The Future of Fashion: Corporate Social Responsibility and Essential Marketing Strategies

Claremont Colleges Claremont Colleges

Scholarship @ Claremont Scholarship @ Claremont

CMC Senior Theses CMC Student Scholarship

2021

The Future of Fashion: Corporate Social Responsibility and The Future of Fashion: Corporate Social Responsibility and

Essential Marketing Strategies Essential Marketing Strategies

Taite Jorgensen

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.claremont.edu/cmc_theses

Part of the Business Law, Public Responsibility, and Ethics Commons, E-Commerce Commons,

Entrepreneurial and Small Business Operations Commons, Fashion Business Commons, and the

Marketing Commons

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation

Jorgensen, Taite, "The Future of Fashion: Corporate Social Responsibility and Essential Marketing

Strategies" (2021).

CMC Senior Theses

. 2681.

https://scholarship.claremont.edu/cmc_theses/2681

This Open Access Senior Thesis is brought to you by Scholarship@Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion in

this collection by an authorized administrator. For more information, please contact

[email protected].

Claremont McKenna College

The Future of Fashion: Corporate Social Responsibility and

Essential Marketing Strategies

Submitted To: Professor Jeff Lewis

Taite A. Jorgensen

for

Senior Thesis

Spring 2021

May 3, 2021

Abstract

This paper analyzes how fast fashion has impacted future trends of the fashion industry.

Due to globalization, the fast fashion industry has been able to create new norms of over-

consumerism and international labor. Because of this, the fast fashion industry is able to mass

produce in a way consumers have never seen before, in addition to making it all at extremely low

prices. However, fast fashion brands are only able to mass produce cheap goods through

unethical methodologies; these methodologies include unsustainable materials and practices,

inhuman labor conditions and wages, and by making sizes that exclude bigger bodies.

Consumers are now realizing how detrimental these practices are, and in result, they want to see

more brands that focus on corporate social responsibility. Consumers are demanding that fashion

brands do better. Although there is a rise of brands wanting to prioritize ethics because of the

consumer demand and personal values, the brands face challenges, like time, money and

resources. This paper then shares specific essential marketing strategies that brands need to use

in order to market their ethics for profit. These strategies include utilizing social media, trend

forecasting, specific leadership approaches, and pricing that reflects the consumer. Brands that

are using these strategies are able to be ethical and profitable in the fashion industry. It is clear

that the future of fashion is valuing ethics.

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter 1: Corporate Social Responsibility

Chapter 2: Essential Marketing Strategies

Concluding Thoughts

Bibliography

Introduction

As recently as the 1960s, the United States manufactured and produced up to 95% of all

clothing sold in America. Today, only about 3% of our clothing is made in the US—and the

remaining 97% is outsourced (Sherman 2016). During the past few decades, manufacturers

discovered that the more we outsource labor, the cheaper the cost to produce goods. This practice

is called globalized production, where labor is outsourced to countries with low-cost or emerging

economies, and thus, much lower wages (Style Vanity 2020).

Globalized production transformed the way clothing could be produced, bought, and sold,

which ultimately led to the creation of the fast fashion industry common in the US today. Fast

fashion is defined as inexpensive clothing produced rapidly by mass-market retailers in response

to the latest trends (Rauturier 2020).

Fast fashion has changed the mass-market retail clothing industry immensely. First, it

normalized globalized labor. It is now common for clothing items to be created internationally

and then sold in the US. Furthermore, lots of items have their own ‘passport,’ meaning that each

step of the production process was done in a different country.

Second, it has further pushed consumerism, which describes the tendency of people

living in a capitalist economy to engage in excessive materialism that revolves around reflexive,

wasteful, or conspicuous overconsumption. The appetite for new inventory has led to a drastic

increase of annual seasons. Traditionally, there were two to four seasons in fashion—

Fall/Winter, Spring/Summer. Now, there are up to 52 micro-seasons per year, which means new

introductions weekly. As a result, American consumers purchase more than ever before.

