Buying second-hand clothing is a common, sustainable alternative to buying fast fashion, and has rapidly gained popularity in recent years. When I made the switch to buying second-hand, I was unknowingly contributing to a much larger movement – a sustainability trend. And more recently, this trend has spread and accelerated online.

Source: PRETEND

Why Should We Avoid Fast Fashion?

Before I talk about online thrifting, here’s a quick background on fast fashion. Fast fashion refers to clothing that is produced and marketed to consumers as fast and as cheap as possible in response to recent trends. Generally, a company falls into the fast fashion category if the following are true:

– they produce new, mass-produced clothing items

– they are not transparent about where their clothing is coming from

– it is not obvious that they are fair trade and/or genuinely sustainable

Clothing production is very environmentally demanding and uses a lot of resources. Manufacturing one pair of jeans can produce up to 75 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions – and one t-shirt uses 700 gallons of water. But it’s not only the production of clothes that is a problem, it is also problematic at the consumer level. On average, 1 in 2 people throw away unwanted clothing in the garbage instead of donating, selling, or repairing the items. There are clearly some consumeristic bad habits at play here, but the fast fashion industry is driving the problem and unsustainably producing huge amounts of clothing.

In a linear economy model, clothing is made, purchased, and discarded, which results in a lot of waste. But in a circular economy model, the most sustainable system, clothing is not thrown away – it is bought and used with care, repaired if possible, resold to be reused by others, or upcycled for different purposes. The loop keeps going around as clothing items are repurposed, reloved, and diverted from landfills.

Source: AforeAfter

What Is Online Thrifting?

There has been a rise of second-hand online shopping and selling on various platforms, including Etsy, Instagram, Poshmark, thredUP, Depop, and Facebook marketplace, to just name a few. The people behind the online thrift “shops” vary. These “shops” aren’t actual thrift stores, like Value Village or Goodwill; they are exclusively online. Platforms, like Depop and Poshmark, aren’t even actual shops per se, but rather a collection of shops on a website. For example, you could make an account on Depop and create your very own second-hand shop. You would post your items on your page, set your own prices, other people would purchase those items online, and you would ship the items to them. You would likely make some money and the company, Depop, would take a percentage of the profit.

Stormee James, a woman from Ohio, made US$1700 from selling her clothes during the pandemic as a kind of side gig on top of her regular job as a school cleaner. Stormee is one of many people who have decided to sell their own used clothes to make a small profit during the pandemic.

On top of people selling their own clothes, there are also online thrift shops that are more like genuine small businesses, with an established brand and aesthetic. These online shops are usually run by individuals who have a passion for collecting vintage clothes and reselling them. The shop owners would likely go hunting for good quality, vintage thrift finds that fit their brand’s aesthetic at local second-hand stores or flea markets, and then buy the items to resell on their shops. All these types of online buying and selling can be grouped under the same umbrella as the resale clothing industry.

Source: The Knight Crier

The resale industry on the whole is seeing resounding, steady growth and this trend is only expected to continue increasing. In the U.S., the second-hand clothing market is estimated to grow 5 times in 5 years, from 2019 to 2024, and the retail market is expected to shrink. According to thredUP’s 2020 Resale Report and statistics from GlobalData, the entire second-hand market will be almost twice the size of the fast fashion market in the U.S. by 2029. And the coronavirus pandemic will only act as a catalyst to these upward trends.

Source: thredUP

I am a curious person, always formulating questions in my head, and as a writer, I find myself looking for stories even when I don’t intend to. So, as I’ve observed the online resale market flourishing and gaining popularity, I started to wonder…

• What are the main drivers behind this rise of online thrifting?

• These online second-hand shops are a sustainability trend, but are they all truly sustainable?

• How might the rise of online second-hand shopping impact local thrift stores?

• What are the social and economic implications of online thrifting for people who rely on thrift stores for lower priced clothing?

And boom. There’s a story.

The Drivers 

Why are we seeing an increase in online thrifting in the first place? There are several factors behind the trend, but the following four are what I’ve gathered as the main drivers.

1. Sustainability

The truth behind fast fashion is spreading and environmental awareness is ever-growing. More and more people are understanding that taking small actions and making shifts in our own lives towards sustainability are important. Buying and selling second-hand are key ways we can make those sustainable shifts towards establishing and sustaining circular fashion.

2. The pandemic

Following the start of the pandemic, more people than ever have been cleaning out their closets and getting around to selling those unwanted items that they’ve always been meaning to. I’m sure this behaviour is a result of either boredom, new motivation to declutter, looking for new ways to make a bit of cash, or a mixture of all. In terms of buying second-hand, there are plenty of cheap, online options, which are an important source for those whose finances have taken a toll from pandemic life. Perhaps staying at home is even inspiring people to redesign their lives – why not redecorate your living room or adopt a new style if you have to stay home all day anyway?

3. Generational change

Young people – millennials and Gen Z’s – are normalizing second-hand buying and driving this shift. Life as a young adult today is very financially different than it was for preceding generations. Millennials and Gen Z’s have collectively strived to remove the stigma that used to be associated with thrifting – the belief that the only people who thrifted were grandmas and people who could not afford to buy new clothes. Now, buying second-hand is normalized and encouraged by younger people, which has suited their need to spend less and save more in our current economy.

4. Influencers

Online influencers and celebrities are following the sustainability trend by supporting second-hand stores, re-wearing outfits to big events, and further contributing to removing the stigma with thrifting. For example, celebrities like Cardi B and Meaghan Markle are starting to sport vintage clothes, and Kate Middleton, Jane Fonda, and Tiffany Haddish have all made fashion statements in 2020 by rewearing dresses to important events.

The Benefits 

When looking to buy clothes, online second-hand shops and websites can be great places to find unique, quality items for a decent price. Browsing through online second-hand shops is easy and quick. On apps and websites like Depop or Poshmark, you can search for items and apply filters to help focus your results – totally hassle free. For individual online shops, you can follow them on Instagram or Facebook and have their items show up right on your feed without even searching. It truly is effortless thrifting.

And of course, second-hand shopping also diverts purchases away from fast fashion, which is supportive of social and environmental sustainability. Some online thrift shops are genuine local businesses as well. Re-selling clothes can be a kind of “side hustle” for some, but for others who are passionate about slow fashion have made this business their full-time careers. So online thrifting can also be supportive to small-business owners and individuals who have worked hard to establish their own online brand.

The rise of online thrifting has also created an aesthetic, trendy, and appealing way to buy second-hand items. Not everyone enjoys the experience of shopping at a thrift store: the smell of other people’s clothes, sifting through rows of clothing racks to discover maybe one quality piece in your size, finding extremely quirky and cringey items in the process, and buying clothes you have to wash before wearing. So, with online thrifting, more people are being steered away from fast fashion and enjoying thrifting in a new way.

