Polls show that consumers want
to buy clothes that are better for
the planet, but can they?
By Kimberly Atkins Stohr
WHEN IT COMES TO sustainable clothing shopping habits, we consumers know the buzzwords: “Slow fashion,” “circular fashion,” and “upcycling” come to mind. We know fast fashion is bad, minimalism is in, and thrifting is cool — not just because of the prevailing winds of fashion trends but also because sustainability is a virtue among clothing shoppers. One result has been a dramatic increase in consumers doing what they believe is the right thing. When our closets become too full of garments that no longer fit, or we want to downsize Marie Kondo-style, or we just get bored of our wardrobes, we pack up the clothes we no longer want and donate them to charities, resale shops, and consignment stores.
Racks of clothing are organized by decade at The Garment District, a used-clothing store in Cambridge. (Erin Clark/Globe Staff)
Thousands of garments are stored on a five-tiered conveyor system at the ThredUp sorting facility in Phoenix, March 12, 2019. (Matt York/AP)
I did this too. In fact, as I began writing this series I had no less than six large boxes of clothing, shoes, handbags, and other items that I earmarked for local thrift stores. I’d never think of throwing fabrics away, aware that they would languish in landfills. I thought I was doing the right thing.
After all, Massachusetts passed a law prohibiting clothing and other products from being thrown away, requiring that they be donated or recycled instead, an effort to reduce waste from those items in state landfills by 30 percent over the next decade.
According to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, about 230,000 tons of usable clothing, footwear, linens, and other apparel textiles are thrown away each year. This waste accounts for about 6 percent of landfill contents, according to the agency.
That’s because, while we may imagine donated items find new homes in other Americans’ closets, the vast majority of them don’t. According to a Greenpeace study, only 10 to 30 percent of donated used clothing in the United States, the United Kingdom, and European Union countries are resold domestically. The vast majority of textiles donated in the West — between 60 and 90 percent, depending on the country — are disposed of through commercial recyclers, which in turn repackage the clothing and sell the bundles to countries in the Global South.
Some are sold cheaply, but most items end up rotting in piles in countries in the Global South, blocking streams and other waterways, emitting methane, carbon dioxide, and toxic chemicals as the fabric degrades, and sending microplastics into the ocean. Tons are piled in high, rotting heaps in landfills, allowing dyes and other toxic components to pollute the soil, air, and groundwater — as well as endanger merchants who dig through the piles in search of garments that may be salvageable and sellable.
The effect isn’t just devastating for the planet but also for the people in the places hardest hit by this disaster, those least responsible for it, and those often in the least powerful position to do anything about it. Again — climate sustainability and social justice are inextricably bound.
A report by Greenpeace details the social injustice of this environmental waste. While a small fraction of imported secondhand clothing is resold, providing a crucial source of affordable clothing in African countries like Kenya and Tanzania, most clothing is not.
The dumping isn’t confined to landfills, which cannot contain all of the waste. Piles of clothing end up on the banks of rivers and streams local residents depend on for water to drink and bathe. But the dirt, dye, and other chemicals that seep from the piles are so prevalent that colorful pools of toxins float across the water’s surface like lily pads.
There are better, less destructive ways for sustainability-minded consumers, even the most ardent fashion lovers among us, to shop. But figuring that out can be daunting even for those most motivated to protect our planet while maintaining their own sense of style.
The good news is that consumers' hearts are in the right place; but the bad news, according to a survey by Zalando, a European e-commerce platform, is that there is a wide gap between consumer sentiment and consumer behavior when it comes to sustainability.
I took this approach myself with my high stack of boxed-up clothing and accessories, and I unpacked every piece. My new motto is “wear and repair.” On Aug. 1, I decided that for one full year I would not buy a single new item of clothing, with minor exceptions (like replacing my running shoes when they wear out). Instead, I am wearing what I already own — even if it requires mending or alteration — or buying items secondhand or handmade sustainably by artisans. The impact of my actions alone on the planet may be small. But the change to my mindset will, hopefully, last forever.
