Sufficient Recommendations

The fashion world is perceived as being superficial, selfish. And it’s true. The environmental issues the apparel industry is addressing today are not new, but until now the clothes have been more important than the environmental cost. The Fashioning Sustainability article identifies eight key issues faced in the apparel industry today and offers solutions for each one. They have offer sufficient recommendations to bring about change, especially when the actions suggested are combined. 

Both Fashioning Sustainability and Ecosystems and Human Wellbeing suggest this solution: Transparency. Transparency can work in two ways. The first way, as stated in Fashioning Sustainability, uses transparency so that brands and retailers are more aware of the origins of their products. The more brands and retailers know about the process behind their stock, the more involved they can be in enforcing high standards of sustainability. The second way, suggested by Ecosystems and Human Wellbeing, requires the company to be transparent with the public about their efforts in sustainability. Public transparency also allows for accountability. If the public associates a brand with sustainable clothing because of the image the brand built up, the public is going to hold that brand to the high standards they will expect from them. For example, Patagonia’s mission statement is: “Build the best product, cause no unnecessary harm, use business to inspire and implement solutions to the environmental crisis.” Patagonia does an excellent job with being transparent to the community and promoting environmental sustainability.  It would be really hard for their brand to get away with acting outside of the guidelines they have set for themselves because they have transparently placed themselves in the public eye. Also, it could be detrimental to Patagonia’s business if they were to act against their guidelines because people’s expectations would be ruined.

Another solution suggested by Fashioning Sustainability is “empowering consumers is a priority driving demand for sustainable clothing.” As selfish as the fashion industry is, consumers do care about the environment, and thankfully, they are a critical driver for greater sustainability in clothing.  The issue with sustainable clothing is that some designers don’t see sustainability as an opportunity but as an obstacle. The solution is that there are alternatives to designing for sustainability, such as simple solutions and innovations. For example, Urban Renewal: (Vintage: Recycled: Remade) takes old articles of clothing and recycles them by renewing and reconstructing them into modern designs and then putting them back out on the market to be sold as a new product. Another example of an innovative solution comes from Patagonia. Patagonia chooses to use bamboo as a sustainable alternative to rayon. Though Patagonia does not discuss if their sustainability plays a role in their pricing it is not uncommon for sustainable products to cost more. Surprisingly, the organic tshirt costs 30% less than the conventional one and had a reduced impact on our environment. Even if the organic shirt were to cost more I think that we should be willing to pay for the necessary steps to protect our environment and am therefore in full support of better use of real costing. Fashioning Sustainability point out that consumers are “increasingly willing to pay more for more ‘ethical’ products,” especially if they are aware of why the product costs more.

Time has been said to heal all wounds. This has not been the case for our environment. Time has only allowed our environmental issues to pile up. Time is not going to change the state of our environment, but over time the state of our environment can change, if we make the choice to do so. It is up to us as consumers (and designers) to be educated on sustainable issues and to implement things like transparency and innovative alternatives when possible.  

Patagonia resources: http://www.patagonia.com/us/patagonia.go?assetid=23429

Parallel Problems

History is known for repeating itself. In school, we study history with the intention of learning from the mistakes of previous leaders in order to avoid creating a cycle of negative events or to mimic the actions that resulted in heroic acts or peace. We spend more time studying the people of history than we do the environmental changes that have occurred and reoccurred over the years. Now, as the environment is becoming a more pressing issue in the world today we have to reeducate ourselves. The environmental problems that we are facing are not new, but they are increasingly getting worse.

Take The Lessons of Easter Island for example. The natives of the island were advanced in their technology and have impressed archeologists with how progressive they were for their time. However, progression cannot last without resources. The islanders made use of the natural resources available to them, they used the trees for housing and transportation and even their fishing nets were made from the mulberry trees. But the trees never replenished. The people of Easter Island ended up deforesting their land and in turn, eventually ended their lives. Deforestation trapped the islanders and limited their capabilities. Eventually the progressive natives were forced to regress back to primitive conditions. The deforestation ended their fishing abilities (no new canoes or fish nets were able to be created), their religious practices (without the transportation the trees provided for their heavy stone statues they could no longer move them to their ceremonial sites), and lead to warfare between the clans and eventually cannibalism. When the environment of Easter Island collapsed so did the society. The islanders’ problem was that they could not find a balance with the environment and their cultural ambitions were too much for the limited resources available on their island.

The human population of the earth parallels the population of Easter Island in that there is no practical means of escape, and we are continually depleting our non-renewable resources.

If we do not want the history of Easter Island to repeat itself, Michael Klare’s article Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet suggests to start reducing our dependency on non-renewable resources, like oil, “to reduce the threat of armed conflict as much as the threat of climate change.” We have seen through the story of Easter Island that war is just one outcome when resources are limited or no longer available. Since we live in a culture where warfare is already so present it seems even more important to begin to cleanse our society from triggers that could cause even more war as a result of scarce resources.

It is no longer a secret that our environment needs attention. It is even getting to the point that our environment needs attention for our own benefit. As stated in Ecosystems and Human Well-Being there have been four main findings, two of the findings are:

“The degradation of ecosystem services could grow significantly worse during the first half of this century.

The challenge of reversing the degradation of ecosystems while meeting increasing demands for their services can be partially met under some scenarios… but these involve significant changes in policies, institutions, and practices that are not currently under way.”

If our resources cannot be replaced we should have a common mindset to make them last for as long as possible so that future generations have the same resources available to them as we did.

Ecosystems and Human Well-Being also reports that “approximately 60% of the ecosystem services evaluated are being degraded or used unsustainably.” Factors like capture fisheries and fresh water are now well beyond levels that can be sustained at current demands. And actions to increase one ecosystem service often cause the degradation of other services and will often cause significant harm to human well-being including poverty. Improved communication and education are essential to preserve the resources we have and to achieve the objectives we have set.

Yet, our society as a whole seems to ignore the trouble our environment and then ultimately we are in. Richard Heinberg writes in an article Peak Everything that our starting point is realizing that we are now “living at the end of the period of greatest material abundance in human history,” and that some of the most important resources are “entering their inevitable sunset phase,” and as a result, putting us “at the beginning of a period of overall societal contraction.” It is our job to take this knowledge and begin to change our culture to prepare for life after this environmental transition.

      

The environmental problems we are facing now have been building up for years. These are not new problems. These problems have just been neglected and shoved under the rug until they are too prominent to ignore anymore. While we have been ignorant about the condition of the environment, it has only been getting worse and now it is up to us to change our lifestyle in order to sustain what we have left.

For reference: global resource depletion rate

http://makewealthhistory.org/2010/01/12/peak-everything-global-resource-depletion-rates/