I am someone who enjoys the full experience of going to a thrift store, but I’ve also enjoyed online thrifting. I have found some really nice, affordable clothing online from other people’s shops. On the app Depop, I discovered a shop that sells vintage sweaters that have different logos on them, like sports teams and universities. I was on a mission to find a used University of Waterloo hoodie, since I go to UW and don’t want to buy a new sweater, and I found a vintage one on their shop. It’s great quality and it’s an item I’ll enjoy for a really long time!

Credit: Siobhan Mullally

The Concerns

Not all that glitters is gold… Despite the positive, sustainable shift to online thrift shopping, there are still concerns that come along with it.

First, I’ve noticed on some apps, like Depop, that although people might be reselling their clothes, it is clear they still buy new clothes regularly. Some people likely support fast fashion and just resell those items online once they’re done with them. After buying fast fashion clothes, they may use those items for a year, a month, a day, or may never wear them at all before reselling. So, just because someone is reselling on a thrifting site does not mean they’re contributing to slow fashion or circularity.

Also, as thrifting has become a popular activity labelled as “sustainable”, it seems as though people might be buying clothes a lot more often since the media and culture have classified it as a guilt-free method of shopping. I do agree that thrifting is a more sustainable alternative to buying new items, but I still think people need to rethink their consumerist tendencies to buy new items all the time, even if the items they buy are used. Online thrifting may just be enhancing consumerism by giving people a “sustainable” way of consuming the same amount of, if not more, materials that they would be buying new. Buying second-hand is an important shift for a circular economy, but the rise of online thrifting may just be perpetuating consumer culture, which is the root of what needs to be shifted.

I also wondered how local thrift stores and the people who depend on them would be impacted. As online thrift shops are on the rise, thrift store business would likely follow since thrift stores are the source of the clothes that many online shops resell. If thrift stores get more demand, their prices are likely to increase as well, and this could turn into a harmful form of gentrification.

Gentrification is the process of a neighbourhood or area becoming higher in economic value, when a low-income area transforms into a higher-income area driven by wealthier people moving in, attracting new businesses, and often displacing the people who already live there. In terms of thrift stores, gentrification might look like prices of clothing going up and excluding the shoppers who depend on thrift stores for lower priced items. One of the top reasons people thrift is to be able to shop on a budget, but if the thrifting market starts skyrocketing after its massive popularity jump online, will thrift stores no longer be affordable for those people? Where will low-income individuals shop if the thrift store is no longer a feasible option for them? Maybe department stores are the next cheapest, like Walmart or Giant Tiger. The clothing at those stores is fast fashion and likely lower quality, which will cause wear-and-tear more easily and induce more buying. An unsustainable fate in the long run.

Going forward

So, what’s the takeaway – what’s the best, sustainable option? Buying second-hand is definitely better than fast fashion, right? And I should also be aware of what online thrift shops I contribute to so I can choose to support the genuine small businesses? And I have to avoid the people who resell and still support fast fashion? And I should try not to contribute to gentrification? So, how can I be a responsible, sustainable shopper?

If you are asking yourself any of those questions and are feeling overwhelmed, conflicted, frustrated, hopeless, or confused – don’t worry. I’m with you on that. It can be difficult to sift through all the information and decipher the best way to move forward. It is important to understand that we will all make sustainable shifts in different ways and at different paces, so there’s no “one solution fits all”.

Personally, what works for me right now is buying things second hand to avoid fast fashion, but also trying to buy things less – only when I need something. Of course I occasionally impulse purchase because it can be hard not to participate in buying new clothes for fun, but I’m working on it. My next goal to continue improving the sustainability of my clothing lifestyle is to learn how to sew, so that I can mend my clothes instead of needing to replace them. We will all be at different points and have different capacities for change, but learning about the options is a great way to start thinking about what you can do next.

Source: Alisa Koz

When I am considering a second-hand purchase or have a genuine need for an item, I like to visualize the “buyerarchy of needs” pictured above. The bottom of the pyramid is the largest section because that action is what we should be doing the most of. Similarly, the top is what we should be doing the least. But the key to remember is that we have options. We should all be working on taking that next step towards sustainable fashion, whatever it may look like, online or otherwise.

The post Slow Fashion at the Speed of Light appeared first on A\J.

With circular fashion touted as the savior of this phenomenally wasteful industry, hundreds of the biggest fashion brands have rushed to associate with it.

Speaking with Mart Drake-Knight, co-founder of circular brand Rapanui, we asked whether big brands can back up their bold rhetoric and make real advances towards a circular economy, or is circular fashion being used as the next best tool for greenwashing the same old practices.

The Case for Change

Over the last 20 years, the explosion of fast fashion alongside a growing middle class with cash to burn, has led to a doubling of clothing production. Meanwhile, the number times we wear these clothes has dropped by a third.

We now consume and dispose of clothing faster than ever before, with a staggering 73% of our clothing eventually ending up in landfill. Sadly, most brands are not motivated to make clothes that last, with some chains, such as Zara, even admitting to producing clothes that are designed to be used less than 10 times.

This style of aggressive consumerism has led to a level of demand that has stretched natural resources to their limits. We often forget that most of our clothes are made of natural materials that we grow out of the earth. They require light, water, nutrients, fertilisers, pesticides, transportation, and ultimately, energy.

The textile industry is now moving at such a pace that it creates 10% of global CO2 emissions, with cotton production alone using 16% of the world’s pesticides, and 2,700 litres of water for just one t-shirt. We are quite literally rinsing the earth dry of resources, and with production projected to increase 81% by 2030, we are sleepwalking into an environmental disaster.

Circular Economies for A Sustainable Future

The current system used by 99% of the fashion and textile industry is not fit for purpose in the face of growing demand. Even with a major shift to sustainable practices, and the best will in the world, population growth alone will make reducing demand almost impossible.

Today, most brands follow the traditional linear model of take – make – dispose. This means all of the input energy is lost at the disposal stage, and we start from square one, by taking even more of our finite planetary resources.

Currently, less than 15% of clothes are collected for recycling, and less than 1% of used material actually ends up integrated into new clothing. You don’t need us to explain how blatantly wasteful this system is.

A circular economy for fashion offers by far the best, and perhaps most obvious, solution to this growing problem. A system of production in which waste and pollution are designed out, by keeping extracted resources in circulation for as long as possible. Then, when a product is beyond use it can be recycled or properly biodegraded, thereby completing the circle.

The broader circular model also focuses on sustainable production, so that the ‘take’ and ‘make’ parts of the system minimise environmental impact as well. Though it is at the disposal stage where circular fashion is unique and most promising.

For the fashion industry, a circular economy really does make sense. Most clothes are predominantly made of natural materials, like cotton, wool, silk, or even viscose. They lend themselves to being re-used, and recycled. A 100% cotton t-shirt, for example, is totally biodegradable, and suitable for re-manufacture.

