7 problems with the term "fast fashion"
Let us know your thoughts on The Crisps!
Welcome to another issue of The Crisps – your newsletter on anti-greenwashing and honest fashion communication. You can support us by subscribing to a free or pro subscription, liking, sharing, or commenting on our posts.
There’s an update on the EU Green Claims Directive! You might have read it already but in case you missed it, here are the most important aspects:
Environmental claims have to be independently verified!
Offset claims can be used but the brand has to prove a net-zero target, show progress towards decarbonization and disclose percentages of total greenhouse gas emissions offset.
The EU Council is now ready for talks with the European Parliament, negotiations start in the new legislative cycle which begins in September.1
Now on to the topic of today’s issue! We’re diving into the term “fast fashion”. Blaming “fast fashion” as the cause of all the industries’ problems is just as misleading as claiming “luxury fashion is always sustainable”.
Here’s why!
What does “fast fashion” actually mean?
Many misleading phrases are misleading because they don’t have a binding definition. The term “fast fashion” is no different. Some use it to describe overproduction, exploitative labor and rapid trend cycles. Others speak of consumer behavior aspects like disposing of fashion quickly.
Entities like the European Union use "fast fashion" in their communications. However, they fail to provide clear frameworks for what the term entails.2 The problem with popular but undefined phrases is that they leave room for interpretation and misuse where we have to know what exactly we speak about. And that leads to greenwashing and the development of superficial solutions rather than meaningful change.
But let’s get into the problem in more detail.
How do you like The Crisps?
If you have a few minutes to spare, we'd love to hear your feedback! As a thank you for filling out our survey, we’re giving away 10 yearly pro subscriptions. To enter the raffle, just fill out our survey by June 24th and reply to this mail with “SURVEY”.
Important note for everyone who already filled it out! First up: THANK YOU! However, none of the participants liked the post. The survey is anonymous so we don’t know who all of you are! Please reply to this email so we can include you in the giveaway.
Narrow View: Traditionally, the term refers to low-cost, trend-driven clothing rapidly produced to meet consumer demand. However, the term lacks a binding definition that expands these aspects.
Misleading Focus: The term suggests that only certain brands or practices are problematic. That diverts attention from the systemic issues affecting the entire industry – including high-end and mid-range brands that also engage in unsustainable practices.
Mass Production and Overconsumption: The entire fashion industry, not just "fast fashion," works on mass production and overconsumption. High-end brands also produce excessive quantities of clothing and contribute to waste and environmental harm.
Labor Exploitation: Exploitative labor practices are widespread across the industry. Workers in garment factories often face poor working conditions and inadequate wages, regardless of the brand's market position.
Environmental Impact: Resource depletion, pollution, and carbon emissions are not limited to “fast fashion”. Luxury, high-street, and all other brands contribute to them as well.
Greenwashing: By focusing on "fast fashion" brands can promote minor eco-friendly initiatives to distract from their overall unsustainable practices. This can mislead consumers into believing that significant progress is being made when, in reality, the systemic issues remain unaddressed.
Tokenism: Efforts to "fix" fast fashion often result in token gestures, such as using organic cotton for a single collection, without making meaningful changes to the brand's overall business model or supply chain practices.
How we use the term today oversimplifies a deeply complex issue. So in next week’s issue, we have some suggestions for new and differentiated terms. We will also dive into why “fast fashion” is misleading, and why “fast” might not be the problem.
Best,
Tanita & Lavinia
🔹 Learned something in this issue? Share The Crisps with your friends and colleagues.
🔹 Like our content? Support our work with a paid subscription.
🔹 Got feedback or topics we should cover? Send us an email to thecrisps@substack.com
Disclaimer: The content and opinions presented in The Crisps newsletter are for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal, ethical, or professional advice. The Crisps does not endorse any specific brands or products mentioned in its content.
European Council. (2024, June 17). Green claims directive: Council ready to start talks with the European Parliament. Retrieved from https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2024/06/17/green-claims-directive-council-ready-to-start-talks-with-the-european-parliament/
European Parliament. (2023, April 24). Ending fast fashion: Tougher rules to fight excessive production and consumption. Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20230424IPR82040/ending-fast-fashion-tougher-rules-to-fight-excessive-production-and-consumption
Fully agree with this article. I also suspect the traditional "fast fashion" companies mostly headquartered in the EU, willing to point finger at the new wave of "ultra-fast fashion" chinese companies with which they cannot compete. For them, creating a definition of fast-fashion that keep them out of the spotlight and banning chinese players would be all beneficial but let's not forget that they are the ones who came up with this business model and their production set up is not necessarily better than that of the Chinese brands.