Okhravi 1

Leila Okhravi

Mr. Wood

English IV Period 1

22 February 2020

From the Shopping Cart to the Landfills

“Guess how much I paid for this sweater?” I boasted to my equally frugal father, “$10

from H&M!” He congratulated me on my cheap find as I began to question how on Earth a

sweater could be sold for under $20. After all, I knew how much it cost to make garments; I

sewed a great deal of my own clothes. A knitted sweater like the one I had purchased from H&M

would’ve cost me at least $30 to make, not even taking my hours of labor into account. If I had

spent the time and effort to make it, I would be sitting at my sewing machine for at least three

hours cutting, pinning, and sewing away. If I wasn’t as experienced, the project could have taken

twice the time. In the end, the sweater I boasted about to my dad had a gaping hole and had to be

tossed out after a few short wears. But, never fear! H&M had released two more collections

during the short period of time I still was able to wear my poor quality knitted sweater. I could

now fill the gap in my closet that once housed the knitted sweater with ten other low quality

items! I mean, why wouldn’t I? Who in their right mind would pass up a $5 band tee that I swore

reality TV star Kylie Jenner wore last week online, even if I had zero clue who the band was?

This irresistible marketing scheme meant to target young, impressionable consumers like me is

called fast fashion. Fast fashion, similar to many fast food business models ensures customers

will be able to buy exorbiant amounts of poor quality clothes in a short period of time.
 Okhravi 2

It was then I became more curious about the origins of my clothes and what happened

after I grew tired of them. Who made this $5 graphic t-shirt I’m wearing? What kind of fabric is

this top made out of and how is it manufactured on such a large scale? How are brands able to

push out mass quantities of clothing in such a limited time? As I started making more clothes of

my own, I valued the time and effort I spent choosing textiles and matching embellishments, as

well as the attention I paid to insignificant-seeming details that made my garment unique. These

combined experiences all led to my question: how can we combat fast fashion to deter its

negative impacts on the environment and laborers?

When a curious consumer first looks up the term “fast fashion”, well over three billion

search results pop up. In order to recognize whether or not a brand is one they should be

supporting or not, it is crucial that consumers pay attention to two important aspects: whether the

brand is a “fast fashion” brand and if it is sustainable or not. Both of these terms, however, are

broad in nature. What does it really mean to be a fast fashion brand? More importantly, what

does it mean to be truly sustainable in today’s technologically advanced marketplace?

Consumers do not have to look too far than their own downtowns and other local shopping hubs

to find a variety of fast fashion brands. In our own local downtown Walnut Creek shopping

center, Forever 21, H&M, and Zara are the worst culprits when it comes to fast fashion.

Fortunately, with access to an abundance of information, consumers can use programs

like ​Good on You​ to read about what production methods their brands of choice practices and

whether or not it is considered sustainable and environmentally friendly. According to Good on

You, H&M, Forever 21, and Zara are all some of the most notable fast fashion brands in the

retail clothing industry for a number of reasons. In fact, Inditex, Zara’s parent company, is
 Okhravi 3

labeled as one of the worst fast fashion brands while still being the world’s largest fashion

retailer (Vox). The common theme with a majority of these big box retailers is the abundance of

merchandise they produce each season and how many seasons there are. International fast

fashion brand Topshop reportedly introduces a staggering 400 new styles ​a week​ to their website

and storefronts. This largely successful and widely implemented business model maximizes

profits and has consumers, “...feel[ing] off-trend after the first wear” (HuffPost). Not only does

the consumer feel out of place wearing it several times, they simply cannot wear it for longer

than that due to its poor quality. Consumers must question why a knitted sweater they are about

to purchase costs a mere $10. The brand’s profit margins are astronomical, meaning their cost of

production is much lower than the retail price. If handmade, none of the garments produced can

be sold for such a cheap rate, so why is that sweater so cheap?

Besides the clear abundance of clothing retail giants are putting out, another key aspect of

fast fashion brands are the design elements they choose to implement. How did Forever 21 know

exactly what the consumer was yearning for? Look no further than the pricey, but gorgeous

designer dress reality TV star Kim Kardashian wore last week to an upscale event. The

one-of-a-kind Balmain gown Kardashian wore on the latest red carpet was knocked off within

less than 24 hours of her wearing it by Fashion Nova, another notorious fast fashion online

retailer (WWD). This is particularly devastating for the designers of the original gowns, seeing

as though their work, that they have invested a substantial amount of capital, time, and expertise

into, is now being sold at a fraction of the price it cost them to make it. Furthermore, they will

not be getting compensated for their creative work.