In order to realise the goals of circular fashion we need to re-think the product life cycle. As Mart Drake-Knight explains:

“To recover and remake clothes, they need to be designed from the start with this in mind. It’s not just about closing the loop, it has to be clean.” …“You can’t take the egg out of an omelette, like you can’t take plastic out of nature meaningfully. It’s best to keep material flows clean if you are serious as a designer about long term (i.e. circular) sustainability.”

Where We Are Now

What’s interesting is that the principals of a circular economy are so applicable to fashion that the industry simply cannot ignore it, even if it wanted to. It’s rapidly been embraced as the go-to sustainability concept, since its mainstream emergence in 2014.

This year 90 fashion brands, including the likes of Nike, Decathlon, ASOS, GAP, and Tommy Hilfiger, have all pledged support for the Global Fashion Agenda’s (GFA) Circular Fashion System commitment. Sounds great, right?

Perhaps not. Circular fashion is so on-trend that it’s become something of a buzz word that everyone wants to associate with. But let’s be clear, talking about circularity in fashion is very different from enacting real change.

According to the GFA, just 12.5% of the global fashion industry has taken ‘concrete action’ towards integrating principles of a circular economy into their business models. And your guess is as good as mine when it comes to defining what exactly constitutes ‘concrete action’. There are endless special reports and design projects, commissioned by some of the biggest brands, with the aim of showing what ‘could’ be done if we conceive products with circularity in mind.

The problem is that all the talk rarely translates into material change. At some point all barriers towards implementing circular models within the fashion industry come down to money. Changing long established practices, especially in large supply chains, is seriously expensive, and as yet, none of the biggest fashion brands have really committed to recycling or re-manufacturing on a scale that compensates for their own production.

A point backed up by the first hand experience of Mart Drake-Knight: 

“Fundamentally the economy does not reward a company for recovering their waste, or using renewables, or natural materials. So it requires a total redesign of the business model and systems to make this kind of thing work.”

From some of the most powerful and profitable brands there is a lot of talk about the need for industry wide commitment. Hiding behind the inaction of others, as if they haven’t got the resources to make changes on their own steam. The sentiment is there, but when profit is at stake the collective will is incredibly weak.

Let’s Talk About H&M

Take H&M for example, who have positioned themselves as industry leaders on sustainability, by pouring millions into green advertising campaigns. Meanwhile, their business model is still founded squarely on the wasteful prototype of fast fashion; cheap, disposable clothes.

They claim to mitigate their environmental impact with their recycling program called ‘Bring It’, allowing customers to return used clothing to stores in exchange for 15% off when they spend more than $50. Of these returned garments, around 60% are still usable and are sent to clothing charities, and the remainder are used to make scrap fabric like cleaning cloths.

The problem is, after their second life the majority of re-used clothes and scrap fabric will still end up in landfills. Meanwhile, an incredible 0.1% of donated fabric actually ends up integrated into new H&M clothing.

In effect, H&M are just deferring waste disposal onto other people. Sure, some of the clothes remain in use for longer, but ultimately H&M is still failing to take responsibility for their own waste through safe disposal or re-manufacturing, and who would when you create so much of it. The system is not even close to circular, without a thought for durability or recycling at the design phase.

What H&M has created is a fantastic PR campaign, that gives customers a false sense of righteousness as they spend that discount voucher after dumping the clothes they had just bought 6 months earlier. Publicly, at least, it looks like everyone has ‘done the right thing’, but long term, pushing our waste onto others will not scratch the surface of the environmental problems facing the fashion industry.

Who Really Closes the Loop

Whilst the biggest fashion brands squabble over their own deficiencies, passing the responsibility amongst themselves, it’s left to the smaller brands to show us how it’s really done. Companies like Rapanui, haven’t waited for ‘industry wide consensus’, they’ve simply prioritised the environmental and social challenges, and designed their own systems accordingly, as Mart Drake-Knight explains:

“The challenge is developing new technologies that do not currently exist, or implementing existing technologies in new ways, to make it happen.”

“Short term you could probably make more money pumping out super cheap plastic stuff for one-wear. But it’s not sustainable.” … “The economics of ‘losing everything eventually’ vs the economics of ‘investing in something that will last’ is a no brainer isn’t it? You don’t even need a spreadsheet.”

Rapanui are pioneering how circular fashion should really work. Where virgin materials are used their sourcing and manufacturing processes are incredibly clean and traceable. From their base on the Isle of Wight they have created a supply chain that’s just about as sustainable and circular as currently possible.

However, the most impressive part comes later. Once clothes are worn out they can be returned to Teemill for re-manufacture. This means used garments are converted back to yarn, which is then spun to produce clothes again. Old becomes new, and this time hardly any natural resources have been extracted.

This is real closed loop manufacturing. An authentic vision of circular fashion, made possible because Rapanui chose to do everything with sustainability in mind from the very beginning. Mart Drake-Knight tells us:

“there are also some really interesting economic dynamics” … “As soon as your entire business makes new from old, your entire customer base is both your consumer and also your supplier. And material is no longer a cost, it’s an asset.”

How We Can Help

Companies like Rapanui have demonstrated that circular fashion is not a fantasy beyond reach. They show us what is possible right now if you build a brand with sustainability as a genuine priority, instead of an ill conceived afterthought.

Brands that make clothes with real foresight to close manufacturing loops only serves to demonstrate just how careless mainstream fashion continues to be. The excuse of waiting on industry wide cooperation is wearing thin, when clearly it’s the bottom line, profit, that is what’s holding back progression.

With this in mind, we can make a simple and powerful choice. Obviously money counts, so we can use our spending power to do the talking. By avoiding brands that are wasteful by design and choosing sustainable alternatives, we can send a powerful message for change. Hopefully the days of take – make – dispose will be numbered.

The post They Talk the Talk, But Are Big Brands Doing Enough To Make Fashion Circular? appeared first on A\J.

Well, times have changed, and now this is the time to keep questioning the status quo of the industries we are working within, and to understand that foundation ideas and suppositions about the right way of doing business with outdated mentalities just won’t cut it anymore. If the ‘customer is always right’, then we are the leaders, we have the voices, and we need to ensure that we’re leaving a legacy that with enough will may move mountains for our future. This is especially seen in the fashion industry time after time. From unsafe working conditions to landfills piled to overflowing with textile waste. It is a problem we all contribute to, but it’s time to step up and do better.

From fast fashion to luxury goods, there are opportunities to use our platforms and consumer power to demand innovation and creativity from our designers, manufacturers and fashion retailers to make more sustainable goods produced with better conditions for its workers. It really is that simple. With the ever-changing and evolving trends, consumers would be very appreciative and supportive of the designers, the ‘architects and artists’ of the industry, taking this an extra step forward and using sustainable textile as another form of artistically expressing themselves and the vision for our future.

We decided to hold a Q/A with Brana Dane on the idea of sustainable fashion. Brana is more than a model and activist. She has seen firsthand the negative environmental legacy and injustice that can be left behind in the name of fashion and believes in being the changemaker from inside out.