Americans purchase nearly 20 billion garments a year, which is close to 70 pieces of clothing per

person or more than one clothing purchase per week (Cavusoglu, Dakhli 2016).

And lastly, the fast fashion industry has also normalized extremely unethical practices. To

maintain market share against thousands of competing brands, some brands resort to finding a

way to mass produce trendy pieces at the lowest cost possible. Unfortunately, they accomplish

this through the use of international labor, exploiting child labor, paying inhumane wages, and

using facilities with dangerous working conditions. In addition, fast fashion often includes

harmful environmental practices, which have had an extremely detrimental impact on our Earth.

For the consumer, these new norms within the fashion industry can make it seem

impossible to buy ethically. For example, if a brand appears to be ethical in one way, like they

are size-inclusive or sustainable, they may still have horrible labor practices. Furthermore, the

clothing industry has made it acceptable for fast fashion brands to place a low value on

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).

The concept of Corporate Social Responsibility, or CSR, is the practice of organizational

self-regulation with the aim of being socially accountable. This can be practiced in a variety of

ways in the fashion industry, such as improving labor policies, being more sustainable or

environmentally friendly and/or promoting diversity. Ethical organizations integrate these

practices of social responsibility throughout their business operations and interactions with their

stakeholders. In most organizations, the primary stakeholders are investors, employees, suppliers

and consumers; all of these stakeholders have a vested interest in the organization’s actions

(Chandler, 2020).

How an organization interacts with and treats their stakeholders can be a reliable

indicator of their CSR practices, or lack thereof. Although incorporating CSR practices can be

challenging due to expenses and time, organizations who do it well often receive loyalty and

appreciation from their stakeholders in return (Chandler, 2020)

. Conversely, ditching CSR

initiatives—such as paying fair wages, providing safe and sanitary working conditions, sourcing

sustainable materials, and offering inclusive sizing—is definitely a cheaper way to run your

organization and requires less work. However, it is important to emphasize that ignoring CSR is

a short-term solution for financial success and brand stability. Fast fashion can bring a brand

popularity and generate income quickly because of the shockingly low pieces and easy access to

on-trend items. When this occurs, the organization may find itself under close scrutiny and

inevitably the lack of CSR or ethical practices will come to the surface.

Unethical brands often lose massive profit once their secret is out. Conversations around

the dark side of fast fashion are growing—people are becoming more and more aware of child

labor, unethical international labor conditions, and the horrid environmental repercussions—and

market segments show signs that they no longer want to support brands contributing to these

issues (Chandler, 2020)

. Although committing to being an ethically focused brand requires more

time, money, and attention, it sets a foundation for long-term success. Valuing consumers as

stakeholders is the key to establishing relevance in the fashion industry.

This paper is organized in two chapters: Corporate Social Responsibility and Essential

Marketing Strategies. Each chapter addresses specific areas of focus that can ensure long-term

success and meet evolving standards in the fashion industry. The first chapter, Corporate Social

Responsibility, explores some of the fashion industry’s greatest faults: the lack of sustainability,

lack of diversity, and lack of ethical labor. After defining the problems, each section includes

alternative solutions. The second chapter, Essential Marketing Strategies, highlights innovative

methods that will help fashion brands succeed while implementing CSR practices, such as ethical

leadership, savvy digital marketing skills, trend forecasting, and effective pricing. In each

chapter, specific examples will be shared of brands that are paving the way to a future of fashion

that encourages ethical practices. In order to flourish and continue moving forward in the fashion

industry, organizations need to focus on implementing Corporate Social Responsibility

initiatives and apply Essential Marketing Strategies.

Chapter 1:

Corporate Social Responsibility

Sustainability

Worldwide, 80 billion garments are produced each year, with the bulk of these garments

produced for fast fashion brands (Rauturier 2020). Some of the most well-known fast fashion

brands are Zara, Fashion Nova, Pretty Little Thing, Topshop, BooHoo, Missguided, Shein, Nasty

Gal, and H&M. All of these brands are multi-million or billion-dollar organizations due to: 1)

their ability to mass produce thousands of different products quickly and 2) their ability to keep

their prices extremely low. These brands use the cheapest manufacturing methods available,

which, unfortunately, also tend to have the biggest negative impact on the environment.