 Okhravi 4

Aside from the important detail of where the designs come from, possibly the most

crucial aspect of examining fast fashion brands is watching for their sustainability. For the

purpose of simplification, consumers must look no further than two important details: how does

the brand’s production methods treat a worker and the environment?

Possibly the most difficult to overlook is the fashion industry’s indelible impact on our

Earth. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) estimates that it takes

approximately 3,781 liters of water to make an average pair of jeans. This number, being

staggering enough, is just for one pair of jeans. “That equates to the emission of around 33.4

kilograms of carbon equivalent [per pair of jeans]” (World Bank). If the consumer takes into

account that around six billion pairs of jeans are made annually, those meager stats compound at

an astounding rate. In fact, approximately 70% of Asia’s rivers and lakes are polluted by 2.5

billion gallons of wastewater produced by the textile industry alone. Furthermore, the fashion

industry as a whole makes up about 10% of total global carbon emissions. Since excess carbon

emissions are the number one advancers of climate change, retail giant Inditex, the parent

corporation of numerous fast fashion brands and the largest retail clothing company in the world,

is one of the largest individual contributors to climate change. To determine a brand’s

environmental footprint, potential customers must ask three important questions. How are brands

exporting their merchandising? What kind of textiles are brands using?

Possibly the most overlooked aspect of non-sustainable fashion is how the merchandising

is being shipped. Oftentimes the $5 graphic tee you have in your shopping cart at Zara was

shipped from a manufacturing facility in China to the Walnut Creek storefront via aviation.

“Over all, the aviation industry accounts for 11 percent of all ​transportation-related emissions​ in
 Okhravi 5

the United States” (New York Times). Although according to the World Bank air-freight is much

more expensive than other modes of travel, it is a coveted form of shipping because it provides,

“humidity control and dust protection. It also allows for accurate and flexible allocations of

inventory and the ability to source and sell globally with no time constraints, particularly useful

for online sales” (Just Style). Due to the fact that the fast fashion business model relies on a

quick supply chain, retailers like Forever 21 and Zara rely upon aviation to quickly ship

merchandise to keep up with ever-dynamic fads.

Besides often overlooked shipping methods, consumers must also pay close attention to

the tags sewn into their purchases. Polyester, nylon, spandex, and acrylic are names customers

often see on those tags, but have little idea as to what they mean and what they’re made out of

The tags that detail what your clothes are made of often reveal the environmental impact the

garment had when made and what it will have once discarded. Customers will be surprised to

find out that many of their favorite leggings for the gym are made out of a material initially

manufactured to act as an alternative for rubber during World War II. This commonly used

textile, spandex, is a synthetic polymer, meaning that it is man-made and not naturally occuring

like cotton. Spandex, along with polyester, acrylic, and nylon, take, “hundreds of years

to…[bio]degrade due to [the] plastic polymers [they are made out of] which in turn release toxic

chemicals such as heavy metals into surrounding soil and water systems” (Simply

Environmental). Not only do these materials take years to biodegrade, but even when consumers

still own and use synthetic polymers, there is still an immense environmental impact that often

goes undetected. Ecologist Mark Browne notes, “each time we wash synthetic garments they

shed 1,900 individual plastic microfibers”. In fact, a commonality he found when examining
 Okhravi 6

several shorelines around the world were the high amounts of synthetic microfibers, mostly near

sewage outflows, polluting the shores. Browne found that, “85% of the human-made material

found on the shoreline were microfibers, and matched the types of material, such as nylon and

acrylic, used in clothing” (Guardian). As if not alarming enough, National Geographic reports

that human beings are consuming upward of 39,000 to 52,000 microplastic particles in food and

water annually. When adding the amount humans consume by merely breathing, the amount

could reach a staggering 74,000 or more. Ultimately, it is up to consumers to decide if that cute,

affordable graphic tee is worth the 74,000 microplastics they will be inhaling for the next year.