BELOW: Textile and plastic waste at Dandora dumping site in Nairobi. (Kevin McElvaney/Greenpeace)
BELOW: Textile waste near Gikomba market in Nairobi. (Kevin McElvaney/Greenpeace)
Suits are displayed in the window of a Men’s Wearhouse store in New York, June 25, 2013. Good On You rates the men’s clothing giant as “We avoid,” partially because “it does not publish sufficient relevant information about its environmental policies to give a higher rating.” (Brendan McDermid/Reuters)
Kimberly Atkins Stohr is a columnist for the Globe. She may be reached at kimberly.atkinsstohr@globe.com. Follow her @KimberlyEAtkins.
Editors: Marjorie Pritchard and Amy MacKinnon
Designer/Photo Editor/Project Manager: Heather Hopp-Bruce
Digital Editor: Rami Abou-Sabe
Copy Editor: Jessie Tremmel
Developer: Andrew Nguyen
Reduce,
repair, respect
PART 4
6%
of landfill contents is usable clothing, footwear, linens, and other apparel textiles.
But halfway around the world, other buzzwords paint a different picture. In Malawi, it’s “Kaunjika,” and in Kenya, they say “mitumba.” Both mean “bundles,” referring to the massive amounts of secondhand clothing exported from the Western world to countries in Western Africa and South Asia. In Ghana, the imports are called “obroni wawu,” which roughly translates to “the clothing of dead white men.”
A man rode in a truck carrying loads of secondhand clothes at a market in Kampala, Uganda, on Oct. 7. In August, President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda announced a ban on the importation of used clothing. (BADRU KATUMBA/AFP via Getty Images)
Gordon Renouf, founder of Good On You, which ranks fashion brands on their impact to people, animals, and the planet. (Gordon Renouf)
Good On You was designed to give consumers information about what brands are doing, what they are not doing, and what they are being less than forthcoming about in terms of their impact on the world and the people in it, Renouf told me.
The seeds of the idea were planted during the period of reckoning within the fashion industry that took place after the Rana Plaza disaster of 2013, when a poorly constructed clothing manufacturing building collapsed in Bangladesh, killing more than 1,000 people and injuring thousands more — mostly low-income earning women.
It was a wake-up call for the fashion industry and consumers alike. But the fashion industry did little to empower those who buy clothing to make more informed choices.
“There were campaigns calling for greater transparency in the fashion industry about workers’ rights,” Renouf said. “Consistent with the idea of protecting workers’ rights is giving consumers the agency to make good, ethical choices.”
Good On You uses publicly sourced information as well as information disclosed by fashion brands to rank fashion brands. That system assesses hundreds of data points based on more than 100 criteria that focus on the entire production chain, from the sourcing of raw materials to products’ end of use, reuse and recycling programs.
While the methodology is complex, the result is easy to use. The site uses five levels to rank brands based on their impact on people, animals, and the planet: great, good, it’s a start, not good enough, and we avoid.
Of course, the approach is only as good as the information that is available. To that end, Renouf praised the efforts of some countries, states, and municipalities to pass fashion supply chain transparency laws that force many of the world’s largest brands to be more forthcoming about the impact of their garments on environmental justice. They focus on everything from the amount of water required to produce garments to the types of dye used for fabrics, the impact of manufacturing on water and soil pollution, fair wages paid to workers, and environmental hazards in the workplace.
While 60 percent of respondents said they believe fashion brands should be more transparent about the impact of their garments on the environment, only 20 percent said they actively seek out that information when purchasing garments. Though 53 percent of those surveyed called clothing brands’ ethical labor policies important, only 23 percent said they investigated them.
