A Captive Audience


Industry heroes
March 28, 2011, 7:16 am
Filed under: Thoughts | Tags: , ,

A couple of recent talks, one at RMIT and another as part of LMFF have got me thinking about the adoption of more sustainable practices by fashion businesses.  The commonly accepted viewpoint in Australia (as I am hearing it) is that we lag behind Europe in terms of motivation, legislation and actual action.  Likely, our size and sprawl contributes to this – tackling landfill issues for example seems of little importance when we have so much space and so many disused mine sites to fill with our garbage.  In other countries, this space simply doesn’t exist.

At the LMFF panel discussion last Tuesday, Is Fashion Sustainable? I heard panelists and audience alike grapple with the question of how to turn this attitude around.  Whilst there are many creative and thoughtful approaches being employed by smaller scale practitioners, the questions I am hearing asked are who are the heroes among the established industry who will stand up and lead others in this area, and how can those companies best be encouraged and supported?  The presentation at RMIT last Thursday by Anne Chandler, Environmental Manager at IKEA made me realise that companies committed to environmental initiatives do so as part of a more general approach to business based on conscience, leadership and innovation.

Companies committed to environmental initiatives do so because:

1. It’s the right thing to do.

2. They consider themselves leaders in their field and are therefore aware generally of the impact their company has.

3. They have a holistic approach to business that allows them tho see where benefits are/will be – eg, profits, increased quality, reduced costs.

On the other hand, in my experience, businesses not doing anything:

1. Have a lack of any ethical standards in regards to anything.  This means there is no fundamental motivation to change.  Perhaps the only way to target these companies is through protest/direct action strategies such as those directed at Primark in the UK and hope for consumer boycots and general disruption to their business.

2. Follow fashion trends but without a perception of themselves as leaders in their market.  This lack of vision and creativity will probably be also apparent in the design process, where very unimaginative copying of samples bought from other companies is probably rife.

3. Have a scattergun and fragmented business approach, characterised by poor communication both internally and with stakeholders.

Thinking about the more general approach to business of different types of companies made me conclude that it is probably most prudent to focus efforts in the area of assisting and bringing together fashion businesses (no easy task in itself, as I understand) that are leaders in a general sense, in the hope that they will reap the benefits, while companies with no interest whatsoever in change will dye out in a Darwinian survival of the fittest strategy.  A friend working for a prominent NGO told me how they only work in countries that are politically stable, otherwise their good work in development risks being for nothing if war tears everything apart.  Fashion companies are similar in this sense.  They change ownership and go broke at alarming rates, and it makes sense to build up and support those who are already stable.

Advertisements

4 Comments so far
Leave a comment

Great points Georgia. Having said that, its really critical to me that we are speaking to and encouraging those who have the flexibility to change in a dynamic way. That’s why we love people like you – you are both resilient and dynamic! Hoorah!

Comment by Lara McPherson

Thanks Lara! I’m hardly a mover and shaker though, just one of the tiny people. Ultimately it’s the big people who have to change in dynamic ways. One step at a time…

Comment by captiveaudience2

Hi Georgia, I was at the panel discussion for LMFF too and you have hit on the main thing that I took away from that fantastic event: the fact that there needs to be a fundamental shift in the way we interact with ‘fashion’. A whole industry based on trends is inherently problematic, but if the bigger players make a shift toward beautifully made, ethically produced items that are meant to be worn for longer, they will lower production costs and increase loyalty to their label, while they are also grabbing the title Innovator and being seen as such by their competitors. There is no place for ‘fast fashion’ in our sustainable future.

Comment by Alice Jones

Hi Alice, I absolutely agree with you, but I’m still hesitant to totally denounce “fast fashion”, rather I’d like to see it redefined so that instead of meaning “cheap clothing harming people and planet” it means something more like “dynamic interactions between people and clothing” A clothing swap, for instance is fast, instantaneous gratification, but it’s not harming anyone.

Comment by captiveaudience2




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s



%d bloggers like this: