overproduction

Dior in Court Administration & the Case of Luxury Fashion

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 3 minutes

Is luxury fashion sustainable and ethical as they claim?


Dior in court administration highlights the case of luxury fashion, bringing to light a harsh reality. Luxury brands pride themselves on labelling their products and practices as the only sustainable and ethical fashion. But the truth is way far from that high-standard patina. The reality diverges significantly from the beautiful policies displayed on their websites or the public declarations made during panels, events and fashion shows.

Luxury & sustainability: the image of dedication


Let’s take a step back. In 2019, magazines and millennials applauded Maria Grazia Chiuri for explicitly tackling sustainability. “A topic she’s grappled with privately for some time and that’s becoming a growing focus at LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton, the luxury conglomerate that owns Dior,” you can read on WWD.

The same WWD article notes: “The group recently bought a stake in the Stella McCartney brand, known for its green credentials, and appointed photographer Yann Arthus-Bertrand, founder of the Good Planet foundation, as an advisory board member. LVMH is set to unveil further environmental initiatives at a press conference in Paris on Wednesday.”

The news: Dior in court administration


Now, back to the present day. According to Reuters, “an Italian subsidiary of French luxury giant LVMH that makes Dior-branded handbags was placed under court administration on Monday, after a probe alleged it had subcontracted work to Chinese-owned firms that mistreated workers.”

Italian police conducted inspections at four small suppliers operating in the Milan area. The staff lived and worked “in hygiene and health conditions that are below the minimum required by an ethical approach.” Additionally, the workers had to sleep in the workplace to ensure “manpower available 24 hours a day.” Moreover, safety devices had been removedfrom the machinery to allow faster operation.

The current investigation into labour exploitation within Italy’s fashion supply chains is shattering the immaculate image brands use to describe themselves. Indeed, it exposes the connection between luxury brands and sweatshop conditions.

Specifically, this is the Milan court’s third decision this year regarding pre-emptive measures. In April, they accused Giorgio Armani Operations of inadequate supplier oversight. 

However, Reuters has seen a copy of the latest decision: the court stated that prosecutors alleged the rule violations were not isolated incidents among fashion companies operating in Italy, but rather a systematic issue driven by the pursuit of higher profits.

“It’s not something sporadic that concerns single production lots, but a generalised and consolidated manufacturing method,” the document said.

No comment from LVMH. Armani stated that it has always implemented controls to “minimize abuses in the supply chain.” Fun, isn’t it? Is a 2/3€ per hour pay a minimisation of abuses?

More data on investigations here:

Behind the Seams: Fashion Industry & Forced Labour

And here:

Workers’ Rights in the Fashion Industry

The case of luxury fashion


In conclusion, let’s repeat this concept once again: fast fashion and luxury fashion are two faces of the same coin. For different budgets, but operate through the same exploitative pattern of overproduction.

Is luxury fashion sustainable and ethical, as they claim? Not at all. It’s a marketing manipulation. Mass-produced garments made in sweatshop conditions are neither sustainable nor ethical. High-end brands sell a dream, an illusion of luxe. And, If quality is an illusion crafted by marketing, so is luxury. What once was known as luxury fashion isn’t really luxury anymore.

Indeed, luxury fashion has nothing to do with true luxury.

The absence of moral fabric within the industry is evident, and consumers demonstrate disregard by ignoring this issue despite the wealth of available information.

The point is: does it still make sense to support these brands?

Dior in Court Administration & the Case of Luxury Fashion Read More »

Shiny Objects Syndrome: Unveiling Psychology Behind Consumer Behaviour

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 3 minutes

Exploring the paradox: why people forget reality and support exploitation in fashion


Shiny Object Syndrome is the psychological idea where a person moves from one subject or object to the next, creating a constant distraction and a constant need for something new and exciting. This syndrome is present in the fashion industry with fashion trends, technology, news, social media, etc. 

Shiny Object Syndrome: encouraging overproduction from brands


In terms of the fashion industry, the control of Shiny Object Syndrome over society is what encourages fashion corporations to overproduce and contribute towards the abundance of textile waste and exploitation of labour. But our need for something shiny and new is costing the planet purchase by purchase. 