The eight most problematic practices associated with fast fashion production include:

1) Sourcing and using unsustainable materials

2) Using harmful chemicals in production

3) Polluting the water supply

4) Excessive use of water in production

5) Releasing Microfibers into our oceans and food chain

6) Generating massive waste

7) Excessive Greenhouse gas emissions

8) Rainforest destruction

(Maiti 2020)

The sections below discuss each practice in detail.

Souring and Using Unsustainable Materials

Unfortunately, the least sustainable materials are often the cheapest, so of course fast

fashion brands rely on them. Those used most in fast fashion production include virgin plastics,

non-organic materials, synthetic fabrics (polyester, nylon, and acrylic), animal-derived materials

(wool, leather and fur), man-made cellulose fibers, and bast fibers. Most of these materials are

non-biodegradable and only further contribute to the landfill when clothing is discarded ("Fixing

Fashion, Environmental Audit Committee").

Heavy Reliance on Harmful Chemicals

The materials used to create fast fashion items are processed using harmful chemicals and

are non-biodegradable. In fact, chemicals are used in every part of textile processes for making

fibers, bleaching, and dyeing fabrics. Roughly 23% of all the chemicals produced worldwide are

for use in the textile industry. Not only does this practice have a negative impact on our

environment and the workers exposed to the chemicals, but it is also dangerous for consumers.

Some studies show that certain chemical substances contained in pajamas can be found in a

child's urine 5 days after wearing those pajamas for just one night ("Fixing Fashion,

Environmental Audit Committee").

Contributing to Water Pollution

Our global water supply is also heavily impacted by the fashion industry: approximately

20% of the world’s industrial water pollution comes from textile treatment and dyes. In most of

the countries where garments are produced, untreated toxic wastewaters from textile factories are

dumped directly into local bodies of water. For example, 22,000 liters of toxic waste are dumped

into the rivers by tanneries in Bangladesh every day. This wastewater contains toxic substances

such as lead, mercury and arsenic, among others. These toxins have proven harmful to aquatic

life and the health of millions of people living near those bodies of water.

Chemical fertilizers used to produce cotton are another major source of water pollution. The

contaminated water from the fields also drains into the sea and eventually spreads around the

globe, impacting humans and aquatic animals ("Fixing Fashion, Environmental Audit

Committee").

Excessive Water Consumption

An estimated 1.5 trillion liters of water are used to produce fashion each year. This includes a

huge quantity of fresh water that is used in the dyeing and finishing process for our garments. As

a reference, it can take up to 200 tons of fresh water per ton of dyed fabric. Cotton, which is

usually cultivated in warm and dry areas, also requires extensive water for irrigation. Up to

20,000 liters of water are needed to produce just 1kilogram of cotton.

This consumption generates tremendous demand for a precious resource, already scarce, and

has dramatic ecological consequences. For example, in India, cotton production caused the

desertification of the Aral Sea, entirely draining the lake of water. This is only one such

consequence affecting the water supply due to textile production. Currently, “100 million people

in India do not have access to drinking water." says Stephen Leahy from The Guardian; yet 85%

of India’s daily personal water needs are used instead to grow cotton in the country ("Fixing

Fashion, Environmental Audit Committee").

Introducing Microfibers to Our Oceans and Food Chain

Each time we wash a synthetic garment (polyester, nylon, etc.), about 700,000 individual

microfibers are released into the drained water, and eventually make their way into our oceans.

Scientists estimate that 190,000 tons of textile microplastic fibers are deposited into our ocean

each year. Scientists have also discovered that small aquatic organisms are ingesting those

microfibers. Sadly, these aquatic organisms are eaten by small fish, which are later eaten by

bigger fish. Plastic has now been introduced into our food chain. Synthetic fibers are not only

being released into our water supply and impacting our food chain. A recent study concluded that

by wearing synthetic fibers, these plastic microfibers are released into the air. According to the

study one person “could release almost 300 million polyester microfibers per year to the

environment by washing their clothes, and more than 900 million to the air by simply wearing

the garments” ("Fixing Fashion, Environmental Audit Committee").

