1

04 February 2020

Fast Fashion’s Impact on the Environment

“Approximately 500,000 tons of used clothing are exported abroad from the United

States each year … In 2015, the United States exported more than $700 million worth of used

clothing” (Bick, et al). Bick, Halsey, and Ekenga explain the significant impact and waste made

by the fast fashion industry. Corporations such as H&M and Zara are large scale businesses that

mass-produce clothing to follow quickly changing fashion trends. This ultimately is leading to

harmful pollution and a large environmental crisis. Through production techniques that are both

harmful for the workers and environment, businesses mass-produce unsustainable clothing for

the high consumer demand (Bick, et al). Overall, consumers, businesses, and governments

contribute greatly to the environmental factors of the harmful fast fashion industry. Joy, Sherry,

Venkatesh, Wang and Chan explain that Zara has 2,700 stores in over 60 countries which is

similar to the expansion of other fast fashion brands (Joy, et al). Fast fashion and unsustainability

are a global issue as represented with these statistics. This further expresses the importance of the

environmental factor as the number of stores represents just how much clothing is mass-

produced that becomes waste in an unsustainable manner. The environmental factor of fast

fashion is vital to consider the differing solutions needed to have businesses turn to sustainable

fashion. Due to the ever-increasing demand for fashion from consumers, businesses who comply

with this unsustainable demand and the few government actions proposed to prevent fast

fashion’s environmental damage there may be a need for businesses to invest in sustainable

products.

As the demand to produce new fashion increases, consumers are causing a greater

environmental impact. Bick, Halsey, and Ekenga have an MPH and are knowledgeable in fast
 2

fashion (“How Fast Fashion Hurts Environment, Workers, Society”). They explain that,

“Approximately 85 % of the clothing Americans consume, nearly 3.8 billion pounds annually, is

sent to landfills as solid waste, amounting to nearly 80 pounds per American per year” (Bick, et

al). The authors indicate that consumers are unaware of the environmental impact induced by

fast fashion. Through the statistics, the authors show concern and express that the root cause of

pollution is the lack of policies advocating for sustainability. Similarly, Dr. Claudio elaborates on

the effects of the customer demands by writing, “[The] demand for man-made fibers, especially

polyester, has nearly doubled in the last 15 years … The EPA … considers many textile

manufacturing facilities to be hazardous waste generators” (Claudio). Claudio details how the

customer demands affect the environment with the high use of oils and gas emissions. She

advocates for a change in the industry to reduce the impact that is harmful to the planet and the

workers who produce textiles. Claudio explains multiple aspects of this industry that led to the

root cause being the lack of consumer awareness. On the contrary, Lesley Chen, a digital

publicist and writer (“About”), explains that creating one’s own clothes is a sustainable trend.

“You are more likely to wear, maintain and keep the clothes you make, which produces less

waste and has a lighter carbon footprint” (“Sew Good”). Her view on producing one’s own

clothing is said to minimize environmental impact. This is an alternate solution to reduce waste

compared to buying from fast fashion brands. The businesses that produce the items are just as

impactful as consumers in this industry.

Fast fashion businesses contribute to the large pollution crisis occurring today. Desai,

Nassar, and Chertow studied at Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies and present a

view on the companies’ environmental effects by saying, “Swisstex California manages to be

competitive with Chinese and Indian dye factories by consuming five times fewer chemicals and
 3

half the water that competitors require” (Desai, et al). Swisstex mass-produces textiles but

displays awareness about the pollution crisis by limiting their harmful consumption of water and

chemicals. Swisstex’s geographic location is an advantage to having access to sustainable

production unlike companies in lesser developed countries. Similarly, Adidas has taken action to

decrease pollution. The author Rochell was a, “fashion editor … before joining The Times as a

writer and stylist” (“Hannah Rochell”). She explains, “This year, [Adidas] will make five million

shoes using plastic that is intercepted on beaches and coastlines before it enters the oceans; every

pair saves the equivalent of 11 bottles” (Rochell). Adidas displayed concern for the plastic

pollution issue and had put into use the waste to help the crisis. Rochell expresses that the

alternate solution to plastic pollution would be using waste to produce products. To continue,

Glausiusz is a “journalist writing about science and the environment” (“Josie Glausiusz's Blog”)

who explains the actions of different sustainable designers and the environmental effects

sustainable fashion may have. “Salmon skin … is normally discarded as a waste product, yet it is

a valuable and resilient material that can be turned into shoes, belts and bikinis … exploding

demand threatens some established forests that are being cleared … for bamboo plantations”

(“Sustainable Fashion”). Different methods to reduce environmental impacts are readily

available, yet Glausiusz also discusses the issue of high demands in sustainable fashion.

Government demands influence businesses as well.

Differing government actions are taken to combat fast fashion’s environmental impacts.

Dr. Luz Claudio once again explains how unhelpful U.S. government’s actions are relating to

fast fashion by discussing that, “The U.S. government offers tax incentives for citizens who

donate household goods to charities such as the Salvation Army and Goodwill Industries, which

salvage a portion of clothing and textiles that would otherwise go to landfills or incinerators”
 4

(Claudio). Claudio emphasizes that the government's solution is not helping the issue of the

massive waste and carbon footprint fast fashion has. As a result of the growing waste, Claudio

explains that although this solves a portion of the issue, a large portion of clothing is still burned.

