Introduction
Second hand, or “pre-loved,” clothing has become increasingly popular as a sustainable and economical alternative to “fast fashion”. Despite good intentions, only 1% of discarded clothing is recycled into new clothes (European Parliament, 2020). The majority of unwanted clothing is exported to low-income countries, dumped in landfills, or incinerated. At least 70% of donated clothing is exported to Africa, where it is resold or discarded in landfills; 85% of all textiles end up in landfills (Kubania, 2017). The incredible waste that the 2.5 trillion dollar global fashion industry creates simply cannot continue to be accomodated (Maloney, 2019). The increased popularity of fast-paced trends, exacerbated by social media, has led to the emergence of a linear economy model that creates deliberately poor quality products that are bought, worn, and quickly disposed of, allowing the fashion industry to bring in billions of dollars of profit at an extremely low cost due to its production and labor practices. Attempts at recycling, reusing, or prolonging the life of these garments are also futile, since the majority of them were never made to be durable. Recycling or donation, as mentioned, often also leads to clothes in a landfill. The demand for trendy, quickly available, and cheap clothing has created an utterly unviable linear economic model within the industry where clothes are made from virgin materials that are resource and labor intensive while also creating immense pollution and waste. According to the model that the industry is operating on and even with significant reductions in discarded clothing, the majority of waste produced is in the supply chain. In fact, the supply chain emissions of the industry is approximately 25 times more than its direct emissions (Cernansky, 2023). In recent years, there have been attempted solutions to this pressing problem, with the circular economic model (CE) being amongst the most notable. This model relies on extending the life of products by reusing, repairing, and eventually recycling products in order to minimize waste. In theory, recycled materials would “close the loop”, hence the name, between the consumer and producers, meaning resources can be infinitely reused. The circular economic model is the only solution to reconcile the current practices of the fashion industry.
Waste
The fashion industry is amongst the most polluting industries around the world. It produces 97 million tons of waste each year and ranks globally in the top three in terms of land and water use and top five in raw materials and emissions. The industry uses 79 billion cubic meters of water, constituting 20% of global water use, each year. It also emits 1.7 billion tons of CO2, making up nearly 10% of global annual emissions, according to Centobelli and colleagues from the University of Naples in Naples, Italy, and the University of Derby in Derby, UK (Centobelli et al., 2022). The amount of waste and resource use, especially exhaustible natural resources such as land and fresh water, produced by the industry is exorbitant and poses incredible environmental risks.
There are two major categorizations of industry waste: pre-consumer and post-consumer waste. Pre-consumer waste is waste created in the process of production or before the product reaches the consumer. This type of waste, however, is given much less attention than its counterparts despite its role in the total waste produced by the industry and the fact that supply chain emissions are much greater than the direct emission of the industry. Due to the mass production of textiles and garment construction, errors such as fabric inconsistencies, cutting, and sewing errors are becoming increasingly common. The largest factor in pre-consumer waste, however, is over ordering. Manufacturers often deliberately over-order textiles, which results in extra stock and unnecessary waste. Pre-consumer waste is often dumped at a landfill or incinerated (De Silva, n.d.). In order to reduce this unnecessary waste, the production, management, and consumption practices must change.
Post-consumer waste is defined as waste created that is not due to the manufacturing of products, such as after the product has been consumed or disposed of. Post-consumer textile waste largely consists of discarded clothing. The average American discards 80 pounds of clothing annually, the majority of which ends up in landfills. Furthermore, although thrifting and donating clothes have become a popular, more sustainable option, clothing in second hand stores often also contributes to waste. Around 500,000 tons of used garments from the United States are exported to low and middle income countries as compressed bales each year. In the European Union (EU), 25% of the textiles consumed annually by one person is exported while at the same time the amount of exported discarded textiles from the EU has increased from 550,000 tons in 2000 to approximately 1.7 million tons in 2019. The exported clothing is sorted and pieces deemed suitable are sold in local second hand shops. Clothing not suitable for sale remains in compressed solid form and is either incinerated, discarded in landfills, or becomes pollution, often blocking waterways and other natural habitats (Bick et al., 2018). Even with increased donation and attempts at reusing clothing, much of it ultimately remains as waste.
Planned Obsolescence
The increased prevalence of trend culture in the past few decades due to social media, amongst other factors, has led to a cycle of quickly changing fashion trends. These fast-paced trends, which remain more popular now than ever, encourage practices in the industry such as planned obsolescence, poor quality materials, and unethical labor practices in order to produce garments that keep up with the latest styles (Sierra-Fontalvo et al., 2023). Planned obsolescence is the practice of creating products with a deliberately and unnaturally limited lifespan to encourage more purchasing. Although factors that cannot be controlled, such as expected wear and tear of the product, contribute to product obsolescence, a study by Jurgita Malinauskaite, a professor of law and the head of Brunel Law School in London, UK, and Fatih Buğra Erdem, an associate professor of the Faculty of Law at the Social Sciences University of Ankara in Ankara, Türkiye, premature product obsolescence more often the deliberate choice of producers (Malinauskaitė & Erdem, 2021). Planned obsolescence must be addressed from the early stages of design as production speeds up and older products are continually disposed of. According to a study by Sierra-Fontalva and colleagues at the Universidad del Norte in Barranquilla, Colombia, product obsolescence was found to have been given “limited consideration” in its design and development process, meaning that even products that are not deliberately meant to be unusable after a short time are also subject to premature product obsolescence, creating unnecessary waste (2023). Planned obsolescence encourages consumers to buy products “a little newer, a little better, a little sooner than is necessary” in order to increase profits. This has not only led to lower quality since durability is no longer prioritized, but has also resulted in annual or seasonal versions of many products, which have minor aesthetic changes, in order to encourage more consumption. This in turn fuels the cycle of quick production, poor quality products designed to break, and more, needless purchasing that only contributes to the waste generated by the industry (Thornquist, 2018). The amount of post-consumer waste created increases each year due to trends and consumption patterns such as these. In order to end this cycle, not only must a design and production change be taken but also a cultural one.