As mentioned previously, the manufacturing methods used often determine the

environmental impact a clothing item will have. Not only the material used, but the often

overlooked dyeing process as well. Cosmopolitan magazine reported that neon green was the it

color of 2019. Every young, hip celebrity had one clothing item that was neon green sometime

during the year. However, what those celebrities failed to recognize was how environmentally

unfriendly the dyeing process of that garment was. Firstly, it is important for consumers to

recognize just how important dyeing is during the clothing-making process. Experts estimate,

“that over 10,000 different dyes and pigments are used industrially and over 700,000 tons of

synthetic dyes are annually produced worldwide” (IntechOpen). Although a majority of those

dyes are used on textiles, about 10-15% of the dyes enter our waterways (Trusted Clothes). The

chemicals entering bodies of water around the world further damage surrounding ecosystems on

top of the microplastics and shipping methods used by the fashion industry. Additionally, besides

excessive amounts of chemicals entering our waterways, the process of dyeing textiles is quite

water intensive, requiring 24.56 trillion gallons of water annually (GreenBiz). This amount does
 Okhravi 7

not include the additional water used for growing certain natural fibers such as cotton. Overall,

the industry as a whole uses approximately 4% of global freshwater sources including dyeing,

agriculture related to textile production, and washing.

Besides a clear environmental threat, laborers face a similar struggle when it comes to the

exploitation fashion industry. In early 2019, female workers in Dhaka, Bangladesh began a series

of widespread protests, including about 50,000 workers, who faced severe abuse in the

workplace from their mostly male bosses (The Nation). These demonstrations are not isolated

cases and are often disregarded by Western media, particularly because the fashion industry does

not want the average consumer to be aware of its rampant abuses of laborers. It is also important

to note that not all of these stories come from workers in East, South, and Southeast Asia.

Although the United States often prides itself in having some of the most progressive labor and

abuse laws in the world, Anjelica Sauerwein, a longtime sewist, who currently works in product

development and production for a clothing company in San Francisco, notes that, “it is important

to change people’s assumption that if it’s not made in America, it’s automatically not good [in

terms of treatment of laborers]”. She goes on to explain her experience working with a Chinese

manufacturer, saying she was quite impressed with their, “...extremely clean, high-tech, well-lit,

and ventilated facility”. Besides the actual infrastructure, she also commented on how the factory

provided, “...a daycare for…[the workers’] children” as well. Sauerwein compared this example

to her many experiences with domestic manufacturers, by noting that, “although the workers

[here] are being paid San Francisco’s minimum wage, the amount does not take into account the

exorbitant cost of living in a major city”. On top of the relatively low pay, the laborers in the

United States were often forced to work in poor conditions: poor lighting and ventilation and a
 Okhravi 8

very cluttered work space. Besides clear structural issues within several factories worldwide, the

fashion industry’s laborers, predominantly women, often face sexual abuse from their

predominantly male bosses. In fact, the #MeToo movement, particularly popular among

American women in Hollywood, has also gained traction in the Asian nations that have high

amounts of manufacturing jobs. The Nation notes that, “At the factory level, workers face brutal

workplace discipline and even the risk of violence—a reflection of a workforce culture that

demands nonstop productivity and strict labor-management hierarchy”. On top of the physical

violence workers face, they also often bear the brunt of environmental damage Western

multinational corporations create as a result of their wasteful, unsustainable production methods.

Seeing as though the fashion industry currently makes up about 10% of global carbon emissions,

they are one of the top contributors to the climate crisis. The United Nations indicates in an

extensive study that poorer people’s, “​initial ​inequality causes the disadvantaged groups to suffer

disproportionately f​ rom the adverse effects of climate change, resulting in greater ​subsequent

inequality” (United Nations). Since many workers who are often paid a dollar or less a day, they

do not have the resources needed to relocate if a climate crisis-related natural disaster were to hit

their hometown. Ultimately, it is crucial for consumers to recognize how their favorite clothing

brands are treating their laborers in order to determine if it is a fast fashion brand or not.

Upsetting information like the facts detailed above is abundant online. It becomes easy to

feel hopeless in a situation with information-overload like this one and, in turn, stay complacent.

Emily Keller, owner of EmmyK Apparel, a brand dedicated to repurposing the fashion industry’s

waste, and Fashion Institute of Technology alum, recognized this issue as well, noting that,

“there’s a sense of hopelessness that comes with…[all this knowledge]. However, if you don't
 Okhravi 9

have the drive to stand up and change your lifestyle, who will?” The ultimate question with any

social issue is the same: why should the public care about this issue? Aside from the horrific

impacts this industry has on laborers and the planet, the solutions may not be as difficult to

implement as previously thought. However, consumers must stay commited in their mission to

combat fast fashion by not allowing themselves to become overwhelmed.

What kind of “mission” should consumers be undertaking to combat the adverse effects

of the mainstream fashion industry? Although it all may seem too pricey to transition, Keller

later goes on to comment that if you change your consumption habits accordingly, it will not be

too difficult at all. Keller recommended a practice she’s implemented in her life: stop buying

new clothes! She found it worked very well for her, “...because…[she] love[s] to thrift shop”.