Generating Massive Waste

Clothing has quickly become a disposable commodity; the equivalent of one garbage

truck of textiles is wasted every second and ends up in the landfill. As a result, we generate more

and more textile waste. A family in the western world discards an average of 30 kg of clothing

each year. Only 15% of the clothing we discard is recycled or donated, and the remaining 85%

goes directly to the landfill or is incinerated. Since synthetic fibers are non-biodegradable, and

these fibers are used in 72% of our clothing, the bulk of this discarded clothing can take up to

200 years to decompose. In addition, a portion of this waste is burned, which releases dangerous

chemicals into our environment ("Fixing Fashion, Environmental Audit Committee").

Excessive Greenhouse Gas Emissions

The fashion industry accounts for 10% of all global carbon emissions. Due to the energy

expended during its production, manufacturing, and transportation of the million garments

purchased each year, these emissions generate massive amounts of greenhouse gases. Synthetic

fibers, which are used in the majority of our clothes, are also made from fossil fuel; this type of

production is much more energy-intensive than for natural fibers. For example, 70 billion barrels

of oil are used to produce polyester each year. To compound the environmental impact, most of

our clothes are produced in China, Bangladesh, or India. These countries are essentially

Fashion, Environmental Audit Committee").

Rainforest Destruction

Approximately 70 million trees are cut down each year to produce clothing. Every year,

thousands of hectares of endangered and ancient forests are demolished and replaced by

plantations of trees used to make wood-based fabrics such as rayon, viscose, and modal. This

loss of ancient forests, or deforestation is threatening the ecosystem and indigenous

communities. Furthermore, Scientific American identifies deforestation as having an “extreme

effect on global warming” and concludes that deforestation adds more carbon dioxide to the

atmosphere than “the total of all the cars and trucks on the world’s roads” ("Fixing Fashion,

Environmental Audit Committee").

These practices are all used in varying degrees by all manufacturers in the fashion

industry, and their use has resulted in fashion becoming the second largest polluter in the world

("Fixing Fashion, Environmental Audit Committee"). Fast fashion brands, however, depend

heavily on the eight environmental impacts listed above. They do so because it is cheap, and

these impacts make it easy to quickly mass produce products. In order to gain a competitive

advantage in this massive industry, brands have had to create ruthless business models. Fast

fashion depends on volume and speed to market; fast fashion brands are able to design, create,

produce, and ship in a fraction of the time common with more sustainable brands, all at a fraction

of the cost. Fast fashion’s dependency on these common methodologies leaves little room to

incorporate CSR. Thus, these companies have created massive profit while destroying the

environment.

Most fast fashion brands' primary goal is to produce knock-off clothing designs as

quickly and cheaply as possible for the highest profit margins. This production philosophy,

however, is highly unsustainable and has proven to be detrimental to the environment. Although

there are many brands that continue to ignore the repercussions of their unethical practices, there

is a growing movement among fashion brands to become more sustainable. These responsible

brands are committed to using recycled materials, less water, and creating sustainable buildings

for their facilities, which includes their offices and production buildings. Larger corporations,

such as H&M and Adidas, have all received backlash for their lack of sustainability initiatives;

consumers are especially upset with these profitable brands because they have the power,

resources, and money to create positive change, but have instead chosen to continue to use ‘fast

fashion methodologies’ such as unethical labor practices, support unsafe working facilities, and

the use of unsustainable materials that contribute heavily to the landfill. In response to this public

backlash, H&M has declared their clothing will be created by 100% recycled materials by 2030,

and Adidas has started recycling plastic from the ocean to make shoes ("Fixing Fashion,

Environmental Audit Committee").

Watching larger organizations struggle with adding sustainability values to their

initiatives, small businesses caught on that sustainability needs to be incorporated into the

foundation of their company. Up and coming fashion brands and small businesses recognize that

more and more consumers are concerned about sustainability, and they will likely not support a

brand that does not have sustainability initiatives. As a result, there are now thousands of

successful small businesses where sustainability is a core value.