Social Factors
The model of production that the fashion industry is operating on both cultivates and depends on a cycle of overconsumption. In “Moral Courage and Intelligent Disobedience”, Thomas and Chaleff write “In both instances there was a culture driven by pressure from above and greed which encouraged cheating and fraud by involving thousands of people” (2017). Phenomena such as cultural association and fear of missing out contribute to overconsumption and conformity consumption. The industry’s marketing practices that push new products as new, up to date, trendy, or improved, especially when this is not the case, creates consumption patterns such as unnecessary seasonal purchasing. These practices not only create excessive waste but have also promote materialistic values, especially for young girls that are the main target audience of the industry (Thornquist, 2018). Excessive trends and fads, the waste they create, as well as the social impact they have shows the necessity of recognizing the “falsity of material wealth” (Roosevelt, 1933).
The Circular Economy
In light of the issues created by the fashion industry, there have been numerous proposed solutions. The circular economic model, however, is the only solution that addresses these issues at their cause. While schemes such as donating and reusing clothing, buying second hand, recycling textile waste, and buying from “sustainable” brands do make an impact, these approaches on their own are unlikely to make significant progress in solving problems such as pollution, waste, overconsumption, and poor manufacturing practices because these issues are simply symptoms of a fundamental flaw within the way the industry operates. The circular economic model, therefore, is the most promising course of action. A circular economy is the model of using and reusing resources and products for as long as possible and thereby extending its life and reducing waste (Malinauskaitė & Erdem, 2021). The circular economy would reduce the need for newly produced products, which almost always requires virgin materials, lower emissions, and slow the “fast fashion” economic model (Centobelli et al., 2022).
This model has been proposed for the European Union (EU) as an alternative to the current linear model, otherwise known as the “take, make, use, waste” model. The EU has a plan to “close the loop” on, not only the fashion industry, but production practices in the EU on the whole. Potential benefits include minimizing waste, which is the major concern for the fashion industry, in addition to creating new jobs, stimulating economic growth, and encouraging investment. This plan, however, does acknowledge the obstacles in implementing a circular economy, especially across such a broad area with diverse economies such as the EU. These obstacles will undoubtedly apply to the application for the circular economy in the fashion industry as well (European Commission, 2015). But, this plan remains in its early stages and issues that arise from it will inform future applications of the CE in other economies.
In the previous decades, there has been a noticeable shift from producing high quality, durable products to ones that are much cheaper but quickly become unusable. Emerging technologies have made mass production the dominant method of manufacturing in order to meet ever growing demand. This has resulted in extreme and often unnecessary waste, which will be significantly reduced through the CE model by minimizing the need for virgin materials (Sierra-Fontalvo et al., 2023).
Limitations
Despite the merits of a circular economy, it is not without its faults. Critiques of the circular economy can be categorized into two main types: theoretical and practical.
The most notable of these critiques were delineated in a 2021 paper by Corvellec and colleagues at the Lund University, in Helsingborg, Sweden, stating that proponents of the circular economy are overly idealistic without considering possible implications of the CE and provide little detail on implementation. The authors claim that those who favor this model propose a “deliberately vague, but principally uncontroversial circular economy” (Corvellec et al., 2021). It must be noted, however, that the majority of critiques remain speculative due to the lack of an instance of large scale implementation. As more economies move to implement the circular economy, these concerns can be either dispelled or addressed.
Practical issues largely relate to technology. For example, due to the nature of some textiles, which degrade and lower in quality as they are repeatedly recycled, resources and recycled materials cannot be perpetually reused. Some argue that this limits the efficacy and detracts from the merits of the circular economy. However, implementation of the circular economy will result in a reduction in waste as well as a change in the methods through which waste is processed. Furthermore, a larger and larger fraction of discarded materials will be able to re-enter the supply chain as advances in textile and fiber recycling develop.
Conclusion
Fashion trends have been changing at an accelerating rate and increasing in prevalence. Since the late 20th century, such widespread consumerism has gained momentum and led to the rise of mass production. In the 21st century, the fashion industry is among the most polluting industries globally. The linear model of production has created millions of tons of waste each year as well as incredible pollution, water use, carbon emissions, and use of natural resources. The circular economic model, which aims to prolong the life of materials and products and can return needlessly wasted material back into the supply chain, is therefore the most ideal and only solution to the unsustainable model the fashion industry is currently operating under. Although there have been criticisms of the circular economic model, the majority of these can be addressed with a systematic, long term, and large scale approach. The biggest barrier to the implementation of the circular economy remains consumption habits, which must change for the creation of a more environmentally viable, economically aware, and socially responsible fashion industry.