Industry-wide efforts to help consumers make more informed decisions have been mixed. Efforts by some brands to push sustainability have been met with charges of greenwashing. And there is still no industry-wide definition or benchmark for what counts as sustainable fashion, let alone clothing produced in a fully environmentally just way.
But there are spaces where innovation is happening to give the growing number of environmentally and socially conscious shoppers the tools they need to shop sustainably.
“One of the significant problems faced by consumers is that it’s not easy to know which brands are doing better in terms of environmental impact and respecting the rights of workers in the supply chain,” said Gordon Renouf, a longtime consumer advocate in Australia and cofounder of Good On You.
The website was born from the realization that while fashion consumers want to shop in accordance with their values, it was never easy for them to do so. Unlike other products, from foods to pharmaceuticals to even everyday consumer products, there is no set of industry-wide standards or international governmental certifications for fashion garments, though some states have drafted or passed laws attempting to force greater transparency. Absent such laws, consumers know only what the manufacturers and fashion brands choose to divulge. And usually, that isn’t much.
Heather Hopp-Bruce/Globe staff
23%
Those who actively seek out that information when purchasing garments
53%
Those who called clothing brands’ ethical labor policies important
20%
Those who investigated clothing brands’ ethical labor policies
60%
Respondents said they believe fashion brands should be more transparent about the impact of their garments on the environment
From a survey by survey by Zalando, a European e-commerce platform
Consumer sentiment vs. consumer behavior
“I do not think that we will ever be able to regulate to perfection,” Renouf said. “But there is always a role for government to play when it comes to getting better information to consumers.”
Another way for consumers to make better choices is to remember the wise words of the late fashion designer Vivienne Westwood: “Buy less, choose well, and really make them last.”
That means using and reusing what you’ve got instead of replacing it. It can be as small as mending holes in socks or bigger, like joining a wider movement of those who seek to mend the world by mending their own clothes — and even adding their own fashion flair in the process.
+ What you can do
A new sketchbook
Rags to runway
From wardrobe to waste
Designing woman
Not so fast, fashion
Designing woman
From wardrobe to waste
Rags to runway
Reduce, repair, respect
A new sketchbook
+ What you can do
Not so fast, fashion
Series
Designing woman
From wardrobe to waste
Rags to runway
Reduce, repair, respect
A new sketchbook
+ What you can do
Not so fast, fashion
Series
6%
Heather Hopp-Bruce/Globe staff
23%
Those who actively seek out that information when purchasing garments
53%
Those who called clothing brands’ ethical labor policies important
20%
Those who investigated clothing brands’ ethical labor policies
60%
Respondents said they believe fashion brands should be more transparent about the impact of their garments on the environment
From a survey by survey by Zalando, a European e-commerce platform
Consumer sentiment vs. consumer behavior
+ What you can do
A new sketchbook
Rags to runway
Reduce, repair, respect
Designing woman
From wardrobe to waste
Not so fast, fashion
Editors: Marjorie Pritchard
and Amy MacKinnon
Designer/Photo Editor/Project Manager: Heather Hopp-Bruce
Digital Editor: Rami Abou-Sabe
Copy Editor: Jessie Tremmel
Developer: Andrew Nguyen
Kimberly Atkins Stohr is a columnist for the Globe. She may be reached at kimberly.atkinsstohr@globe.com. Follow her @KimberlyEAtkins.
Read more about fashion and environmental justice impact in Part 2: From wardrobe to waste
W
NOT SO FAST, FASHION
Join the conversation
Join the conversation
@GlobeOpinion Instagram
On Boston Globe Today
Kimberly Atkins Stohr and host Segun Oduolowu discuss the project.
On Say More
Kimberly Atkins Stohr and podcast host Shirley Leung talk in “Cute Top. It's killing the planet.”
On Boston Globe Today
Kimberly Atkins Stohr and host Segun Oduolowu discuss the project.
On Say More
Kimberly Atkins Stohr and podcast host Shirley Leung talk in “Cute Top. It's killing the planet.”