What would you choose; education at a lesser-known institution or an Ivy League school? A rational consumer would go for the least expensive option. But what if the opposite thing happened? According to common knowledge, if a good’s price increases, demand falls. That does not hold when it comes to luxury products which carry with them a story desired by all.

 

This was proven years ago by economist Thorstein Veblen, in his treatise The Theory of the Leisure Class in the year 1899. He explained that people want to acquire such high priced entities as it provides an illusion to belong to a higher status, even if that means a person doesn’t have the purchasing power. People tend to associate price with quality, without any legitimate proof to believe so. According to a study conducted by Stanford University and California Institute of Technology in 2008, research participants reported finding more pleasure in sipping a 90$ wine rather than a 10$ one. Surprisingly, the same wine was served with price tags altered. This proves that marketing and pricing strategy can affect decision making. But everything comes at an unprecedented price, whether it’s our hard-earned money or innocent lives of human beings and animals.

 

The first thing which looms in our mind when we utter luxury is fashion. The fashion industry is the largest sector that caters to this tier. Their capitalization on exclusive raw materials and larger-than-life advertisements never fail to attract customers. The high price is ironically the USP. According to them, the materials they use and the creative minds they hire constitute it. But how does this work?

 

According to Deutsche Welle, high-end fashion brands claim to follow a moral code of conduct when it comes to working condition of laborers. But the supply chain is under wraps and there is no account of how the subcontractors operate. The laborers often complain of low wages and injuries while working in an unhygienic environment. Gruesome treatment is meted out to them if they complain. In December 2015, New Model Centre Development Association and Clean Clothes Campaign developed a report called A Tough Story of Leather. It threw a spotlight on the Santa Croce district of Italy, the second-largest manufacturer of leather in the world. It gives insight into how the workers are subject to harmful environmental practices and abuses. Though approved initially, it later faced resistance from higher authorities who were close to the fashion houses. The story doesn’t end here. We often love to buy vintage fur coats. But it comes at the opportunity cost of killing thousands of raccoons and rabbits, slaughtered in the Zhejiang province of eastern China. It is one of the world’s largest fur industries. These furs are transported to wholesale markets where they are bought for cheap prices or given to subcontractors. They transport furs to fashion houses’ direct suppliers to manufacture those coats. All of this happens with utmost secrecy. They often claim to get such materials from Europe and America, where raw materials are expensive. But they secretly outsource and manufacture them from Asian countries, to be shipped elsewhere. At such inhumane working conditions and low wages, the companies are barely burdened with production costs. All of it goes into fashion shows, wine tasting, polo, car rallies, vintage art shows, etc. which are organized so that the world’s wealthiest population can associate themselves with the brand. Celebrity endorsements also give them an extra edge.

 

The high-end brands face stiff competition from another aspect of the fashion industry: Fast Fashion. They provide consumers with designer clothes’ knockoffs at a cheaper rate. But it is estimated to produce tons of wastage and is one of the fastest-growing categories of waste in the world. Fast Fashion follows a business model that captures more buyers. They practice two strategies: Quick Response Manufacturing and Dynamic Assortment. These help the companies to compete in a rapidly changing manufacturing arena by bringing the products more quickly to the market; increasing profit by enhancing delivery performance and reducing costs. For example, high-end fashion brands usually release 2 to 3 seasons per year, each season comprising new collections. But fast-fashion chains arrange nearly 52 seasons.

 

During the manufacturing and delivery process, the amount of wastage generated is huge. Consumers buy a lot more than they wear. As a result, they throw away clothes which end up in landfills. Organizations like Savanna Rags collect and recycle them. According to The Economist, they reported that only 25% of the waste is usable. This happens because of cheap raw materials and plastic. Brands generate waste by transporting the unsold merchandise to landfills near Africa and Kenya and burning them. This makes way for them to clear stocks. On the other hand, carcinogenic chemicals are thrown into the river while manufacturing. Al Jazeera reported that residents near the Citanum River in Indonesia are suffering from severe liver problems due to these factories. Though these activities are acknowledged by the companies, no preventive measures are taken. They resort to Greenwashing. The annual report (2018) of Inditex proves this contradiction where they claim to include all of their stores’ waste on Pg 282 just to contradict it 5 pages ahead by stating “Waste generated in stores is not included”. Environmentalists claim that the fashion industry generates more greenhouse emissions and carbon footprint than international flights and maritime shipping.

 

Fashion not only ends with clothing and accessories, it includes another important aspect, make-up. Market demand for make-up is increasing, making room for the import of an important chemical, Mica. Mica is mostly mined in the Indian state of Jharkhand. To make matters worse, 90% of the laborers are children, ranging from 6 to 14 years of age. Many die each year as they get covered under debris while working. This process went underground after the 1980s due to strict environmental and child labor eradication policies. Once the mica leaves the mine, it is funneled into a process that conceals the fact that children ever had anything to do with it. Surprisingly, NCPCR India (National Commission for Protection of Child Rights) claimed to know this since 2016 and has been doing a survey, which is overseen by the Ministry of Women and Child Development, India. But when investigated, they completely denied any such project being undertaken by them. Kailash Satyarthi Children’s Foundation and make-up conglomerate Estee Lauder is closely working to build a child-friendly mica industry since 2019 in the villages of Bihar and Jharkhand. Many brands have also pledged to use synthetic mica to reduce mining-related deaths. But no significant changes have been observed yet.

 

On the brighter side, initiatives like Rent the Runaway are doing an amazing job when it comes to renting clothes. They have their laundry system, so one just needs to rent and return them after 4 or 8 days. Luxury brand Patagonia has opened mobile repairing services around Europe and North America so that customers buy their clothes less and repair more often. This is making way for protecting environment, human rights, employment and profit.

 

The bigger picture holds more unfortunate stories we will never know. But there’s a solution to everything and it is on us to bring change through sustainable usage and a controlled purchase. According to a news segment, aired on the Netflix show Patriot Acts with Hasan Minhaj, “If everyone bought one used item this year instead of new, it could save nearly 6 pounds of CO2 emissions – that’s equivalent to removing half a million cars off the road for a year.”Buy a few clothes and make-up, rent them on special occasions, mend the old clothes, use torn clothes as rags, wash less and dry clothes more under the sun. Try to differentiate between needs and wants. Be a responsible Fashionista!

 

 

 

References

Cover art done by Urooj Ali.

Leave a Reply

Skip to content