What we once thought of as a socioeconomic system that would bring wealth and happiness to humanity, has today become a driver of environmental destruction, socioeconomic injustices, unforeseen financial risks, human diseases, impoverished health and increased stress. The ready-made society that we have created for ourselves on a global scale is no longer serving its desired purpose but rather contradicting it.

A ”ready-made society” here refers to a society in which consumer products (such as clothing, shoes, accessories, home textiles, furniture, IT-devices, home appliances and other consumables) are designed and manufactured – often in large volumes and similar varieties – based merely on trend forecasts, estimated sales and expected consumer behavior.

In a ready-made society, production is primarily driven by businesses’ urge to maximize sales, increase economic profits and grow market shares. Products are rarely designed and manufactured to meet any real need or specific demand by customers. Rather, businesses rely on effective PR-strategies to create and impose constructed demands for their pre-designed and pre-manufactured products, and customers have to adjust their preferences to what is already made available to them. Without any other option or a strong character, customers can easily fall for the temptation to buy the ready-made products (and more than needed), perhaps reasoning that ”they cannot influence what is already there but only buy what is presented to them”. In other words, the ready-made society creates an impression that consumers cannot be held responsible for an unsustainable act of buying the wrong or too much products, as they have not been involved in their creation at any point. What is not evident to most people however is that production was actually based on previous sales numbers and consumer behavior.

This ready-made society is essentially a result of the widespread industry strategy called ”planned obsolescence”, which has been dominating our modern industry since at least the 1950s. This strategy implies that products are designed and manufactured at the onset to become obsolete within only a short time span, typically due to broken parts (which were intentionally made to break easily), an impoverished functionality (intentionally made to be weak) or an out-dated style (intentionally made to be replaced by a new style). In this way, the industry is able to create an endless demand for new products as the previous ones break, become outdated or begin to function improperly. With this short-term profit-focused strategy, a global market of ready-made products is created and maintained. Companies today rely heavily on this inter-dependency between consumers and their market shares.

Yet the truth is, most people rarely need mass-produced and ready-made products, may it be clothes, home textiles or IT-devices. Especially in more developed countries, the need to fill our homes with additional pillows, glasses, appliances, table cloths, t-shirts, pants or accessories is no longer real. This may have been true in the 40’s or 50’s when our homes were not filled to the brim with ”stuff” and we still had some actual need for basic garments and household items. Today, in contrast, people long for the ”exclusive and special”, items that hold personal meaning and add value to life – things that we feel emotional bonds to, in terms of beauty, intrinsic values, history or special personal meaning.

Furthermore, we can no longer ignore the widespread adverse environmental impacts that modern society has caused, and still does, in terms of greenhouse emissions, changing climate, melting icecaps, polluted air quality, destroyed forests, impoverished marine and river ecosystems and reduced biodiversity in many parts of the world etc. More so, our modern society has also brought various adverse impacts on human health, particularly in urban and industrial areas of developing countries. Nearby and downstream of textile and garment factory sites and conventional cotton farming areas, for example, studies have shown increased frequencies of neurological diseases and various cancer forms due to the release of toxic chemicals and substances into the environment. Even in more developed areas, our ”modern” society has caused air pollution, degraded water quality, noise disturbances, higher stress-levels, and in some instances, increased prevalence of various cancer types and pulmonary diseases linked to lifestyle and/or the environment.

The time has come for our global manufacturing industries to transition from a ”ready-made production approach” to an ”on-demand production strategy”. (Dr. Anna Brismar)

We need to build industries that are meant to serve people’s and society’s actual needs and specific demands to meet also the long-term and higher good of society, as opposed to meet constructed desires of consumers underpinned by short-term economic interests of the companies. The new ”on-demand strategy” is likely to be the missing piece-in-the-puzzle of a wider global sustainability strategy that will help to create a society in which humanity can live in harmony with Nature, and in which the true needs of people and societies are ethically, fairly and responsibly met.

