Fashion’s growth problem and why we buy.
Reduce, reuse, recycle. Think before you shop. Buy better, buy less. Or is that choose well, buy less? Buy….fewer? Did I miss any?
Increasingly, these snappy big advertising slogans are sneaking into our feeds in cute gradient text tiles, reminding us that in order to put our consumer lifestyles into reverse gear we simply need to repeat a few words and our mindsets will magically shift. That’s all it takes, right? A few trusted media figures and savvy marketing campaigns getting us on track to shop more sustainably. Teach us how to be that great oxymoron, the ‘conscious consumer’. And they certainly try. But making more small, ethical purchasing choices without addressing the structural failures of unsustainable businesses is not going to change the world — it only alleviates our guilt.
This is because the business model for almost all retailing companies, especially the fashion giants, is built on perpetual growth. They must increase profits in order to survive. So even if they’re telling you in earnest to ‘buy better, buy less’, what it really comes down to is their bottom line — they still need you to buy something from them, otherwise they will cease to exist. But I don’t think we’re all just suckers for slick ad campaigns. Even the best marketers in the world can’t manage to get entire populations hooked on disposable fashion. So what’s going on?
The structural inequality inherent to wealthy capitalist societies is, unfortunately, what’s to blame here. I’m dramatically oversimplifying, but in effect the longer and more demanding our working days are, the more we rationalise needing multiple access points to purchasing, next day delivery, free returns, myriad channels for resale. If it’s effortless, it’s cost-free, guilt-free and most importantly, I’m supported in every way by companies to shop like this, then why would I not? They just make it so easy. The fact that wages (in Australia) have not increased with the pace of inflation and today’s average salary has about as much purchasing power as it did in the 80s has a fair bit to do with it, too. Economies of scale say that $200 of our wages spent at a fast fashion retailer will get us more clothing than it will at an independent ethical label.
So really, it’s not you — it’s them.
Although fast fashion has shaped itself into some kind of cloaked social contract, more and more people are rejecting the convenience and allure of 21st century consumption. We know that unsustainable and exploitative practices must be occurring in order for Zara to have a new collection on the racks every fortnight. And as such, we demand more transparency and accountability from our brands. Unfortunately though, the industry has a very powerful tool to respond to our demands, and that’s greenwashing. They use the right words, we believe them, that false sense of trust leads to a purchase, and the whole cycle continues. Despite our best efforts, the global fashion industry is expected to grow by 3.9% each year to 2025. Grim.
The complex machinations of the fast fashion behemoth should explain why, in a climate where degrowth is of absolute urgency, we are buying more than ever before. It’s far easier for H&M to roll out global campaign for its new ‘Conscious Collection’ (is that…13% recycled polyester?) than it is for me to explain Boohoo’s centralised supply chain and union-busting antics or ASOS’s gargantuan logistics and warehousing systems. Unfortunately, perfectly executed multi-million dollar greenwash campaigns do far more to relieve buyer anxiety and exhaustion than me doing this:
Big advertising mantras like reduce, reuse and recycle place the burden of action on the consumer and not on the corporations that are oversupplying and burning through the planet’s dwindling resources. Their supply is endless, and they create demand through employing tactics of artificial scarcity (an ‘exclusive’ drop is never actually exclusive). They have their feet on both pedals of the fashion value chain crank, and they can go as fast as they like.
If we know this is happening, then why aren’t consumer attitudes changing at an equivalent pace? Why do people who feel positively about sustainable products still rarely follow through with their wallets? The reason is what researchers refer to as the “intention-action gap”, and it is pervasive because people are more likely to engage in a behavior only when they get a positive feeling from doing so. This has been crucially overlooked in a lot of sustainability marketing, which favours unrelatable and bleak statistics like how much water it takes to make a t-shirt, instead of focusing on shaping good habits or positive influence. This approach doesn’t really compel someone to adopt more sustainable buying habits, and when you add in all the greenwashing it just makes them more cynical. And a cynical shopper will get fed up and buy whatever they damn well please.
Much of the reason why we cave and buy more than we need comes down to social conditioning and, arguably, the entire history of the advertising industry. I find that when I’m tempted, it helps to think about the bigger problem behind my potential purchase. Who or what is tempting us to accumulate more goods, and why? In 1928 Edward Bernays, the so-called father of public relations, developed some of the earliest theories around advertising in his seminal work Propaganda. He wrote that by simply manipulating the collective mind, you can persuade people to consume beyond their means and needs. It should be pointed out that Bernays was the nephew of Sigmund Freud, and his most successful PR campaign was convincing women to take up smoking. What a guy!
The problem isn’t just fast fashion though; advertising has convinced us that it’s okay to consider entire categories of belongings as disposable. The real issue, the most tragic and destructive outcome of this, is that we have lost our ability to place meaning in crafted objects. But that doesn’t mean we can’t find it again.
