GREENWASHING SLOW FASHION

"Slow fashion” is one of the many terms within the fashion industry being substituted into communication strategies of companies despite their practices not aligning with their claims. This has led to a rise in greenwashing from many fashion companies. Greenwashing is when a company makes unsubstantiated claims as to deceive customers into believing that their products have a larger positive environmental impact than they do.

A company which is notoriously known for their continuous greenwashing attempts is fast-fashion retailer H&M. Recently H&M have been sued for the greenwashing of their ‘conscious choice’ line. This line of theirs retails higher than their “regular” garments due to its “little extra consideration for the planet”. The garments were labelled as ‘conscious’ (environmentally friendly) and marketed to contain sustainable materials, reduced virgin materials and less resource intensive. The brand joined the Higg Index:

The Higg Index was developed by the Sustainable Apparel Coalition (SAC), a global, multi- stakeholder non-profit alliance for the fashion industry. The Higg Index is a comprehensive suite of tools that enables standardized measurement of sustainable performance in the value chain (SAC, 2021). It is an apparel and footwear industry self-assessment standard for assessing environmental and social sustainability throughout the value chain as well as identifying effective sustainable efforts and those needing improvement (SAC, 2021). SAC developed the Higg Index for all industry participants, from brands to factories and retailers, to drive collective industry and systemic transformation. It offers product, facility and brand and retail tools, that measure across topics such as water use, carbon emissions and labour conditions (SAC, 2021).

The Higg Index was developed over 10 years and has its origins within the outdoor industry (OIA, 2018b: 12). The SAC is an initiative of Walmart, an American multi-national retail corporation, and Patagonia, an American clothing company that markets and sells outdoor clothing (SAC, 2021). Both companies, alongside CEOs of leading global companies, developed an index to measure the environmental impact of their products (SAC, 2021). This led to the formation of SAC, which adapted and Eco Index by OIA, of which Patagonia was an existing member. The Eco Index was developed by the Sustainable Working Group (SWG) of the OIA as an assessment tool to address the impacts associated with manufacturing in the outdoor industry (OIA, 2018b: 12). SAC adopted the Eco Index and developed it further into a web tool, alongside the latest scientific research, consultants, stakeholders, and industry experts (SAC, 2021). The OIA and SAC continue to work closely together to promote the Higg Index which is increasingly the supply chain management platform used by outdoor, sporting goods and fashion companies (OIA, 2018b: 12) (SAC, 2021).

*Edited extract from personal Master Thesis: Measuring Sustainable Innovation and Future Orientation of Leading Outdoor Retailers

Upon joining the Higg Index, their results were reported on the H&M website. H&M were then sued for greenwashing due to the data being used deceptively and reflecting inaccurate results – which the company said was due to a “technical error”. This technical error involved H&M ignoring the minus signs in the index score and advertising a garment with a water consumption rating of -20% (reflecting that the garment consumes more than 20% water than average), as the opposite of 20% less consumption. This clearly incorrect data was consistent throughout their collection and is just one identified example of the fast-fashion retailer’s exploiting sustainable ‘buzzwords’ and using greenwashing tactics on their customers. (Marinaro, 2022)

Greenwashing is a growing problem within the fashion industry especially. Many companies will place themselves within sustainable topics with only a small, or sometimes zero, amount of knowledge and/or understanding of the topic. Consumers are increasingly aware of environmental concerns and regulatory industry requirements and are holding brands accountable with their purchasing decisions (McKinsey, 2021: 50). The increasing consumer pressure for brands to perform more sustainably has led brands to find quick solutions to retain (and grow) their consumer base when facing these challenges. These ‘solutions’ are often implemented in the front end of their companies, in marketing and communication, more-so than within their actual supply chain and business operations. The reason for this often comes down to the cost of implementation being higher than the cost of a marketing campaign which can market and/or exaggerate existing sustainable efforts, resulting in a rise of greenwashing within the industry as companies compete for customers.

An example I have personally seen throughout working within the fashion industry is the use of the term ‘slow fashion’. This term is increasingly being used especially by smaller fashion brands globally. This trend has grown over the years with more and more brands adapting the term to their personal brand stories. Brands see the term as a direct opposite of the negatively associated fast-fashion model which they clearly do not fit within due to their production being at a significantly smaller and ‘slower’ pace, especially when compared to fast-fashion retailers like H&M, BooHoo and Shein.