Founded in 2010, Everlane has established themselves as a sustainable, ethical brand with

ready to wear clothing—such as tee shirts, loungewear, and denim—at reasonable prices

(Everlane 2021). Because of this, Everlane is able to compete with fast fashion brands because of

available stock and prices, which hopefully will prevent the fast fashion industry from

expanding.

Everlane exemplifies positive CSR practices with their diligent and well-publicized

commitment to sustainability. As one of the three stated pillars of the company’s mission

statement, Everlane practices ‘Radical Transparency.’ Radical transparency reveals their

methodologies and the impact of each step in their production. Because of their commitment to

sustainability and transparency, Everlane has gained the reputation of being one of the few

ethical and trustworthy companies in the fashion industry. Although implementing CSR practices

is time-consuming and costly compared to not implementing CSR practices, Everlane is showing

that the industry is changing; the fashion industry is now starting to recognize all the benefits of

CSR. Everlane, however, does emphasize that large-scale change can rarely happen

quickly. Yet, they continue to make promising progress toward their goals in order to make a

meaningful difference in the fight against climate change, and they remain committed to their

mission statement through two broad initiatives. Everlane’s goal is to eliminate all virgin plastic

from their supply chain and move all of their cotton production to organic (Everlane 2021).

Everlane’s plan to eliminate virgin plastic is far reaching. Once plastic is manufactured,

it never dissolves; hence, there are more than eight billion tons of plastic on the planet.

Everlane’s initiative began in 2018 when they made their first environmental commitment:

eliminate all virgin plastic from their supply chain by 2021, which includes their products,

packaging, poly bags, offices, and stores. Everlane’s progress has been promising. The majority

of their virgin plastic consumption is concentrated in three areas: fabric used in apparel,

components in their footwear and accessories, and polyester bags that cover every product

leaving their factories. As of October 2020, they have transitioned 90% of their apparel materials

that once contained virgin plastic to recycled materials made from plastic water bottles, fishing

nets, and other items destined for the waste stream. Everlane markets these more sustainable

products under the labels ReNew and ReKnit. They have also transitioned 45% of their footwear

components to recycled materials. They have switched their virgin plastic shopping bags to

renewed versions that are recyclable. In fact, the company recycles these new versions at their

distribution center to create furniture (Everlane 2021).

Everlane has also revamped their office food program and their store processes to

eliminate almost all virgin plastic. However, much of their remaining transition from virgin

plastic requires material innovation that is currently unavailable. Instead, they are working

directly with select partners to develop functional alternatives, such as sourcing recycled elastane

for stretch fabrics. Everlane’s dedication to eliminating the use of virgin plastic is extremely

beneficial to our environment: they are helping shrink our landfill (Everlane 2021)!

Everlane’s second initiative of using only organic cotton is also extremely beneficial to

the environment; worldwide, cotton farming uses more toxic pesticides per acre than any other

crop. Everlane’s goal is to source all of their cotton from certified organic farms by 2023. Instead

of toxic pesticides, organic farming uses crop rotation, cover crops and organic fertilizers to

create rich life-supporting soil. The pesticides used in most cotton crops poison the groundwater,

streams, and rivers, which endangers the people and wildlife that rely on those sources. By

replacing dangerous chemicals with natural alternatives and old-school agriculture techniques,

farmers are also spared dangerous levels of exposure. By Everlane making a commitment to

organic cotton, they are protecting many workers in the production chain, but they are also

specifically protecting their customers from any toxic residue (Everlane 2021).

In addition to the use of organic cotton and eliminating virgin plastic, Everlane also

incorporates other sustainable materials in their product lines. Everlane strives to use the most

sustainable materials from farm to factory and invests in new fabric innovations to ensure they

are reducing their impact on the planet. They prioritize natural fibers but will use recycled

synthetics when they have a clear performance and/or durability advantage. Overall, Everlane

uses seven materials that contribute to their sustainability focus:

● Denim: All of Everlane’s jeans, denim shorts, skirts, and jackets are made at Saitex, a

LEED-certified factory that recycles 98% of its water, uses renewable energy produced

onsite, and repurposes byproducts to create affordable homes.