In sum, we need to develop a society in which humans can live in harmony with Nature. This will require stepping away from our ”ready-made” modern society dominated by ”planned obsolescence”. Instead we need to create a society where industries center on ”on-demand production” (such as made-to-order, custom made etc.). Our Earth can no longer support industries that manufacture ready-made products based on estimated, constructed and make-believe desires. Our natural resources are dwindling and heavily affected by pollution and over-extraction. In order to enable a sustainable lifestyle, we must focus our natural resources on meeting the actual needs and individual demands of people within reasonable limits and in fair distribution. Hereby we can prevent further waste generation, environmental destruction and socioeconomic injustices.

Photo sources: Unsplash.com

Make it last: In your opinion, what issues are often neglected in today’s debate on fashion and sustainability?

Anna Brismar: One issue that is rarely discussed is the need to reduce today’s enormous annual production volumes of new clothes, shoes and accessories by the fashion industry on the global market. This is especially true for the production of fast fashion items aimed to serve the demands of industrialized countries. The present production rate of fast fashion – often of lower quality and short-lived design – is by no means sustainable. This is evident when we learn about the various harmful environmental impacts throughout the production chains, the poor working conditions in most fast fashion garment factories (mainly located in Asia), and the vast amounts of clothes, shoes and accessories that end up in landfills or are incinerated every year. It is also apparent when we study statistics of annual consumption rates by European countries over the last two decades. In Sweden, for example, we have increased our annual consumption level of textiles by 40 percent, from 2000 to 2009. In Great Britain, the volume of sold clothing has increased by 60 percent between 1995 and 2005.

The continuous increase in fashion consumption per capita in industrialized countries is hardly generated by an increase in people’s basic needs for more clothes etc., nor can it be fully explained by a growing world population, or by a growing middle-class segment. Rather, it is an incautious shopping behavior primarily driven by psychological and sociocultural factors. Various studies have shown that we tend to buy new clothes for various non-functional reasons, for example to express a cultural belonging, to get momentary satisfaction by finding a new trendy piece or shopping at a good price deal, or we shop to cure an emotional unease or even spiritual void. Today, shopping is rarely about filling an actual gap in the personal wardrobe of a “necessary” functional piece, such as a new pair of running shoes (if the old ones are worn out) or a new winter jacket (if the old one is too small or torn).

But, how do fast fashion companies address this trend of increased fashion consumption per capita? Are companies actively looking for ways to promote a more conscious and healthy shopping behavior? Are they starting to question their present production levels and their ambition to “grow” in volumes to meet stockholders’ demand for profit and consumers’ demand for fashion news? Are fast fashion companies today considering the possibility to actually reduce their annual production volumes and finding other means of upholding revenues? Unfortunately, there is still little evidence pointing in this direction. (Yet, new circular business models provide promising possibilities and a number of “more conscious” fashion brands are already working along these lines.)

To add to the case, “the need to close the loop on textiles” has become a common statement among large fashion chains in Sweden in recent years, primarily by H&M. Only in the last year, several Swedish chains have followed the example of H&M and launched their own textile collection initiatives (such as Hemtex, KappAhl and Gina Tricot). H&M are also investing big money in new fiber recycling technologies, primarily as a means to secure their supplies of raw material (textile fibers) for future production. Yet, circularity and sustainability in fashion is not only about creating closed loops of textiles (through reuse, redesign and recycling). Also, it is about addressing the key question “How can we do more with less?”. Only working to promote closed loops will not bring sustainability in the fashion industry. Production rates or volumes, as well as the contents, purpose and beneficiaries of the fashion flows, will have to be considered too. In essence, a more sustainable fashion industry means making wise, careful, efficient and purposeful use of our limited natural resources on a global level, as well as preventing, mitigating or reducing any adverse impacts on the environment (and creating fair and ethical working conditions).

In sum, fast-fashion companies need to start seriously questioning their present production rates and instead begin to explore new ways of making profitable business that do not rely on high/increased production rates (which require high natural resources input). Business models that offer custom-made, locally made, long-lasting and high quality fashion, as well as more sustainable fiber alternatives and toxic-free production, will have to lead the way and become the industry norm in the future. Offering a selective, high quality and more sustainable range of fashion products would also serve the demands of an increasingly conscious middle and upper class worldwide.

This article was originally written and published for Make it last on December 15 (2014). Republished here with permission.