The U.K. has a different approach to solving the increasing environmental impacts of fast

fashion. Kathryn Hopkins is a financial editor (“Kathryn Hopkins”) and quotes Mary Creagh, “a

chairwoman of the Environmental Audit Committee” saying, “‘Our recent evidence hearing

raised alarm bells about the fast-growing online-only retail sector. Low-quality 5-pound dresses

aimed at young people are … discarded almost instantly, causing mountains of non-recycled

waste to pile up’” (“British Lawmakers Aim to Grill Fast-Fashion Bosses”). The government is

acknowledging and questioning the waste produced by this industry and both Hopkins and

Creagh express an alternate solution of enforcing laws that limit mass production of clothing. On

a different perspective, the Turkish government has acted on eliminating a fast fashion

production practice. John Hobson works at the University of Birmingham (“John Hobson”) and

discusses that, “With commendably swift action, the Turkish government banned the process of

denim sandblasting in 2009” (Hobson). Sandblasting is not only harmful to the workers’ health,

but it also produces emissions and waste that harms the environment. An alternate solution that

Hobson presents is the Turkish government banning a harmful fast fashion practice.

Businesses investing in sustainable products and production is necessary because of the

growing consumer demand for unsustainable clothing, the compliant businesses, and the limited

effective government actions on this unsustainable industry. A possible solution to the mass

production of fast fashion would be for the businesses to invest in sustainable production and

products. As previously mentioned, the pollution and large waste created by fast fashion is an

ever-growing issue. If initiative to stop this mass production is not taken, the environment will
 5

become further polluted and eventually lead to a larger crisis. The fast fashion in the public’s

closets are contributing to pollution and the emissions are adding to the increasing climate

change crisis as well. There is only one Earth and human actions such as producing

unsustainable clothing is further harming it. A solution such as businesses adopting sustainable

products will hinder this harm on the Earth. Fast fashion all points back to consumer demand and

evidently it is in the hands of consumers and businesses to change this unsustainable and

damaging production.

(Overall word count :1280)

 6

Works Cited

Bick, Rachel, et al. "The global environmental injustice of fast fashion." Environmental Health:

A Global Access Science Source, vol. 17, no. 1, 2018. Gale Academic Onefile, link-gale-

com.libproxy.estrellamountain.edu/apps/doc/A569155838/AONE?

u=mcc_estm&sid=AONE&xid=dbdaa070. Accessed 10 Dec. 2019

Chen, Lesley. “About.” Lesley Chen, lesley-chen.com/about. Accessed 13 Jan. 2020.

Chen, Lesley. “Sew Good.” Girls’ Life, vol. 26, no. 1, Aug. 2019, p. 70. MAS Ultra - School

Edition, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=ulh&AN=137224094&site=ehost-live. Accessed 08 Jan. 2020.

Claudio, Luz. “Waste Couture: Environmental Impact of the Clothing Industry.” Environmental

Health Perspectives, vol. 115, no. 9, Sept. 2007, p. A448. Advance Placement Source,

doi:10.1289/ehp.115-a449. Accessed 09 Jan. 2020.

Desai, Anuj, et al. “American Seams: An Exploration of Hybrid Fast Fashion and Domestic

Manufacturing Models in Relocalised Apparel Production.” Journal of Corporate

Citizenship, no. 45, 2012, p. 53. Advanced Placement Source,

search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aqh&AN=79191004&site=ehost-live.

Accessed 09 Jan. 2020.

Glausiusz, Josie. “Josie Glausiusz's Blog.” The Times of Israel,

blogs.timesofisrael.com/author/josie-glausiusz/. Accessed 13 Jan. 2020.

Glausiusz, Josie. "Sustainable Fashion." Nature, vol. 459, no. 7249, 2009, p. 915. Gale

Academic Onefile,

link-gale-com.libproxy.estrellamountain.edu/apps/doc/A202562490/AONE?

u=mcc_estm&sid=AONE&xid=34c72b48. Accessed 10 Dec. 2019.

 7

“Hannah Rochell.” Get The Gloss, getthegloss.com/author/budget-beauty-hannah-rochell.

Accessed 13 Jan. 2020.

Hobson, John. “To Die For? The Health and Safety of Fast Fashion.” Occupational Medicine,

vol. 63, issue 5, July 2013, p. 317–319, doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqt079. Accessed 20

Jan. 2020.

Hopkins, Kathryn. “British Lawmakers Aim to Grill Fast-Fashion Bosses.” WWD: Women’s

Wear Daily, Nov. 2018, p. 2. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=aqh&AN=132974382&site=ehost-live. Accessed 08 Jan. 2020.

Hopkins, Kathryn. “Kathryn Hopkins.” Muck Rack, muckrack.com/kathryn-hopkins. Accessed

20 Jan. 2020.

“How Fast Fashion Hurts Environment, Workers, Society.” Brown School at Washington

University in St. Louis, 9 Jan. 2019, brownschool.wustl.edu/News/Pages/How-Fast-

Fashion-Hurts-Environment-Workers-Society.aspx. Accessed 13 Jan. 2020.

"John Hobson.” Research Gate, researchgate.net/profile/John_Hobson7. Accessed 20 Jan. 2020.

Joy, Annamma, et al. “Fast Fashion, Sustainability, and the Ethical Appeal of Luxury Brands.”

Fashion Theory: The Journal of Dress, Body & Culture, vol. 16, no. 3, Sept. 2012, pp.

273–295. EBSCOhost, doi:10.2752/175174112X13340749707123. Accessed 24 Jan. 2020.

Rochell, Hannah. “Time for a Sea Change.” Evening Standard, 31 July 2018, p. 27. Newspaper

Source, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=nfh&AN=130986265&site=ehost-live. Accessed 09 Jan. 2020.

8