Brana is a Model and Activist. Brana is also one of the leaders of the activist group, “Model Mafia”, which promotes fair working conditions, more sustainable fashion practices, and promoting a more inclusive fashion and modelling industry. She was honored to speak about the importance of sustainable fashion at the annual NYC public Earth Day rally in Union Square April 2019. Brana has participated in and led numerous social media campaigns to reduce plastic consumption. For example, she collaborated with Lonely Whale to reduce single use plastic and again with Rainforest Alliance to help get the plastic bag banned in NYC.

Brana has helped organize members of the fashion community during many environmental marches and several public events. In fact, she created and led the recent NYFW rallies for the climate strike that went viral on social media and was even reposted in Vogue Brasil, proving that customers want more than garments – they want ethics in the workplace and they want it now.

Growing up on the ocean in Vancouver, Brana feels a deep connection to nature and is motivated to preserve it for future generations. While using her platform to shed a light on the needs of our planet and the plight of the modern garment worker, she seeks to inspire a light to as many people as possible as her heart and soul is intertwined in two seemingly opposing worlds: Fashion and Sustainability. Below we take a look through Brana’s lens on the industry.

***

GV:  What is your definition of ‘sustainable fashion’?

BD:   Fashion is a means of expressing oneself. Sustainable fashion goes beyond the surface and expresses concern for the lives that made the garment as well as a concern for our shared environment. The benchmarks to asses this for me are threefold. Firstly, is the garment produced with a long life-cycle? Secondly, does the production use renewable resources while creating minimal waste? Lastly, is the piece produced using labor that is responsibly treated and paid fairly? 

GV:  From your perspective , what is the biggest environmental concern in regards to the fashion industry? 

BD:  The amount of textiles burnt or that end up in landfills is astounding. At around 92 million tons of textile waste across the globe annually, it adds up quickly.

GV:  Are there any main culprits that fall into this?

BD:  Big names need to take responsibility for setting the example. Unfortunately only some hear this call. Chanel is still burning it’s unsold garments, but other brands like Burberry have recently stopped this practice. It’s a good first step, but to truly make a difference so much more is needed. 

GV:  What can brands do to promote sustainable fashion practise?

BD:   Brands need to be very clear about how they are different. They need to help raise awareness along with the rest of us to expose the cost of fast fashion. Simply being a sustainable brand creates more demand for sustainable solutions within the industry and will have a great effect to decrease production costs for the future. 

GV:  What can we do as consumers to lower our carbon footprint associated with fashion and textile waste? And how do we promote a more conscious mindset when shopping?

BD:  As a consumer the first question I always ask myself is, “do I need this”? Buying less is the single best thing we can do as a population. I love fashion and support artistic expression but more often then not we are buying things on a whim and not because we truly love or need them. You can always take an old garment to a seamstress or an artist to create a unique fashion piece no one else will ever own. This is great for the environment and supports the artist and craftsmen of the world locally. I think it’s up to the new generation to define what makes us worthwhile people; is it having the newest brand name item or is it honoring the lives of those making the garment? What do we value? Ourselves and our world or branding and labels? 

GV:  Do you see the problem getting better or worse? What is the leading factor of this change?

BD:  There is definitely a subtle shift happening in fashion. It’s been coming for a long time. As a climate activist, I see the overlap between environmental concerns increasing and the surge of demand for sustainable brands. Retail itself is in the midst a major transformation with many large fast fashion companies, such as Forever 21, filing for bankruptcy. It’s slow moving but we have been making some headway. Since COVID some major designers such as Giorgio Armani have even vowed to stop following the fashion week calendar of production and instead produce simultaneously with the actual season. It’s a time to truly wake up to what’s important and embrace our green hearts. 

***

There is enough hope, it would seem, from a leader like Brana, to sustain our efforts to fast-forward our efforts to green our less-fast-fashions. We, the buyers of fashion, have the power within our hands to demand more – and to uplift those who are doing more in the process. With changemakers within the industry like Brana, we hope more can take similar footsteps in leaving a positive impression in their industry, as this is much more than just fashion. There’s an old saying that ‘clothes make the person’, if so it could be looked at as ‘you are what you wear’. Today, at the grassroots level of young citizens (and consumers, there’s a change of mentality and lifestyle. Oftentimes, fashion and textile waste are overlooked as a not-so-silent climate offender. With fast fashion giants (and their industries silos like retailers and designers) contributing the trash that’s fueling the growing waste problem in landfills, it brings us as consumers to a crossroad: what drives our decision-making? What’s more important when it comes to our fashion choices: how to be more conscious when purchasing or staying on top of the latest, hot-now apparel? If we all work together as citizens AND as consumers to demand a greener alternative THIS FASHION SEASON, the industry can’t afford to be offering goods and services labeled as REDUCED TO CLEAR, OUT OF STYLE and SO LAST YEAR.  

The post You Are What You Wear appeared first on A\J.

Being sustainable and adopting an environmentally-friendly lifestyle is becoming the norm. People have begun turning away from over-consumerism and have started making an effort to generate less waste and put more thought into the products they consume.

This change in behavior extends to how they approach beauty, too. While brands like Kylie Jenner’s Kylie Cosmetics remain popular, more and more people are starting to pay attention to how beauty products impact the planet. According to data from Marketing Week, sales of vegan beauty products are growing and Google searches for ‘vegan beauty’ have doubled. It seems that many are starting to ask themselves, “Do I care about what’s in my cosmetics when I just want to look good? Does the environment matter more to me?”

If you’re truly committed to transitioning to a sustainable lifestyle, you have to introduce massive changes in your routine. As noted in a previous Alternatives Journal post, living sustainably demands a complete lifestyle shift that requires you to be conscious of how your purchasing decisions impact the planet.

Aside from buying less and generating less waste, you also have to make the necessary changes in your beauty routine. If you want to start cultivating a completely sustainably beauty regimen, you may want to consider following these tips:

Recycle your empties.

Part of being sustainable is making an effort in recycling your empty bottles and containers. Throwing items into the trash without considering recycling them can have adverse consequences on landmines and oceans. Real Simple suggests buying a dual compartment bin so you’re always reminded to recycle whenever possible. You may also want to keep an eye out for beauty brands that offer recycling options in-house. L’Occitane, Origins, and MAC have already been the cosmetic product recycling pioneers.

Go packaging free.

Speaking of empties, you may want to do away with them altogether by switching to items that are packaging-free. Brands like Lush have managed to find a way to remove all packaging from their products, resulting in less waste. Their shampoo bars come wrapped in recyclable paper and lather up as you clean your hair with ingredients that also happen to be environmentally-friendly. Other brands like Ethique and Seed Phytonutrients have followed suit, so you may want to check them out as well.

Buy from sustainable beauty brands.

