Can the fashion industry finally overcome the
disconnect between wanting to sell as much as possible while fulfilling new
sustainability objectives, asks Gherzi Textil Organisation partner Robert P.
Antoshak.
As a consultant, clients ask me two questions more than any other: How do we become more environmentally sustainable, and when will the apparel market turn around?
Not
surprisingly, these are the central questions of our times. Still, they set up
a seemingly interconnected relationship between sustainability initiatives and
business objectives.
Let me explain. For an industry that prides
itself on a good fit, it’s striking how some environmental advocates misjudge
the practicalities facing clothing brands these days. It’s not a case of
proposing new ideas that fall on deaf ears but instead of those ideas failing
to be realised in the context of a brand’s business objectives. Most
strikingly, many new ideas are challenging to scale while failing to fit the
needs of making a profit.
There’s no shortage of new ideas, that’s for
sure. However, because it’s difficult to get brands to adopt these ideas, many
initiatives have struggled to gain traction in the industry. No wonder there
are so many initiatives; it isn’t easy to scale to an all-encompassing
standard. Consequently, the industry is left with overlapping or competing
standards, which are sometimes misused in marketing campaigns by brands looking
for cover in sustainability messaging with their customers.
We end up with greenwashing. Yet, the lack
of a universal standard emanating from the environmental community ironically
encourages terrible behaviour on the part of some brands. The more well-meaning
an environmental programme is, the greater the odds some brands may misuse its
goals, kick it to the curb, dress it up with cynical marketing — and a
load of hooey.
Please don’t misunderstand. The struggle to
clean up the industry is essential. Besides the ethical issues posed by
indiscriminate destruction of the environment, the realities of our industry’s
seeming disregard for its impact on the planet are appalling. If not by the
advocates inside of brands, then they should be addressed by government
regulators. Greenwashing and misuse of sustainability goals need to end.
But how does an advocate gain genuine buy-in
through brand management? It’s not easy, but there is a road map. I suggest
checking out a new study recently published by Fashion Makes Change
entitled “Scaling Sustainability Solutions in Fashion.” This is essential
reading for any sustainability person working at a brand.
But we still have the business case to
consider. Philosophical question of the day: does sustainability matter if
there’s no business? It’s worth pondering. Our industry is predicated on
overproduction. That’s no secret. It all comes down to ensuring clothes are on
the racks when anticipating demand. The last thing any brand wants to face is
empty shelves and lost sales opportunities – like what happened during the
pandemic. Yet, overproduction, by its very nature, is wasteful. And the rush to
make stuff faster and faster bakes in new and inventive ways of cutting
corners. When clothing doesn’t sell, so much ends up in landfills, burnt, or in
an ocean.
So, we have an industry that wants and needs
to make money but, thanks to environmentalists’ advocacy, has come to grips
with the reality that it makes too much stuff and pollutes the planet.
Environmentalists may be less interested in the profitability of businesses
than in their mission to clean up the industry. Still, without sound economics,
there is no business.
Let’s consider the current state of the
clothing market. What are the factors affecting the business? The US apparel
market, for instance, has been terrible. Yet, how do we make sense of it these
days? The market is no longer going in reverse but is stuck in low gear.
There’s growth, albeit modestly. The freefall witnessed after the bust-and-boom
cycle of the pandemic has been marked by a return to normalcy. Let’s look at
some standard measures of market performance.
Many things are happening and there are
other factors we could include in the market snapshot. Even so, the key
takeaway from the data is that the market is recovering. Indeed, it’s far from
booming, but it has stabilised and shows modest improvement.
There are reasons to be optimistic:
So, what’s the narrative about the market?
Here you go: Demand has improved, the pandemic-induced supply chain quagmire is
history, inventories are down, and inflation and prices remain low, suggesting
there’s room for more clothing to be sold and, perhaps, at better prices as
demand accelerates. The bottom line for our industry is to be patient. The
market is mending. Baselines have been re-established, and demand has improved.
Consumers are still spending on clothes, attitudes are better, and wallets are still
open to purchase new clothes.
But this brings me back to sustainability.
What’s the narrative for that? Here you go: When the pandemic squashed the
market, advocacy within brands for new sustainability programmes was a
Sisyphean struggle at best. Companies struggled to survive; sustainability was
a luxury they could not afford. But today, that will be less the case as the
market improves.
Any such discussion about business and
sustainability is risky, requiring a stroll on a tightrope. An improved market
should cheer everyone. For sustainability advocates, will a reenergised market
increase willingness to incorporate sustainability programmes substantively, or
will things remain as before? The latter is more likely than the former unless
something changes. A recovered market takes away the argument that we can’t
afford sustainability.
For a notoriously cheap industry, consumers
keep their wallets open to buy your stuff; now it’s time to put a crowbar into
the industry’s collective wallet and pay for sustainability. It’s better for
the industry, better for its customers, and better for the planet.