fashion education

Sustainability Is Ridiculous

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 2 minutes

Why playing this shell game should be banned


Sustainability is ridiculous. Not because the concept per se is foolish or does not make sense. But because it is too broad, too vague, and, therefore, deceptive. 

Sustainable fashion? This is greenwashing


Sometimes for ignorance or superficiality, yet in most cases, intentionally, as those who play the sustainable game are perfectly aware of what they do. But, in the end, sustainability is just a new way to make money by showing a green facade. The industry, that goes from consultancy to fashion brand retail to NGOs, is flourishing. As a matter of fact, industry players spend time on “eco – green – conscious” labels, but it seems they are playing a shell game. The purpose is to hide and manipulate truths. 

In most cases, the effort is all about running after the latest eco-friendly label. But is it enough to achieve sustainability? It is the case of Chloé, for instance. Richemont hired Gabriela Hearst for her eco credentials, and now, three years later, the designer is exiting the company. Though they say revenue increased by 60%, their design is far away from the beauty of the past. 

Why sustainability is ridiculous


Ultimately, we have some doubts about the strategy Chloé has promoted so far. How can a luxury brand based on seasonal trends manage its business without damaging the planet? We wonder how fashion brands that shift to a purpose-driven business can be credible if they still run their activity on an overproduction pattern. Also, they attain the status of B-Corp. Most importantly, we wonder how B-Corp certification can combine with overproduction. That seems contradictory. In fact, in this context, sustainability is ridiculous.

Specifically, we wonder if a drastic reduction of supply by offering only beautiful design garments made with “sustainable materials” and respecting the production chain would be an effective strategy.

But, of course, we understand that manipulating reality with the effect of fueling overconsumption is the most effective way to make money. So keep up promoting a green world!

Sustainability Is Ridiculous Read More »

Fashion Waste Visible From Space

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 2 minutes

Atacama Desert: fast fashion’s disaster view via satellite


Fashion waste is now visible from space. Indeed SkyFi, an American startup that provides high-resolution satellite photos and recordings, has confirmed a giant pile of clothes in the Atacama Desert, Chile. And so, it happens that a piece of news released in 2021 is brought back, highlighting human inactivity and carelessness towards the waste we put out.

The Atacama Desert and the cost of fast fashion


The Atacama Desert, the driest desert in the world, is in Chile. Now it is an island of discarded clothing, including Christmas sweaters and ski boots, piling up in the desert. Indeed, Chile is a hub for secondhand and unsold clothing ending up there from all over the world. USA, Europe and Asia. Approximately 59,000 tons of garments arrive there every year. Clothing merchants buy part of it, but the majority, about 39,000 tons, end up in rubbish dumps in the desert. 
You can read our exploration here.

This is via the SkyFi website:
“The satellite image that we ordered of the clothes pile in Chile’s Atacama Desert really puts things into perspective. The size of the pile and the pollution it’s causing are visible from space, making it clear that there is a need for change in the fashion industry. Our mission to make Earth observation data easy and transparent is vital to identifying and addressing problems like this one.” 

Fashion industry vs change


On the one hand, it’s good to have another viewpoint on what is going on with fashion waste. That perspective about the earth from a distant observation is appalling. On the other, almost two years have gone by since the first news release, but nothing has changed over time. So, were we waiting for a satellite view to make a change?

The fashion industry, a capitalistic system based on the exploitation of people and the planet, has a huge responsibility. However, despite the giant pile of clothes being confirmed, CEOs will not change. The fashion system will not change. But people have the power in their brains and wallet.

Today is World Environment Day, and the big news is that fashion waste is visible from space! Are we waiting for a satellite view from Mars to start moving a finger? Or is it time to educate ourselves and have an independent thought?

Fashion Waste Visible From Space Read More »

The Elephant In The Room: Overproduction

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 2 minutes

& why the fashion system ignores it


The elephant in the room is a bulky presence that fills every physical space. A dominant companion whose effect we can see in every corner of the planet. The thing is, everyone ignores it, hides it, or pretends not to see it. 

But can the fashion industry make change without addressing its elephant in the room? 

Fashion industry: what is the elephant in the room?


It’s overproduction! An enormous, visible, tangible and destructive elephant. Is the industry aware of it? Fashion insiders, CEOs, fashion designers? And the group of all the new “sustainable labels”? And what about those who promote corporate change? Of course, they are aware. But they still put profit first, not the planet. Even new companies born to spread sustainable messages do not renounce the overproduction/overconsumption pattern. In fact, some deemed changing that system would be too radical, and bosses wouldn’t accept it.

But is it plausible to talk about sustainability regardless of overproduction? No! Of course, not! 

To make it even more clear: can brands that overproduce goods be considered sustainable? No, they can’t! It seems obvious!

So, why does every single brand involved in this overproduction system promote its sustainable practices? Marketing is the answer: the purpose is, selling more, feeding the system and their pockets. And marketing takes the shape of greenwashing or social washing in order to show a clean face engaging with people. 