If you’re worried that you will have fewer options when you switch to sustainable beauty brands, don’t fret. There are many brands out there that offer a huge line of cosmetics for you to enjoy and experiment with. Melissa Butler launched the vegan line Lip Bar from her kitchen, and it has now grown large enough to be sold across Target locations in the US. She emphasizes how while it’s cruelty-free, it offers an inclusive range of shade and products crafted from non-toxic ingredients. Other brands like Credo Beauty, Follain, and Love Goodly are also worth looking into. It’s always best to do your research prior to buying so you can ensure that the products are cruelty-free and absent of questionable ingredients.

Start small.

Switching to a sustainable lifestyle takes time, and you don’t have to pressure yourself into making abrupt changes. If you’re used to a certain routine, Marie Claire explains that it might be better for you to swap things out gradually to make your transition into a more sustainable beauty regiment smoother. You can start by buying and using one sustainable product at a time, and then gradually building your routine up over time.

The post Is a Sustainable and Cruelty-Free Beauty Routine Possible? appeared first on A\J.

“Education is the kindling of a flame, not the filling of a vessel.” – Socrates

Education and learning are intrinsic parts of the human experience. In our earliest days, learning (and to a lesser degree, formalized education) were more organic efforts. They were task-based and primarily focused on internalizing the lessons from previous generations, which would then allow us as individuals to survive the never-ending threats to our existence.

In the 18th century, the Enlightenment changed the world and how we educated our children and ourselves. From Newtonian physics to Adam Smith’s invisible hand – and from Rousseau’s social contract to Descartes’ rationalism – Western society gained and built a better understanding of the world. And this improved the ways that humans could manipulate the world.

The benefits of these new approaches to learning, thinking, and living, seemed undeniable. The Enlightenment laid the foundation of modern Western intellectual culture and along with that came the freedom, liberty and tolerance that we cherish today. We continue to reap the benefits of the Enlightenment. We believe education is a right, we applaud multiculturalism, and we uphold the rights of individuals above most other things.

But these wonderful characteristics of modern society come at a cost. In this issue, Steve Quilley argues that while education may be a fundamental right, it has also become a system that reinforces the goals of economic growth. Formalized education has, in many ways, come to replicate the machinery of industrialization. In effect, students become inputs in a process that outputs workers who can plug into societal and industrial roles. How can we fan the flame of inspiration while also stoking the engines of societal development?

We want our children to think critically but also to succeed in the workforce. We want science, but we also crave deep meaning in our lives. Environmentalists feel this struggle constantly – we recognize the wonders of our modern world while being dreadfully aware of the biophysical impacts of our lifestyles. This issue explores ways that we can bring the power and beauty of pre-modern thought back into our rationalized modern world. The articles work through this tension and duality of purpose.

Mr. Green Teacher himself, Tim Grant, builds on Quilley. He shows how educators are breaking away from the systems spawned by the Industrial Revolution, to establish new paradigms that will nurture collaborative problem-solving. Our 13th Annual Environmental Education Directory and accompanying “Stories of Excellence” demonstrate education’s leading role in helping the next generation to repair the damage that past generations have caused on this planet.

The fashion section includes such topics as the grassroots Fibreshed movement and corporate stakeholders embracing the circular textile economy. We are honoured to share the art and stories from Kent Monkman (see cover and Quilley) and the Singh Twins (Quilley and fashion). All use art to reclaim a cultural past that was too long ignored and erased. Truths bubble up. Misconceptions are corrected. The past is tied to the present in each painting.

Education and learning – formal or otherwise – will feed positive transformation. Enjoy this issue!

The post Editorial 43.3/4 Education/Lifestyle (Double Issue) appeared first on A\J.

In 2016, the magazine TakePart reported that 26 billion pounds (11,800,000 tonnes) of textile is tossed into US landfills each year. You might donate clothing in hopes that someone will re-love it, but according to the 2015 film The True Cost, only 10 percent of clothes that people donate get sold. One of the most important practices in closing the loop of the fashion industry is buying donated items, which is why innovative upcycling companies are bringing new life to second-hand fabric.

At the 2017 Hillside Festival, I interviewed the founders of two upcycling businesses, The Upcyclists and Fred&Bean, and they shared varied perspectives on upcycling values. Katie McLellan and Catherine Butchart, the co-founders of The Upcyclists, see upcycling as a uniquely artistic endeavor. Katie crafts wall collages, or as she calls them “wallages,” using the quirks of fabric to create specific effects, such as the fade in jeans becoming clouds that fade into a blue sky. Katie explains that she is moved by the worn and torn fabrics, which can share more stories than something that is brand new. Co-founder Catherine contributes by creating edgy patched clothing, bracelets out of old bike tires, chokers using the hems of pants, and adorable car fresheners out of leftover fabric from her upcycled mitten collection.

Kat Palmer, the founder of Fred&Bean, focuses on reworking her fabric with functional flair. She creates beach vests out of thrifted towels and swim underwear out of reworked swim fabric, the latter of which I can verify as incredibly comfortable since I picked up a pair to wear at the lake during the festival! She explains that clothing should be made to serve you and be of value to your life, not to merely make a sale. Fred&Bean also hosted a DIY booth at Hillside because Kat believes that if more individuals feel comfortable working with fabric, it will be easier to manage material waste. She insightfully explained, “In this life, there’s red tape around almost everything, but fabric is a bit of a free-for-all. There’s so much fabric that it becomes a problem to manage, but it has also become a resource without red tape around it. It’s a resource like water, air or soil.”

Whether fabric is recreated for aesthetic value or functional lovability, I discovered that there are so many ways to “spin straw into gold” as Katie described it. Whatever the purpose, the fabric these makers touch is given new life with a new home, much less shabby than a landfill.

The post Why We Upcycle appeared first on A\J.

When my Austrian grandma passed away, I found her 20-year-old Dirndl in her wardrobe. Although it was much too big for me, I was emotionally unable to throw it away. Eventually, I decided this Dirndl deserved to be worn again. So, I opened all the seams, divided it into its components and reassembled it. Since it was a very simple garment, I added lace and a border to the hemline, and a hand-stitch to the upper part. Finally, to complete the look, I bought a matching Dirndl blouse. The first time I wore the outfit, my husband asked, “did you buy a new Dirndl?” By using my grandma’s Dirndl as a resource for a new product, I was participating in a “circular economy” business model, which aims to reduce resources and avoid waste.

In 2013, the average North American consumer purchased 64 garments – about five per month. Clothing consumption has steadily increased over the last 30 years, and is expected to continue increasing due to low prices and fast changing fashion trends. The North American apparel market is expected to continue growing at a rate of about two percent per year, and this growth will require the use of more resources. Continuous population growth will also increase global fibre consumption; global population is expected to exceed 8.5 billion people and global garment production to increase by 63% by 2030.  The Global Fashion Agenda report states, “this [economic] model is reaching its physical limits.” The entire industry needs an overhaul for environmental and economic reasons.

