Sustainable fashion
Sustainable fashion builds on the concept of sustainable development, which the UN defined in 1987 as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
The intended meaning of the term sustainable fashion is often noble. When campaigners and experts use it (and related terms like ethical fashion, green fashion, and eco fashion), they’re advocating for a fashion industry that manages its environmental impacts within planetary boundaries and ensures the wellbeing of people and other animals throughout the supply chain. In this view, meaningful sustainability requires a fundamental shift away from the business models that drive overproduction, overconsumption, waste, worker exploitation, and the climate emergency. Many experts will use terms like degrowth and the circular economy to describe the systemic changes needed to achieve a more sustainable fashion industry.
But due to its vagueness and the perceived lack of progress towards these goals, sustainable fashion is a term that many designers, activists, and policymakers now have mixed feelings about.
In recent years, terms like “sustainable” and “ethical” have been frequently co-opted in greenwashing and corporate sustainability spin. When the brands that are responsible for the majority of fashion’s overproduction, environmental impacts, and worker exploitation claim to be sustainable, the term begins to lose its meaning. And while a brand can be “more sustainable” and consumers can make “more sustainable choices”, the current reality is that no brand or choice is fully sustainable. This means the term is often limited and loses its potency.
To combat greenwashing, policymakers everywhere, from New York to the European Union, are working on legislating how a brand can use these terms in their marketing, leading to a rise in alternative ways of describing the initial goals behind the term itself.
For example, The New York Times fashion critic Vanessa Friedman has argued the term “sustainable fashion” is itself an oxymoron: “‘Sustainable’, after all, implies ‘able to continue over a period of time,’ […] ‘Fashion,’ on the other hand, implies change over time. To reconcile the two is impossible.” Friedman has resolved to use the term “responsible fashion” instead. More and more, retailers and brands are gravitating toward other labels like “conscious fashion” with similar intentions.
A brand can be 'more sustainable' and consumers can make 'more sustainable choices', but the current reality is that no brand or choice is fully sustainable. This means the term is often limited and loses its potency.