: An Invitation for Systems Change. Fashion Practice, 2(2), pp. 259-266. FLETCHER, K. and GROSE, L., 2012. Fashion and Sustainability: Design for Change. London: Laurence King. GEBREMICHAEL, G. and KUMIE, A., 2015. The prevalence and associated factors of occupational injury among workers in Arba Minch textile factory, southern Ethiopia: a cross sectional study. Occupational medicine and health affairs, 3(6), pp. 1-11. GOPALAKRISHNAN, S. and MATTHEWS, D., 2018. Collaborative consumption: a business model analysis of secondhand fashion. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 22(1), pp. 354-368. HOUSE OF COMMONS., 2019. Fixing fashion: clothing consumption and sustainability. [Online]. UK: House of Commons. Available from: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmenvaud/2311/2311.pdf (Accessed 1 November 2020). JOHNSON, J., 2020. Monthly active users of the Depop app in the United Kingdom (UK) from January 2017 to May 2020. [Online]. Germany: Statista. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1122928/depop-monthly-activeusers-uk/. (Accessed 9 November 2020). JUNG, S. and JIN, B., 2014. A theoretical investigation of slow fashion: sustainable future of the apparel industry. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38(5), pp. 510-519. KHAN, S. and MALIK, A., 2014. Environmental and Health Effects of Textile Industry Wastewater. In: MALIK, A., GROHMANN, E. and AKHTAR, R, eds. Environmental Deterioration and Human Health: Natural and Anthropogenic Determinants. Dordrecht: Springer. pp. 55-71. LEONARD, A., 2008. The Story of Stuff: Full Version. [Online]. Youtube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-RnnEFWUM4. (Accessed 9 November 2020). MCAFFE, A., DESSAIN, V. and SJOEMAN, A., 2004. Zara: IT for Fast Fashion. Cambridge: Harvard Business Review Publishing.

MCKINSEY & COMPANY, 2020., The State of Fashion 2021: In search of promise in perilous times. [Online]. Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/retail/our-insights/state-of-fashion. (Accessed 1 November 2020). MORGAN, L R. and BIRTWISTLE, G., 2009. An investigation of young fashion consumers' disposal habits. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33(2), pp. 190-198. MORLEY, N J., BARTLETT, C. and MCGILL, I., 2009. Maximising Reuse and Recycling of UK Clothing and Textiles. [Online]. London: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Available at: http://www.randd.defra.gov.uk. (Accessed 9 November 2020). POOKULANGARA, S. and SHEPHARD, A., 2013. Slow fashion movement: Understanding consumer perceptions—An exploratory study. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 20(2), pp. 200-206. RAFI-UI-SHAN, M P. et al., 2018. Relationship between sustainability and risk management in supply chains: A systematic review. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 46(5), pp. 466-486. RICCHETTI, M. and PALMA, R D., 2020. Will COVID-19 accelerate the transition to a sustainable fashion industry? [Online]. Austria: United Nations Industrial Development Organization. Available at: https://www.unido.org/stories/will-covid-19-accelerate-transition-sustainable-fashion-industry. (Accessed 9 November 2020). RISSANEN, T., 2008. Creating fashion without the creation of fabric waste. New York: Fairchild Books. RYDING, D., HENNIGER, C E. and CANO, M B., 2018. Vintage Luxury Fashion: Exploring the Rise of the Secondhand Clothing Trade. Cham: Springer International Publishing AG. SANT'ANA, M.A. and KOVALECHEN, F., 2012. Evaluation of the health risks to garment workers in the city of XambrêPR, Brazil, Work, 41(1), pp. 5647-5649. SELFRIDGES & CO., 2020. Bay Garnett X Oxfam Launches at Selfridges London. [Online]. London: Selfridges & Co. Available at: https://www.selfridges.com/GB/en/features/articles/selfridges-guideto/selfridges-x-oxfam/. (Accessed 9 November 2020). SIEGLE, L., 2018. Burberry’s bonfire of the vanities is brazen and ecologically reckless. [Online]. London: The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/23/burberry-fashion-brand-burningstock-environment. (Accessed 9 November 2020). SIEGLE, L., 2011. To Die For: Is Fashion Wearing Out The World? London: HarperCollins Publishers Inc. SORENSEN, K. and JORGENSEN, J J., 2018. Millennial Perceptions of Fast Fashion and Second-Hand Clothing: An Exploration of Clothing Preferences Using Q Methodology. Social Sciences, 9(8), pp. 1-13. UNITED NATIONS., 2020. Sustainable Consumption and Production. [Online]. New York: United Nations. Available at: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-consumption-production/ (Accessed 19 October 2020). WASTE & RESOURCE ACTION PROGRAMME., 2017. Valuing Our Clothes: the cost of UK fashion. [Online]. Banbury: WRAP. Available at: https://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/valuing-our-clothes-the-cost-of-uk-fashion_WRAP.pdf. (Accessed 9 November 2020). WATSON, M Z. and YAN, R-N., 2013. An exploratory study of the decision processes of fast versus slow fashion consumers. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 17(2), pp. 141-159. WICKER, A., 2019. Fashion’s growing interest in recycling clothing. [Online]. London: Vogue Business. Available at: https://www.voguebusiness.com/companies/fashion-brands-recycling-upcycling-resale-takeback-sustainability. (Accessed 9 November 2020). ZAZZARA, L., RAPETTI, G. and TYLER, D C., 2020. Burberry Burning Backlash. [Online]. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3593785. (Accessed 9 November 2020).

4.0 APPENDICES APPENDIX 1