Unbreakable reputations despite concerning news
In April 2024, the Italian police exposed Giorgio Armani operations for using Chinese workers under an unauthorized subcontractor to make handbags and accessories. These workers were subject to unsafe working conditions and exploitation. Armani can also be traced to major water pollution scandals in China. Despite these concerning allegations, Armani maintains their reputation of being the pride of Italy and a loved brand worldwide. This contradiction is evident in other brands as well. 

The result: a vicious cycle
News and trends circulate so much that we forget the significance of events. Thus, when Armani releases their new collection we are too fascinated by the new fabrics, styles, and costs to remember how exactly these novelties were made. Thus, the Shiny Object Syndrome. Ultimately, we are showing brands that they can exploit human rights and the planet and get away with it. This must stop. 

Stopping the shiny object syndrome


Shiny Object Syndrome can reflect in many aspects of our life from relationships to our purchasing habits. If we are always searching for the next exciting thing, we will never be satisfied with what we have. 

To avoid shiny object syndrome you can:

1. Set achievable short-term goals
Setting short-term goals can divert our focus towards positivity and improvement during the week and help us work towards a greater goal. Personal motivation is key.

2. Focus on experience rather than substance and find meaning in smaller things
Spend money on experiences like dinner with friends and plan these experiences for something to look forward to. Also, find meaning in smaller things by reviewing your day and asking yourself what made you smile and how you can make someone smile tomorrow. 
When you do buy, buy thoughtfully. Invest in items where you can read about the story of the designer and feel the craftsmanship. Items that are unique to you and not just a trend.

3. Practice Gratitude
Gratitude always. Gratitude can be as simple as being grateful for a sunny day or the flowers blooming. Once we see what we appreciate, we can appreciate even more and accept a beautiful life.

Gratitude turns what you have into abundance.
Gratitude is so much more than saying thank you.
Gratitude changes your perspective of your world.

What really matters


In conclusion, brands are constantly feeding off our bad habits, not only exploiting their workers but they’re also exploiting their customers. Shiny Object Syndrome increases the profit of brands while decreasing your overall well-being and satisfaction with life. It is better for your health and for our social and economic environments to disengage from Shiny Object Syndrome and focus on what really matters to you.

✍ Credit: Post written by Joelle Elliott, an American scholar pursuing studies in Fashion at Cattolica University in Milan; currently interning with suite123.

Shiny Objects Syndrome: Unveiling Psychology Behind Consumer Behaviour Read More »

Fashion Crimes: Dirty Cotton

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 3 minutes

Earthsight Ong linking european giants to illegal activities in Brazil


According to the British NGO Earthsight, the cotton used by textile giants H&M and Zara to produce their clothes is dirty cotton.

Specifically, the NGO alleges that the two European brands are complicit in large-scale illegal deforestation activities in Brazil, including land grabbing, human rights abuses, corruption, and violent land conflicts. But this revelation is particularly alarming as it implicates Better Cotton, a certified sustainable cotton label. If you heard us say certifications worth zero, here’s the proof.

Fashion Crimes: The report on dirty cotton


Using satellite imagery, court decisions, product shipping records, and undercover investigations, Earthsight has compiled a report titled ‘Fashion Crimes.’ The result is a damning portrait! Cotton certified as ethical by the world’s largest certification system, Better Cotton, is found to be contaminated by numerous environmental offences. Also, this cotton is exported to various Asian manufacturers, producing approximately 250 million clothing items and household articles annually for H&M, Zara, and their sister brands’ global stores.

Fashion Crimes: dirty cotton - Report cover
Fashion Crimes: Dirty Cotton – read the full report here

The NGO has tracked the journey of 816,000 tons of cotton from two of Brazil’s largest agroindustrial companies, Horita Group and Slc Agrícola, in Western Bahia. Traditional communities lived in harmony with nature. But greedy agricultural companies serving global cotton markets attacked them and robbed their lands. The Brazilian families who own these lands have a lengthy history of legal proceedings, convictions for corruption, and multimillion-dollar fines for illegal deforestation.