“Fast fashion” or “throw away fashion,” has changed the way we dress and the way we consume. Fashion has become disposable and has ultimately led to more waste. Each year the average consumer disposes 82 pounds of unwanted garments and textiles. While consumption and waste generation has increased, textile recycling has not developed at the same pace. Today, textiles account for approximately 5-10 percent of the waste in North America’s landfills. This estimate is based on waste audits of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the province of Nova Scotia (Jensen, 2012). The rest of post-consumer textiles in North America, 70 pounds per person per year, ends up in the residential waste stream (Council for Textile Recycling, 2014). The common fashion business model today is based on consumers buying, using and disposing of clothes. This linear business model has made the fashion industry the second largest polluter of all industries, just behind the oil industry.

In contrast to the “buy, use and dispose” model, a circular economy keeps material flow in a “closed loop” from an industrial ecology perspective. Walter R. Stahel, an influential sustainability expert and author of the prize-winning paper “The Product-Life Factor”, summarizes the closed loop: “reuse what you can, recycle what cannot be reused, repair what is broken, remanufacture what cannot be repaired”(Stahel, 2016, p. 435). A circular, closed-loop economic approach promotes the “3R” principle of waste reduction –  reduce, reuse and recycle – by circulating materials in an endless loop of use.

Cradle-to-cradle design is an approach to design and production that considers the life cycle of a garment from its inception in order to close the production loop. For example, a blouse designed with a cradle-to-cradle approach might be made out of 100 percent polyester fabric, buttons and threads. Using only one material type, rather than several, makes it easier to recycle.

China officially accepted the circular economy as a development strategy in 2009. The country strives for a nationwide implementation of a circular economy on both corporate and social levels. Likewise, the European Union is pushing towards a circular-economy driven by legislation promoting waste reduction and recycling programs.

The effort European brands and retailers are making to “close the loop” is no coincidence or simply voluntary, it is instead a result of the EU’s “take back” legislation, which requires brand owners to be responsible for collecting, recovering and disposing of their products.

While the circular economy concept is promising, several factors have slowed its adoption in Canada, including a lack of strategy in the industrial and government sectors. In Canada, a retailer pays taxes and duties on all imported garments. If a garment goes unsold, retailers have two main options. If the company discards it at a landfill, the import duty is refunded since the garment is considered “unused” and a loss. But if the material is recycled in Canada (“used” according to the Federal Government) the duty is not refunded. In other words, the government actively encourages dumping excess garments instead of recycling them.

Perhaps the greatest impediment to a circular economy in Canada regarding textiles is the lack of textile recycling facilities. Though every garment can be recycled in some way, collection systems and processing facilities are needed to do so. For example, when Nova Scotia began its textile waste initiative, the first challenge was to determine all sources of textile waste. They eventually realized how big the problem was, but didn’t have any solutions. Indeed, though the province proposed banning textiles from landfills in 2015, two years later they have yet to implement their ban.

Designers have opportunities to reduce the resources needed for a textile product itself. This infographic was developed by students from the School of Fashion at Seneca College. “Seneca’s textile diversion program is one way the School of Fashion is involved in several sustainability-focused initiatives,” says Chair Gitte Hansen. “This is part of a larger effort to promote and embed sustainability in the Seneca Culture and the values and learnings we impart to our students.”

What are the solutions?

A circular economic strategy requires the active participation of all stakeholders involved in every aspect of an item’s lifecycle. This includes everyone from design, production and supply chains, distribution channels such as retail and wholesale, to consumption, and then the waste management sector, including municipalities, textile collectors and recyclers. Every stakeholder group has opportunities to help close the lifecycle loop of a garment. Let’s take a look at each of them to consider how they might be implemented.

Design

Every product starts with design. Designers have opportunities to reduce the resources needed for the product itself. For example, fully-fashioned knitting is a process that produces custom pre-shaped pieces of a knitted garment and is therefore virtually waste-free. Every fibre has a different environmental impact, and by carefully considering the life cycle of materials for their products, designers can save significant resources. Generally, the lighter the design, the fewer materials and resources are required. For example, polyester and nylon are strong fibres, making thin and durable material. Products made from these fibres require less material compared to cotton or linen fibres to achieve a comparable degree of durability.

Though many consumers are proud of their cotton and presumably more environmentally friendly reusable shopping bags, bags made of nylon or even polyester require less material for an equally strong bag, and have a lower environmental impact. Shopping bags made from recycled nylon or polyester are even better choice, since they require less energy for the fibres and fewer resources overall. Using recycled fibres for new products is an important step in supporting recycling efforts.

Designers can also put more meaning into their products to give consumers more value and reduce excessive consumption. Garments today are meant to be disposable, or at least replaced by the next fashion cycle. Designed at one place, produced in another and sold elsewhere, these fast-fashion garments leave consumers with mass produced, anonymous products. There is often no relationship between consumer and producer, and no understanding of the amount of work going into a garment. The garments are easy to discard because they mean little to the consumer, but are difficult to recycle because they are soaked in chemicals. Garments must be designed from the start in a more sustainable way by connecting makers and consumers more closely. (A\J covered this idea in Kish and Quilley’s “DIY,” Ecological Economics 43.1)

In the circular economic strategy, every stakeholder group has opportunities to help close the lifecycle loop of the garment

Manufacturing and supply chain

A circular economic strategy seeks harmony between economy, environment and society, with efficiency as the primary aim. Environmental efficiency means achieving the highest degree of value from something. In the past, this may have come at the expense of the environment. A circular economy, however, has a long-term vision of efficiency. What is efficient from a short-term perspective may not necessarily be efficient or expedient over the full life-cycle of the product, brand or environment.

The overriding goal of efficiency in a circular economy is to find ways to reduce resource use by reducing both the volume of fabric materials used in production and the amount of CO2 emissions in transporting these materials. Some of the ways clothing producers have integrated these considerations into their production processes include local sourcing of production and materials, which reduces transportation costs and pollution while respecting the natural ecology of the region.

Fashion designer Peggy Sue, located in Milton, Ontario, has included the search for locally sourced natural and raw material as fundamental to her design and manufacturing choices by partnering with the Upper Canada Fibreshed (UCFS). Based on the idea of a watershed, the fibreshed builds relationships between farmers, artisans, mills, designers and consumers to create a strong local textile economy within a 400 km radius of Toronto.

Retail and distribution channels

When products have a lower price per unit (in other words, can be sold cheaply), many retailers in the fast-fashion industry would rather have excess inventory than risk running out of stock. This practice results in huge amounts of inventory that is never sold, not even through clearance.