Specifically, are top brands and new green companies bringing real innovation? Are they doing the right thing with their sustainable marketing strategies? No, they simply found a new way, an updated way, to make money!

And so, in the end, it all boils down to this point: can the fashion industry attempt to make a change without addressing the elephant in the room? No! Of course, not! Indeed, the industry is far from changing for the better.

The Elephant In The Room: Overproduction Read More »

Carbon Neutral: Plant A Tree?

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 3 minutes

Offsetting carbon emissions: why it is misleading


The carbon neutral definition may lead people to believe that a brand claiming this practice is sustainable. But, planting trees isn’t enough to solve the climate change issue.

Indeed, it’s always interesting to read how the fashion industry is involved in sustainable practices. Which, now, we can place under the umbrella of corporate change. We get itchy just thinking about it! There is no company that doesn’t talk about its eco-friendly policies. The bigger they are, the more they blurt out promises they cannot keep.

Sustainable brands


According to the Circular Fashion Index 2023, Gucci is the most sustainable among luxury brands. Kearny, a strategic consultancy company that analyses the impact of the circularity of brands, operates this ranking. They rank fast fashion brands, too! So, fast fashion has sustainable practices –really?

We feel a little disappointed when agencies release these rankings because of the misleading impact. In fact, we think industries use the word sustainable too much. After checking out those rankings, our question is: how can brands structured on an overproduction model be sustainable?

Carbon neutral or greenwashing?


But, while some magazines posted the list of the most sustainable brands or sustainable mega entities, The Guardian released an article that dampens enthusiasm. 

“Adverts that claim products are carbon neutral using offsets are to be banned by the UK’s advertising watchdog unless companies can prove they really work, the Guardian can reveal, as Gucci becomes the latest company to struggle with a high-profile environmental commitment based on offsetting.
Amid growing concern that firms are misleading consumers about the environmental impact of their products, the Advertising Standards Authority’s (ASA) is to begin stricter enforcement around the use of terms such as “carbon neutral”, “net zero” and “nature positive” as part of a greenwashing crackdown later this year after a six-month review.”

The Guardian

Offset CO2 emissions: what does it mean? 


Offsetting CO2 emissions means balancing the amount of CO generated by any activity through reforestation, parks and natural reserves protection. These projects generate carbon credits.

“In January, a joint Guardian investigation found that many rainforest offsets certified by Verra, which operates the world’s leading carbon standard, had little impact despite being widely used by major companies for environmental claims, also finding evidence of forced evictions at a flagship project in Peru used by Disney and Apple.”

The Guardian


Specifically, The Guardian revealed that more than 90% of rainforest carbon offsets by the biggest certifier are worthless! Therefore, planting trees isn’t helping with climate change.

When big brands, corporations and millionaires talk about sustainability and carbon emissions, always be careful. They are the problem. And if they want to be part of the solution, they must change their overproduction model and lifestyle first. 

Changing marketing isn’t enough. Carbon-neutral and sustainable claims are just smoke and mirrors.

Carbon Neutral: Plant A Tree? Read More »

Tailoring vs Mass Products

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 2 minutes

Valuing quality over novelties


Tailoring has nothing to do with mass products. Indeed, they are two worlds apart. Why is it important to make this point clear? Because what and how we buy, is connected to the change we want to make. In fact, it’s about promoting a cultural shift far from the novelty-obsessed fashion industry. To this end, changing the perspective of what we consider new is crucial.

Mass products: ready to wear and trendy items


With the term mass products, we identify the “production of large quantities of a standardised article by an automated mechanical process.” Specifically, in the fashion industry, we call it pret-a-porter or ready to wear. In other words, mass-produced clothing with an average price range. Both top brands and the “average market” garments are mass-produced.

You can call these garments new because they come from a new collection, a current season, or a new delivery. But that doesn’t imply specific quality standards. Nor anything significant in the context of climate change.

Ready to wear is trendy based, cheaper to manufacture and convenient for the consumer. But this business model has reached a tipping point. In fact, the impact it has on the planet is devastating and undeniable. Mass-produced clothing is the result of capitalism, an economic system based on the exploitation of people and the planet’s resources. Since this system believes in endless growth, it fosters overconsumption in the shape of trendy items pushing people towards novelty obsession.

Tailoring: quality over quantity


On another level, we find tailoring. Which means pieces manufactured by artisans, made by skilled hands. Therefore, clothing from ateliers or small realities. They would provide good quality in limited quantities reducing fashion waste.

While mass products change continuously, offering new items that last a breath of wind, tailored garments focus on quality and artisanal workings. In fact, their designs don’t change that much over time. You don’t buy them because they’re trendy, but because you’ll wear them for a lifetime.

Most importantly, tailoring brings an added value, mass products, instead, represent the perpetration of a destructive system.

What if what we call “new” is actually wrong?

Tailoring vs Mass Products Read More »