Thrifting or consignment shopping is one of the best methods of combating fast fashion because

thrifters are not buying a new garment each time they shop, they are buying lightly used clothing.

If a customer buys apparel from a consignment or thrift store, they are inadvertently diverting

clothes that would have gone to a landfill. Furthermore, if consumers are into vintage,

one-of-a-kind clothing, they’ll find exactly what they're yearning for at a thrift store, often at

affordable rates. In a world where merely consuming meaningless items holds precedent over

making genuine connections with the products you purchase, thrifting creates a personal story

behind each of your purchases. The fact that the jacket you thrifted could have been owned by

someone in decades past gives the item a sense of exclusivity. Furthermore, for all the budding

designers and creators out there wary of trying a new painting or embroidery technique on a

brand new clothing item, thrifting also serves the purpose of giving those creators a more

afforable, blank canvas to experiement on. Ultimately, the joys of thrifting have relieved it of its
 Okhravi 10

previous stigma. If a mass amount of consumers make the switch they will not only have the

opportunity to buy cool, unique items, they are also helping to reverse the indelible negative

impacts of the mainstream fashion industry. Susan Goldie, owner of sewnow! fashion studio in

Lafayette, echoed the importance of second-hand shopping, while also urging consumers to

generally consume less. She posed a challenging, but crucial question: how many garments does

one person really need? She went on to comment that, “we have to change our perspective

around how often we need to buy new things. That may seem hard initially, but it forces you to

become a little more creative with the clothing items you do have”. Instead of owning several

low quality graphic tees and pairs of jeans, why not purchase fewer, higher quality basics from

non fast fashion brands and invest in fun, sustainable garments to mix and match with your

basics. Since the customer paid more for the apparel, they are more likely to take better care of

the item rather than not be bothered with it. Additionally, if companies were dedicated to using

higher quality construction techniques, consumers would not be obligated to buy so many cheap

items. Brands recognize this as well and continue to produce their poor quality products,

ensuring that customers will be hooked on their products. Finally, it is important that consumers

read up on their favorite brands and learn more about sustainable ones. Although it may seem as

if every clothing company is fast fashion, it is important for people to choose brands that have

the least negative impact on the earth and laborers as possible. Sauerwein, Keller, and Goldie all

noted the power of the consumer’s dollar. Where we as consumers spend our hard earned money

determines whether or not a brand will stay in business. Ultimately, although it may seem as if

there is too much negative information regarding the fashion industry, consumers are lucky in
 Okhravi 11

that the solutions for combating fast fashion, although limited, are relatively streamlined and

require simple mindset and lifestyle changes.

Although these facts from reputable sources like the United Nations and National

Geographic were shocking, they motivated me to do my own hands-on research. Making my

own capsule collection that embodied my definition of sustainability was the best way to do so. I

spent hours scouring online for the most ethically sourced, ecofriendly textiles while also looking

through my personal collection. As I began designing and sewing the garments, I began to

realize that fashion was never meant to be fast. The fast fashion business model was just that: a

business. Garment-making was always meant to be drawn out, detail oriented, and long lasting.

The sewist could potentially put in hours of work, creating elaborate pieces to be enjoyed as art

for years to come. Yes, it was pricey to purchase, but once purchased, the owner could pass it

down to future generations. This is the ideal form of fashion creation. It values the craft as an art,

rather than mindless, rapid consumption by the customer. If everyone were to value their

garments as if they were the original Mona Lisa, the environmental and human cost would be

almost non-existant.
 Okhravi 12

Works Cited
Admin. “Impact of Dyes.” ​Trusted Clothes​, 29 June 2016,
www.trustedclothes.com/blog/2016/06/23/impact-of-dyes/​. Accessed 16 March

Admin. “Sustainable Fabrics - The Ugly.” ​Trusted Clothes​, 22 Apr. 2016,

https://www.trustedclothes.com/blog/2016/04/21/ethical-fabrics-to-consider-the-ugly-draft/​.
Accessed 12 March 2020.

Chequer, Farah Maria Drumond, et al. “Open Science Open Minds.” ​IntechOpen,​ 16 Jan. 2013,
www.intechopen.com/​. Accessed 16 March 2020.

Chua, Jasmin Malik. “The Environment and Economy Are Paying the Price for Fast Fashion -
but There's Hope.” ​Vox,​ Vox, 12 Sept. 2019,
www.vox.com/2019/9/12/20860620/fast-fashion-zara-hm-forever-21-boohoo-environment-cost​.
Accessed 11 March 2020.