Some of these illicit activities take place in the Cerrado region, a savanna renowned for its rich fauna and flora, constituting the second most important biome in Brazil. The Cerrado, which hosts 5% of the world’s species, saw a 43% increase in vegetation destruction in 2023. The clearing of Cerrado trees for agriculture generates carbon equivalent to the emissions of 50 million cars each year.

Environmental protection is a key issue for the European Union, which has included the new European Deforestation Regulation (Eudr) in the Green Deal. A program against climate change that encourages the consumption of certified raw materials and imposes restrictions on the importation of those produced in deforested regions.

“Earthsight’s year-long investigation reveals that corporations and consumers in Europe and North America are driving this destruction in a new way. Not by what they eat – but what they wear.”

Better Cotton: certifications & greenwashing


In conclusion, the NGO points the finger at Better Cotton, the world’s largest ‘ethical’ cotton certification system, with the raw material exposed as dirty cotton. Therefore, contaminated by various environmental offences. “BC has been repeatedly accused of greenwashing and criticised for failing to allow for full traceability of supply chains.”

Therefore, can we trust sustainable labels? No, of course not! Left alone, labels and certifications mean nothing. In fact, they are frequently used to mislead people. So, they are just greenwashing. Moreover, selling more green products is a strategy to support the overproduction model. So, it won’t solve any issue. (Download “The sustainability basics” checklist here).

Even though brands like Zara and H&M might use sustainable materials, the massive quantities they produce would nullify the sustainable effort. Why isn’t this clear? The solution is plain: we must produce and consume less. It’s the only viable strategy in the face of such devastation.
Consumers play a crucial role in perpetuating these harmful practices, often unknowingly. By reducing our consumption and demanding accountability from brands, we can make a real difference in protecting the environment and promoting sustainability.

While uncovering dirty cotton practices is crucial, it’s imperative to recognize that consuming less is fundamental for sustainability. Consume less: this is the action we must take now!

Fashion Crimes: Dirty Cotton Read More »

Greenpeace: Stop Fast Fashion

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 4 minutes

Take action and sign the petition


Greenpeace has just launched a new petition urging people to stop fast fashion. The issue is very dear to us,  indeed, our perspective on fashion stands in stark contrast to this. So, we invite you to read and take action.

Notice: The content presented in the post is sourced from Greenpeace investigations and reports.

Fast fashion: a polluting and unsustainable industry


Clothes sold and returned immediately. Accessories designed to last only one season. Destined to break within a few weeks. And soon ending up in landfills or in the Global South. With mass production, low quality, and ridiculously low prices, the fast fashion industry generates enormous amounts of waste and pollution. And behind the false promises of sustainability often lies greenwashing and a devastating environmental and social impact.

Fast fashion in 3 numbers:

  • 25%: the percentage of new clothing unsold and discarded every year
  • 1 second: every second, a truckload of discarded clothing is either burned or thrown into landfills
  • -1%: it’s the amount of clothing that is actually recycled into new garments.

Every year in Europe, 230 million pieces of clothing get destroyed.

Greenpeace: stop fast fashion clothing discarded in Africa
Image credit: Greenpeace

Textile fibres


Over 60% of the textile fibres (acrylic, polyester, nylon) used to produce our clothing are synthetic fibres, and many are derived from hydrocarbon refining, such as gas and oil. Polyester, derived from petroleum, begins to release microplastics after the first few washes, which end up in the oceans and then move up the food chain, also in our food. The fossil fuel industry grows and proliferates thanks to fast fashion as well.

The dark side of the most famous brands

  • Shein: According to 2022 data, many of its garments contain toxic substances, with some exceeding legal limits, particularly phthalates, up to 600% of the legal limit.
    (source: Greenpeace investigation 2022)
  • Nike, Ralph Lauren, Diesel: A 2022 investigation demonstrated that waste from the production of clothing and footwear for these three brands was being burned in brick kilns in Cambodia, exposing the involved workers to toxic fumes.
    (source: Greenpeace/Unearthed investigation)
  • Amazon, Temu, Zalando, Zara, H6M, OVS, Shein, Asos: Clothing returned after purchase on the most famous e-commerce platforms travels up to 10,000 kilometres and often is not resold.
    (source: Greenpeace investigation 2024)

