Emily Yoon comments on the detrimental effects of the fast fashion industry.
By Emily Yoon Credit: The Myriad News
In a global era where clothing consumption continues to skyrocket, so does the negative influence left behind by fast fashion brands. Fast fashion describes brands that are able to put out trendy and affordable clothing at a swift rate as a result of their unethical and harmful practices. This includes SHEIN, Zara, Forever 21, Romwe, Urban Outfitters, Victoria’s Secret and hundreds more. Unscrupulous and corrupt customs presented in the fast fashion industry lead to detrimental effects on both humans and the environment.
Companies are Exploiting Their Employees
The unethical practices of fast fashion include child labor, exploitation of Third World countries and hazardous working conditions. In areas such as Bangladesh, China and Vietnam, the textile industry is composed of women and children.
The employees work in unregulated structures while being exposed to harmful chemicals, which ultimately leads to deadly health conditions such as cancer. Although the minimum monthly wage in Bangladesh is the equivalent of 67 U.S. dollars, many garment workers’ salaries do not meet the minimum requirements.
Low income and poverty are not unique to Bangladesh. The majority of fast fashion factory workers have an astronomically low income. This income prevents the meeting of Article 23 in The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 23 briefly explains the right to a safe workplace and insurance of family dignity.
In addition to the failed meeting of Article 23, the fast fashion industry neglects to meet many more. Some articles that are not met include Article 3, Article 18, Article 19, Article 20 and so on. The policies met can differ depending on the country, company, or factory.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not upheld to meet the standards of the fast fashion industry. The real issue is that there are minimal efforts to enforce the declaration. Even the Human Rights Watch is continuing to keep its eyes on garment workers, but they have yet to intervene. This shows how even global NGOs, such as the Human Rights Watch, fall short when it comes to the fast fashion industry.
How the Industry Negatively Impacts the Environment
Fast fashion also has an enormous carbon footprint. Cheap clothes are making its mark on consumer culture by sacrificing the environment. The industry accounts for 10% of carbon emissions, water pollution of harmful chemicals and microfibers/plastics, making it one of the largest consumers of water and the reason for the disposal of thousands of pounds of clothes a week.
The production of cotton alone is responsible for 18% of global pesticide use. The leather industry includes harmful chemical exposure, tightly raising livestock and the incorrect disposal of the harmful chemicals. This further leads to the polluting of water sources which can be pernicious to one’s health if injested.
The fast production of textiles leads to the production of about 15 to 20 million tons of textiles a year. In 2017 alone, about 11.2 million tons out of the 16.9 million textiles produced ended up in landfills. This total is because many products of fast fashion brands are unrecyclable. The amount of waste created is also due to how rapidly the industry puts out clothes. For example, it takes Zara two weeks to produce a trendy product, while the industry average is six months.
Most textiles produced at the cost of the environment end up in landfills which end up emitting large amounts of methane. As a result, even when garments aren’t being used by consumers, they continue to impact the environment. This demonstrates how one piece of clothing can have a negative effect starting at the production and continuing through its disposal.
The rejection of the British Sustainable Clothing Action Plan (SCAP) in 2019, demonstrates the struggles of environmental reforms in First World countries. This is discouraging because First World countries are the nations where new legislation seems to be the most promising in the world stage. SCAP sought to find new waste outlets for textiles while reducing carbon emission, water pollution and waste. The rejection went directly against Prime Minister May’s commitment to cut carbon emissions by 2050. Public outrage was expressed by environmentalists, members of the fashion industry and more because of the overwhelming data available of fast fashion.
A similar trend is seen in the recent repeals of environmental rules in the U.S. Repeals related to the fashion industry include water pollution, air pollution, carbon emissions and substance safety regulations. This is another example of how promising reform continues to be let down.
As awareness of the fast fashion industry expands through data and documentaries such as “The True Cost“, real regulation of the industry doesn’t seem to be keeping up. On the other hand, there has been an increase in sustainable brands that have begun to make their mark in the fashion industry. Our consumptive society leads to blind spending without knowing the detrimental costs of our purchases.