One of the most ecological and ethical options to handle this excess inventory is to donate the items for recycling. For example, fashion recycler Debrand Services, based in Delta, BC, offers secure disposal and recycling for unsold clothing merchandise from retailers and industry. Since more than 90 percent of all garments are made offshore, Debrand must convince their client to forfeit the duty refund they would have received by dumping, and on top of this, pay extra for the recycling. Despite these impediments, Debrand is thriving, and lists companies like Lululemon, Columbia or Aritizia as clients.

Consumers

The average garment is worn fewer than seven times before it is disposed, and most women in North America own clothes they have never worn. To benefit their psyches and bank accounts, consumers should focus on buying fewer clothes of higher quality. Moreover, they should look for clothing made of recycled materials or with a more sustainable approach like organic and fair trade or locally made cotton. Companies will change their practices when their customers make different choices about where and on what to spend their money.

If we buy less today, we’ll have fewer clothes to discard tomorrow. Currently, our economic system encourages us to consume more, but we don’t have to accept this. There are so many great opportunities to participate in the circular economy. Buy clothes from second-hand stores, and trade that unworn sweater sitting in your closet at a swap event. Send garments to repair and mending services – most repairs are cheaper than we might assume. Return clothes through company take-back programs. Donate or sell all unwanted clothes rather than dispose. Even underwear and socks can be donated so long as garments are dry, clean and odourless. There are also plenty of clothes sharing and renting programs like Rent frock Repeat, a Toronto-based company that rents out the most beautiful designer outfits to be returned “guilt free” after a single use. You can even rent your daily outfit from Toronto start-up Boro.

We know the steps needed to create a circular economy, now we just need to take them.”

Waste management sector

This sector consists of textile collectors, privately owned companies, charities and municipalities in charge of waste management and textile recyclers.

To close the loop, unwanted garments must not end up in the waste bin, but instead be collected, sorted and diverted for further reuse.

The municipality of Markham, Ontario began a textile diversion program in February 2016 and banned used clothing in their waste stream in April 2017. According to Claudia Marsales, senior waste and environmental manager, the municipality of Markham and its partners have collected more than five and a half million pounds of textile waste. Other leading municipalities of textile diversion include Colchester, Nova Scotia and Aurora, Ontario. Along with Markham, they have instituted post-consumer textile waste diversion programs. But three municipalities in all of Canada are not enough.

The National Zero Waste Council summarizes the Canadian waste policies: “Canada is united in the achievement of zero waste, now and for future generations.” Such an approach can be achieved only in a circular economy, when products are designed to be recirculated into the economy as materials from which new products will be made. Though zero waste master plans for many products exist, textiles remain unaddressed. The National Zero Waste Council itself has yet to take any action towards textile waste diversion.

Although Canada has a well-established textile sorting industry which resells used clothing globally, Canada lacks recycling possibilities for textiles due to a lack of technology and potential end markets for recycled products. It seems that textiles are the forgotten waste.

The promise of a circular economy is hopeful. There have been significant contributions to the development of a circular economy for textiles at local, provincial and industrial levels, however, it has yet to receive the mass scale required to create a sustainable, circular fashion system. Today, only 15 percent of Canada’s unwanted textiles are diverted from the landfill. Of that amount, only three percent is reclaimed into new fibre, less than five percent is recycled into new products and less than seven percent is resold. We know the steps needed to create a circular economy, now we just need to take them.

The post A Stitch in Time (wastes less) appeared first on A\J.

Sad and grey: this is how I remember the Poland of the late 1980s and the early 90s. As a child, I felt overwhelmed by the depressing cityscapes and monotonous, boring design shaping the reality around me. Everything looked kind of the same: no originality, no uniqueness, no style – just a frustrated, tired crowd waiting for a change. The natural human ability to create beauty was almost completely blocked. Imagination was the only safe space to create with no limitations.

Luckily, the change came fast enough! Solidarity is how it all started. In 1980, Polish workers including Lech Wałęsa  founded Solidarity, a famous Polish trade union that represented interests of the labouring class and fought openly against communists. Solidarity managed to not only negotiate with the communist government, but also lead the country to democracy. After a decade of struggling, Poland was ready for first democratic elections: Lech Wałęsa was chosen as its president in 1990. Democracy offered a creative world of freedom and the promise that anything was possible. This hope coloured not only the people’s thoughts, but also their clothes.

Slowly, the borders opened for intercultural exchange. Polish visual artists and fashion designers travelled abroad, finding inspiration in Western Europe. Gradually, they found their own style, a mix of Western trends and Slavic temperament.

No longer afraid of innovation, Polish clothing designers such as Małgosia Bochenek (Boho), Gosia Sobiczewska (ESTby Es.) and Grzegorz Matląg (Maldoror) have become recognized worldwide for sustainable design that emphasizes respect for people and nature alongside originality. The Polish fair trade fashion market is small but growing, as society becomes more ecoconscious and the demand for such products rises.

Now, 25 years after transformation, Poland is a different country. I am proud to have witnessed these amazing changes in both politics and culture, and happy to share three key ingredients in the success of Poland’s sustainable fashion industry.

SUCH a SUCZ is a part of Poland’s sustainable fashion industry.

Unlimited creativity

After being separated from the rest of the world for so many years, Polish fair trade fashion designers are restless, open and creative. Grzegorz Matląg (Maldoror) suggests that such abundant creativity is a positive consequence of being extremely practical and facing many limitations at the same time. You learn to use whatever pops in your hands, you do not complain, just put things together and create. This alternative kind of thinking often results in unique designs that customers love. Maldoror designs are raw and rather simple, often looking like they are made in a rush, unfinished “sketches.” Avant-garde cuts combined with high-quality textiles create outstanding and eye-catching projects.

High quality

After many years of stagnation, Poland’s textile business is developing extremely quickly. Polish companies are famous for producing high quality fabrics. Alexandra Kościkiewicz (Alexandra K) offers the highest quality vegan fashion, recognized worldwide. Fair trade sustainable fashion brands like BOHEMA CLOTHING, Slogan Eco Streetwear, Alexandra K or SUCH a SUCZ quickly realized that their clients are only interested in the best quality sustainable goods. The design can be extremely minimalistic, like Wearso.organic’s gorgeous dresses, but the quality is what really counts!

Slogan Eco Streetwear

Energy and synergy

What always surprises me in Poland is the enormous amount of energy that artists and designers share. Just look at the beautiful clothing by Anna Dudzińska. Young Polish fair trade fashion designers are a new generation of people who have the power to fight for sustainable fashion. The spectacular success of brands like Wearso.organic shows that there are no limitations for high-quality fashion design produced with respects to the environment. Using organic cotton and caring for employees are the basic principles for Aleksandra Waś (Wearso.organic), who is always interested in the manufacturing chain. She chose to create healthier, sustainable products that are created with no harm to anybody.

Slogan Eco Streetwear cares for both environment and society. They have high ecological and labour standards that are confirmed by credible certificates and attestations for their products. Handcrafted details, vegan materials and sustainable production are the most important aspects of designing also for brands like BOHEMA CLOTHING or Alexandra K. Their online manifestos are not only passionate, but also uncompromising.