However, as Kate Fletcher shares in her article “Slow Fashion: An Invitation for Systems Change” (2010:262), “Slow fashion represents a vision of sustainability in the fashion sector based on different values and goals to the present day. It requires a changed infrastructure and a reduced throughput of goods. Categorically, slow fashion is not business-as-usual but just involving design classics. Nor is it production-as-usual but with long lead times. Slow fashion represents a blatant discontinuity with the practices of today’s sector; a break from the values and goals of fast (growth-based) fashion. It is a vision of the fashion sector built from a different starting point.” This given definition by Fletcher highlights the crucial aspect that slow fashion is not a term that can just be applied by brands for certain aspects of sustainable or slower production within their company, but that this is a vision which should be within the values of a brand from its formation to ensure the success of their sustainable efforts and the creation of new systems.

While fast is the opposite of slow, in the context of fashion this is not the case. These are two different viewpoints within the industry and hold different values, models and processes (Fletcher, 2010: 262). Companies and brands are increasingly employing slower production techniques and processes for various reasons into their operations; however, these components of slow culture are being substituted and/or included into existing production models and labelled as ‘slow fashion’ which is greenwashing are not true to the values of slow culture. “Slow culture, rather being allowed to seed a radical new approach, gets passed through the sieve of understanding and hierarchy of priorities and goals prevalent in today’s industry and becomes absorbed not as high-level systems change (where the rules and goals of the industry are transformed) but as a marketing angle or alternative distribution channel in the current model, a tweaked version of today’s practices.” (Fletcher, 2010: 263).

Companies are not wrong in implementing aspects of slow culture into their operations as these changed behaviours do positively contribute towards the shift away from the growth dominated systems of the fashion industry. However, including select aspects of slow culture into operations, such as small-scale production, craft techniques and localization, will not substitute a company as one of slow fashion. These selective methods of slow fashion are suggestive of bigger change within the industry, but they are not the solution to the problem. Slow culture invites system change and the move away from the focus on economic and production growth of the fashion industry, towards a rebuilding of a fashion system considerate of what would best serve social and ecological needs.

Being a slow fashion brand involves a changed set of relationships with suppliers and customers, high levels of involvement and understanding throughout the supply chain and life-cycle of products, it is inclusive of true social and ecological costs, and takes a radical move away from high-volume and income goals (Fletcher, 2010: 264). It is possible (and encouraged) for companies to implement aspects of slow fashion into their operations but it is a challenge for fashion brands to label themselves as slow fashion while still participating in the mainstream economic and production systems currently dominating the fashion industry.

“Ideas of slow culture are part of a bigger story of change and transformation in the fashion sector towards sustainability. A story concerned with remodelling what we mean by development and success in fashion and profoundly rethinking the values that underpin these most influential of concepts. Sustainability requires that a foundation be laid of a different economic system with different values in the context of a wiser, saner worldview” (Fletcher, 2010: 264).

Bibliography:

- Fletcher, K. 2010. Slow Fashion: An Invitation for Systems Change. Online. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233596614_Slow_Fashion_An_Invitation_for_Systems_Change (Accessed: 5 December 2022)

- Marinaro, G. 2022. (Un)sustainable fashion: H&M is Being Sued for Greenwahsing. Online. Available at: https://www.renewablematter.eu/articles/article/unsustainable-fashion-h-and-m-is-being-sued-for-greenwashing (Accessed: 14 December 2022)

- McKinsey & Company. 2021. The State of Fashion 2022. [online] Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/retail/our-insights/state-of-fashion (Accessed: 29 December 2021)

- OIA – Outdoor Industry Association. 2018. Leading in Sustainable Business. [online] Available at: https://outdoorindustry.org/article/leading-sustainable-business-state-sustainability-outdoor-industry-report/ (Accessed: 6 October 2021)

- SAC – Sustainable Apparel Coalition. 2021. The Higg Index. [online] Available at: https://apparelcoalition.org/the-higg-index/ (Accessed: 6 October 2021)