Deschamps, MJ. “Fast Fashion: The Choice to Air Freight, or Wait.” ​Just​, 6 Oct. 2014,
www.just-style.com/management-briefing/the-choice-to-air-freight-or-wait_id123147.aspx​.
Accessed 11 March 2020.

“Fossil Fuel.” ​Simply Environmental.,​ ​www.simplyenviro.com/fossil-fuel​. Accessed 16 March

2020.

Gibbens, Sarah. “You Eat Thousands of Bits of Plastic Every Year.” ​The Average Person Eats
Thousands of Plastic Particles Every Year, Study Finds​, 5 June 2019,
www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/06/you-eat-thousands-of-bits-of-plastic-every-y
ear/​. Accessed 16 March 2020.

Hanbury, Mary. “Zara and Forever 21 Have a Dirty Little Secret.” ​Business Insider,​ Business
Insider, 6 Mar. 2018,
www.businessinsider.com/zara-forever-21-fast-fashion-full-of-copycats-2018-3​. Accessed 11
March 2020.

“How Much Do Our Wardrobes Cost to the Environment?” ​World Bank,​

www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2019/09/23/costo-moda-medio-ambiente​. Accessed 11
March 2020.

Ilchi, Layla. “Kim Kardashian Calls Out Fast-Fashion Brands for Designer Knock-Offs.” ​WWD,​
WWD, 19 Feb. 2019,
 Okhravi 13

https://wwd.com/fashion-news/fashion-scoops/kim-kardashian-fashion-nova-mugler-knockoff-1
203037428/​. Accessed 11 March 2020.

Islam, S. Nazrul, and John Winkle. “Climate Change and Social Inequality.” ​Department of
Economic and Social Affairs,​ Oct. 2017, ​www.un.org/esa/desa/papers/2017/wp152_2017.pdf​.
Accessed 16 March 2020.

Lohr, Shannon Whitehead. “5 Truths the Fast Fashion Industry Doesn't Want You to Know.”
HuffPost​, HuffPost, 19 Oct. 2014,
www.huffpost.com/entry/5-truths-the-fast-fashion_b_5690575​. Accessed 11 March 2020.

McFall-Johnsen, Morgan. “The Fashion Industry Emits More Carbon than International Flights
and Maritime Shipping Combined. Here Are the Biggest Ways It Impacts the Planet.” ​Business
Insider​, Business Insider, 21 Oct. 2019,
www.businessinsider.com/fast-fashion-environmental-impact-pollution-emissions-waste-water-2
019-10​. Accessed 11 March 2020.

O'Connor, Mary Catherine. “Inside the Lonely Fight against the Biggest Environmental Problem
You've Never Heard Of.” ​The Guardian,​ Guardian News and Media, 27 Oct. 2014,
www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2014/oct/27/toxic-plastic-synthetic-microscopic-oce
ans-microbeads-microfibers-food-chain​. Accessed 16 March 2020.

Okhravi, Leila, and Anjelica Rose Sauerwein. “Fast Fashion in the Eyes of a Product Developer
.” 26 Feb. 2020.

Okhravi, Leila, and Keller, Emily. “Fast Fashion in the Eyes of a Zero-Waste Brand Owner.” 1
Mar. 2020.

Okhravi, Leila, and Goldie, Susan. “Fast Fashion in the Eyes of the Owner of sewnow! fashion
studio.” 28 Feb. 2020.

Phipps, Lauren. “Just Dye It: How This Apparel Company Is Developing Water- and
Chemical-Free Textile Tinting.” ​GreenBiz​, GreenBiz Group Inc., 26 Feb. 2019,
www.greenbiz.com/article/just-dye-it-how-apparel-company-developing-water-and-chemical-fre
e-textile-tinting​. Accessed 16 March 2020.

Schlossberg, Tatiana. “Flying Is Bad for the Planet. You Can Help Make It Better.” ​The New
York Times​, The New York Times, 27 July 2017,
 Okhravi 14

www.nytimes.com/2017/07/27/climate/airplane-pollution-global-warming.html​. Accessed 11
March 2020.

Submitted by vstafford on August 8. “How Fast Fashion Hurts Workers.” ​Green America​,
www.greenamerica.org/blog/factory-exploitation-and-fast-fashion-machine​. Accessed 11 March
2020.

Webber, Kathleen. “The Environmental and Human Cost of Making a Pair of Jeans.” ​EcoWatch,​
EcoWatch, 18 Dec. 2019, ​www.ecowatch.com/environmental-cost-jeans-2544519658.html​.
Accessed 7 April 2020.