At the same time, there are a couple of inspiring initiatives that bring fair trade fashion lovers, activists and designers together. Organizations like Clean Clothes Poland and the Buy Responsibly Foundation provide significant support for Polish fair trade market. Together, they introduced a Fair Fashion? mobile application, which is now available in Polish. Clean Clothes Poland always supports events promoting sustainable fashion like WearFair Fashion Show in Łódź (2012) or Łobzowska Studio Fashion Day in Kraków (2015). The Buy Responsibly Foundation created also the Good Shopping Guide, the first online consumer guide in Poland with a ranking focused on environmental impact and social responsibility.

Slowly, Polish cities are becoming home for new initiatives like the Slow Fashion Cafe in Kraków, where you can sew, recycle or upcycle cloths while enjoying a piece of homemade tart. It seems to be a perfect environment for building consumer awareness.

I am happy to say goodbye to the “old times” and celebrate the inspiring energy and vibrating synergy within Polish environment-friendly fashion business. I wish all the designers the best of luck and also would like to encourage all of the readers to experience and remember Poland, not as a country of kiełbasa and pierogi, but as a fashion-forward place that is famous for high-quality textiles and remarkable fair trade clothing.

If you are hungry for clothing inspired by Polish folklore, take a look at fabulous designs by Aneta Larys-Knap (FOLK DESIGN). Together with Gosia Sobiczewska (ESTby Es.), Slogan Street View and SUCH a SUCZ, she recently presented her projects at the Fur Free Fashion Show 2015 in China.

The post From Solidarity to Sustainability appeared first on A\J.

Not getting new shoes until the old ones wore out, darning the toe hole in the end of a sock, patching a favourite pair of jeans for the third time; these practices are no longer a reality for most of today’s youth. Maybe, if we are lucky, our moms can still sew a badge on our bags or fix a small hole in our favourite sweater, but for the most part, younger generations today – and generations to come – will have no idea how to do this.

With the rise of fast fashion, the cheapness of clothes and shoes, and constant fashion media in our faces, why would we fix something old, when we could have something new for a lot less effort and not much more money? The everyday art of fixing our clothes is almost lost, and the majority of us do not even own a sewing kit – let alone have an idea where to start when it comes to fixing holes in our socks. However, a new trend is arising that also reduces clothing waste – upcycling. 

With the average North American throwing away around 68 pounds of clothing a year, any reduction in textile waste is important. Most recycling can be considered “downcycling” – consumer products are broken down into their base materials to be made into new items. Upcycling skips the energy-intensive step of breaking down materials, instead refashioning old items into something new.  

It is very easy to get started – just go though your closet and find old t-shirts you never wear, or a pair of jeans that you were going to throw away. You can use the links below (or check out our Pinterest page) for great ideas on how to turn these old items into something beautiful!

“Buy less, repair more”

Companies like Patagonia have been pushing their customers to “Buy less, repair more,” and have even released a magazine ad with an image of a jacket captioned, “do not buy this jacket.” They have partnered with programs like iFixit which provides tutorials and tools on the basics for how to sew on a button, how to sew seams using a sewing machine, or how to sew on a patch. Patagonia has even built a “Worn Wear Repair Truck” which will tour around the US and Canada throughout the spring, driven by clothing-repair experts who will teach people the skills that they need to repair their own clothes. iFixit also has a range of apparel-repair tutorials you can follow online, and we’ve collected a number of basic tips and tutorials on Pinterest.

So the next time you get a hole in your pants, don’t throw them away – teach yourself to fix them, or find a cool upcycling project to turn them into something new!

View our Upcycling board on Pinterest

Follow Alternatives Journal’s board Upcycling on Pinterest.

View our Fix It! board on Pinterest

Follow Alternatives Journal’s board Fix It! on Pinterest.

The post Mend Your Wears appeared first on A\J.

A\J’s Fashion issue explores the social and ecological impacts of “fast fashion.” In “Picking Up the Threads,” Kelly Drennan of Fashion Takes Action explains how low prices and über-trendiness come at the expense of both people and the environment.

The issue also profiles a number of designers who are bringing a more sustainable approach to their work – designers whose “slow fashion” products, frankly, often come with higher price tags. We spoke to fair trade advocate Melissa Stieber about why sustainable clothing often costs more – and why investing in sustainable clothing can perpetuate fairness and better quality throughout the entire industry.

Stieber is the owner of More Than Half, a fair trade clothing store in downtown Kitchener, and a leader in trying to change the system from within. Those of us who can follow her lead can expect, just as the early adopters of green energy did, that these actions will make sustainable clothing more accessible.

A\J:  What’s behind the higher cost of fair trade and ecofriendly clothing?
Melissa Stieber: I get asked this question all the time and when I explain to people everything that went into creating a particular item, their perception of clothing changes. We have become so used to seeing low prices that we think, no matter what, clothes should always cost this little.

But behind that fair trade dress is a farmer that grew the organic cotton, workers that picked the cotton – and ginned, spun, weaved, dyed, printed, cut and sewed it – and in many cases did this all by hand using traditional methods.

Fair Trade pays living wages, health benefits and premiums, and creates safe working conditions. Yes, these factors will increase production costs, but they bring clothing back to it’s true value. When you increase social and environmental standards, you come out with a higher quality product that will last longer, feels better and creates a more sustainable world.

Fair Trade clothing doesn’t have to be as expensive as people assume it would be. When we have done our own price comparisons, we found that our prices are about the same as other popular brands – and sometimes a bit less. If people want to pay $10 for a new pair of jeans, they should understand that it was made in a sweatshop, using poor quality materials that damage the environment and will probably fall apart in very little time. 

Will that ever change?
Wholesalers and retailers already do what they can to lower prices by taking a lower margin than their fast-fashion counterparts. But looking for the price to change shouldn’t be our prime concern, it should be changing our perception of the value of clothing and the work that goes into creating it. If we are going to continue putting price first, than the issues of fast fashion will never change.

Why is it worth it to you to pay the higher price?
When I look at clothing or any products that are unethically made I automatically think about what is behind the label. I pay that higher price because in my mind there is no other option; I refuse to be a part of the problem. If paying a little more for clothing can bring others out of poverty, empower women and send children to school, than I’m more than happy to do that. 

What about people who can’t afford the expensive options – how can they support sustainability in the fashion industry?
We have many customers who buy an item or two each season and then do the rest of their shopping at thrift stores. Other good shopping options would be vintage, consignment and clothing swaps, and if you are handy with a sewing machine you can upcycle, creating something new to you.

There are different thoughts on boycotting, but I’m a firm believer in giving my money to only brands I trust. Lessening demand tells a company that they need to change their business model. Ask questions and make brands accountable, – as consumers, we have more power than we think in changing the fashion industry. 

The post Why Sustainable Clothing Costs More appeared first on A\J.