I used to marvel at the idea of buying a top for only $10 — until I learned it was being produced by someone who made less than $10 for a day’s work.
Every Black Friday, I used to hop onto whatever mainstream shopping site was big at the time and fill my virtual cart with all the clothes I wanted. With promotional deals, coupons and offers, I’d receive items all for a low-low price without realizing they were just as low quality. I failed to think about the people behind the fashion I consumed. Soon after, that bargain didn’t feel like a win; it started to feel like guilt.
Today, the fast fashion industry — trendy, cheap clothing designed for rapid production — is worth $114 billion and is projected to reach around $300 billion within the next decade. Globally, companies have reached new demographics and audiences, widening their customer base. But the majority of clothes produced go to waste — over 65% of clothing is thrown away within 12 months of purchasing. While this throwaway culture is immensely profitable for corporations, it exploits workers and results in massive environmental damage.
The debate over ethical standards in the fashion industry is nothing new. However, with the climate crisis accelerating, income inequality worsening and digital consumerism becoming our default, it begs the question: how much longer can we afford to produce cheap, quick items?
The short answer? We’ve reached the end of the road.
Beginning in the 1970s, mass production of items came to the forefront of the fashion industry, and around the same time, consumers became more conscious of their environmental impact. Hippies, for example, embraced sustainable practices, going against traditional norms of shopping. They rejected mass consumerism in support of thrifting and upcycling as a form of protest against wastefulness and pollution.
Unfortunately, these values didn’t stick. With fast fashion, cheap labor took the industry by storm, charging low prices to consumers for equally cheap goods. Sustainable practices like environmentally sourced clothing and thrifting or recycled materials flew out the window. Once markets like Shein and Romwe hit the scene, it transformed the way consumers viewed shopping. However, in 2022, these online shops became a popularized and coveted method of shopping, especially for younger generations.
If you find that you err on the side of supporting less environmentally conscious brands, it’s important to reform the way you shop. Luckily for consumers with an eye for shopping sustainably, a new market has emerged to make that process even simpler.
The “Good on You Directory” is a website that informs shoppers of the sustainability ratings of brands, allowing users to determine if the way they’re shopping is sustainable. But here’s the good news, now more than ever, sustainability is in vogue. According to Forbes, 62% of Gen-Z shoppers already choose to buy from sustainable brands, while 73% will even pay higher costs for environmentally friendly items.
But, if you’re still on the fence about making the sustainable switch, I want you to think about your real-world impact, especially on the environment.
Profit-driven trends are often short-lived and result in thrown-out clothes, adding to waste consumption and creating 92 million tons of textile waste each year. Approximately 3,000 liters of water are used to produce one cotton shirt, according to Princeton University. This makes the industry a major polluter, contaminating waterways with toxic chemicals responsible for 20% of global water waste. If that’s not enough, the fast fashion industry also produces nearly 10% of the microplastics in our oceans, which is equivalent to 50 billion plastic bottles polluting the Earth.
Of course, purchasing ethically sourced clothing firsthand is a privilege. But don’t shy away from buying from consignment retailers and secondhand shopping. Not only can you curate a unique, affordable collection of vintage pieces, but they’ll also be the outcome of the hard work you did to find them.
While affordability is a valid and important concern, it’s necessary to remember that options like thrifting or antiquing are great substitutes for consumers to look into.
While it might sound easier — and cheaper — said than done, there are still plenty of ways to make a positive change without breaking the bank.
Safa Razvi is a freshman and Opinion editor elect for The Daily Cardinal. Safa studies journalism and economics. Do you agree it's time to make the sustainable switch? Send all comments to opinion@dailycardinal.com