Online returns: clothing travelling up to 10,000 kilometers


Clothing purchased and then returned multiple times. Parcels of clothing travelling for tens of thousands of kilometres between Europe and China, with no cost to the buyer and minimal expenses for the producing company. But with huge environmental impacts. This is what emerged from the Greenpeace Investigative Unit Italy investigation, which, for about two months, in collaboration with the television program Report, tracked the journeys of some garments in the fast-fashion sector purchased and returned through e-commerce platforms. It revealed a schizophrenic logistics chain, extremely long journeys, and the environmental impact in terms of equivalent CO2 emissions.

Sustainability? It’s just greenwashing!


Fast fashion companies promote their supposed sustainability and respect for better working conditions by stating on labels that their clothing items are produced with a lower environmental impact. However, it often amounts to nothing more than greenwashing. Our investigation of 29 brands has revealed the truth, and globally recognized brands such as Benetton Green Bee, Calzedonia Group, Decathlon Ecodesign, H&M Conscious, and Zara Join Life, just to name a few, have received a red mark regarding the credibility of the statements on their labels.

Greenpeace: sign the petition


In conclusion, fast fashion, the ultra-rapid fashion sold at very very cheap prices, is not harmless. Unfortunately, the low prices are achieved through the exploitation of workers and harm to the environment. Of course, it wouldn’t exist without modern-day slavery. However, there are alternatives to fast fashion for every budget, for instance, vintage, second-hand and slow fashion. Most importantly, it’s a matter of education and awareness, accessible to all. No excuses left.
So, take action now by signing the Greenpeace petition to stop fast fashion and protect our planet! 👉 sign it here!

Greenpeace: Stop Fast Fashion Read More »

What Happened to Slow Fashion?

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 2 minutes

An opportunity lost in the shadows of rapid change


What happened to slow fashion? As the foundations of the old world crumble, the emergence of a new one is fraught with struggles. Amidst this turmoil, we find ourselves pondering the fate of slow fashion.

Fashion industry: contradictory news


Headlines boast of growth and soaring sales for some brands, yet these reports seem akin to acts of sleight of hand, illusion games. Indeed, they prioritise the interests of banks over the stark realities that surround us. Moreover, these narratives clash with reports of top conglomerates stockpiling billions in unsold inventory.

In the relentless cycle of overproduction, an increase in output translates to a surge in revenue. However, much of this surplus finds its way to the incinerator rather than into the luxury retail.

Further underscoring the disintegration of the traditional fashion world are the ongoing bankruptcy reports. Most recently, Matches Fashion has found its place on this list. The Fraser Group, two months after the acquisition, claims the luxury e-tailer is on the brink of insolvency, a casualty of slowing demand for high-end products. Fraser laments: ‘The company systematically missed the targets of its business plan and, despite the group’s support, continued to record significant losses.’

Deciphering the destiny of slow fashion


In the wake of the pandemic-induced instability, sustainability has emerged as a cornerstone of discourse. Slow fashion, heralded as a rational solution to the problem of overproduction and resulting surplus inventory for shops, has garnered significant attention.

So, we’ve seen a lot of talks, round tables with the usual experts. Of course, by giving a voice to the same names that had caused the overproduction issue. A possible solution emerged, but after a few years of discussions on slow fashion, almost no one talks about it.

So, what happened to slow fashion? Was it just a temporary marketing strategy? Indeed, it languishes in obscurity, championed only by a handful of new brands struggling to gain traction. Meanwhile, the fashion industry remains wedded to antiquated profit models, heedless of its impending catastrophe.

The truth is, the world of fashion as we have known it has long been on shaky ground, particularly since the 1990s. But this reality holds little sway over the major players who continue to prioritise short-term profit over long-term sustainability.

Despite appearing as a missed opportunity amidst the whirlwind of rapid change, our commitment to and belief in slow fashion remains unwavering. We wholeheartedly support its principles and practices.
Please don’t hesitate to reach out to us with any thoughts or reflections you may have on this matter!

What Happened to Slow Fashion? Read More »