#Title

In fashion, ‘sustainability as usual’ may no longer be enough
Can we decouple business growth from climate impacts? This is the thorny question that no politician wants to answer right now, and it is easy to understand why. On the one hand, all our leaders recognise that “business as usual” is no longer an option on a planet where we are already seeing evidence of global change on a daily basis. The latest report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the United Nations body for assessing the science related to climate change, states that many of the changes observed in global climate are unprecedented in thousands—if not hundreds of thousands—of years. It says that the changes are widespread, and that the role of human influence on climate is undisputed.
At the same time, if one considers the above argument in light of Bangladesh’s most successful export industry, it is evident that we may have a problem. Fashion creates millions of jobs in lesser developed countries, such as Bangladesh. If the “fast fashion” tap were to be switched off—in the name of protecting the environment—many of these jobs would be gone, and the societal impact would be huge.
Our leaders recognise this conundrum—this balancing act between societal and environmental impacts. It is for this reason that the idea of decoupling economic growth from climate impacts is so appealing. Such a decoupling would mean that economic growth would become a sustainable goal for all of society.
Is this even possible? Until relatively recently, decoupling of this nature has been viewed as a fanciful notion. This is because the majority of historical data and projections illustrate the intrinsic link between material and energy use and the consequent carbon emissions/climate impacts.
As a consequence, many people have difficulty reconciling the sustainability goals of a business model—fashion, in this case—which is dependent upon selling more and more business units. In short, they say we can’t have our cake and eat it.
I personally have one foot in this camp, and believe that the idea of “sustainability as usual” may no longer be an option, given the urgency of our planet’s situation. What do I mean by that? I mean that, essentially, the traditional, voluntary sustainability approach by our industry—by that I mean fashion buyers and us, their suppliers—may no longer be enough if we are to avert climate calamity. There may come a time when we need more “stick” and less “carrot”—where national and international regulators are forced to step into industries like ours and create laws around issues such as clean production, waste disposal, and other areas.
On the other hand, I see a potential solution where we can separate traditional GDP growth from climate impacts. Within the textile industry, this is via recycling and the circular economy. I have written about this issue before, but I believe it deserves growing scrutiny in countries like ours, which are so heavily dependent upon labour-intensive manufacturing industries, such as clothing production. It is in our own interest to embrace solutions that can separate growth from the impacts of climate change, given that our industries are so dependent on carbon-intensive manufacturing.
How can we do this? One way is to shift to the use of renewable energy, as I have previously discussed in my column.
But a complete rethink of our RMG manufacturing base may also be required, if we are to shift towards a less resource-intensive operating model in line with circular economy principles.
The three major principles around circular economy are: smarter use and manufacture of products; extension of product lifespan and its parts through reuse, repair, refurbishment, and remanufacturing; and useful application of materials such as repurposing, recycling, and material recovery.
While not all of these ideas will be easy to apply in the RMG manufacturing space, many of them could extend the useful life of garments. For example, textile materials can be repaired and refurbished, and alternative markets can be found for them. Is our garment industry ready to explore these ideas?
If all of this sounds quite radical, that’s the intention. I said sustainability as usual might not be an option moving forward, and as manufacturers we need to think about what this new landscape might entail if we are to remain relevant to our fashion buyers. Be in no doubt: our buyers are looking for solutions in these areas. When they talk about “going circular,” it is us, their manufacturers, that they are relying on to enable them to achieve their goals.
What can we do now to prepare for a less resource-intensive, circular environment, where GDP growth is decoupled from carbon emissions?
Most experts agree that several steps will be required for textile manufacturers. One is to phase out the use of unsafe materials and the discharge of microfibres (another huge issue for our customers). This will require more innovative garment design and smarter production processes.
The second is changing the way clothes are designed, a step to be taken in collaboration with our buyers.
Step three is designing products keeping recycling in mind, so that the products are recoverable at the end of their “life.”
Taken together, these actions would initiate a major step for our RMG sector. At some point, we may need to think very differently about our business models as part of a broader societal shift away from a linear business model. These are difficult questions, but now is the time to think about their answers.
Mostafiz Uddin is the managing director of Denim Expert Limited. He is also the founder and CEO of Bangladesh Denim Expo and Bangladesh Apparel Exchange (BAE).
Photo: COLLECTEd