● Clean Silk: Everlane’s silk tops are dyed at a Bluesign®-certified dyehouse and made at a

LEED-certified factory. The producer is working to integrate a better supply chain from

soil to shirt, through Regenerative Organic farming, renewable energy, and water

recycling.

● ReNew and ReKnit: To date, Everlane has recycled over nine million plastic bottles, as

well as upcycled 1 million pounds of textiles and fishing nets to make their ReNew

apparel and accessories and ReKnit footwear. The 100% recycled polyester and nylon

lends advantages in weight, performance, and durability to much of their technical

outerwear, activewear, shoes, and bags.

● ReWool and ReCashmere: Everlane’s partner mills in Italy collect well-worn cashmere

and wool sweaters through recycling programs—then wash and comb them into new

yarns, which are then blended with a virgin core fiber for extra strength and longevity.

● Leather: Everlane prioritizes materials that are under the guidelines of the Five Freedoms

of Animal Welfare, and do not use any leather or suede from animals raised for their

hides. Their tread sneakers are made with leather tanned at ISA Tantec, which is certified

Gold by the Leather Working Group (LWG). They use 47% less electricity, 62% less

water, and emit 46% less CO₂, even compared with other LWG-certified facilities.

● The Forever Sneaker: Everlane believes sneakers should not end up in a landfill, so they

designed the Forever Sneaker with the post-consumer waste stream in mind. It is made of

a natural rubber sole, recycled laces, and a recycled cotton upper—all of which can be

easily recycled because of their partnership with Debrand. And when the buyer is ready

to recycle their Forever Sneaker, drop them off at one of their stores or request a prepaid

shipping label to send them back to us.

● Alpaca: Everlane sources fibers from several small farms across Peru and requires all

vendors to sign their Humane Treatment & Animal Welfare statement, which enforces

their expectations for the ethical treatment of animals. They will conduct animal welfare

audits in 2021 with vendors who are a part of their alpaca supply chain. They are a part of

the Textile Exchange to identify and help implement ethical practices throughout the

alpaca fiber sourcing process. Through this organization, they are also joining forces with

their peers in the Responsible Alpaca Standard International Working Group (RAS IWG)

to set industry standards across the alpaca wool supply chain.

(Everlane 2021).

However, Everlane’s commitment to sustainability does not end with the materials they

use. Where possible, they work with a number of partners to certify that their materials,

suppliers, and production processes are sustainable. Everlane strives to work with the Bluesign

Systems partners, recognized for their work to eliminate harmful chemicals in manufacturing. In

traditional manufacturing, there is no way of knowing which chemicals are being used in dye and

wash processes. Bluesign has done the dirty work by identifying over 900 potentially harmful

chemicals used in production today. To earn a Bluesign certification, manufacturers must prove

that those chemicals have been eliminated from their production process (Everlane 2021).

Everlane also selects partners that have the Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS)

Organic Cotton Certification. GOTS certification takes over a year to account for every step of

production—from the processing of certified organic fiber into yarn—to the dyehouses, mills,

factories, and printers they use.

Everlane also regularly seeks partners with these other certifications:

● California Prop 65 Prohibited Chemicals

● CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission) Banned Substances

● REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction of Chemicals) certified

● ZDHC (Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals) contributors

● GRS (Global Recycling Standard) certification of recycled materials

● Five Freedoms of Animal Welfare

● Non-mulesed wool

● RWS-certified (Responsible Wool Standard), non-mulesed wool

● OEKO-TEX

(Everlane 2021).

Everlane’s dedication to sustainability practices are evident in the factories they choose to

partner with. To ensure the continued integrity of their factory partners, Everlane develops strong

relationships with facility personnel and engages third-party auditors to evaluate factors like

energy use, carbon emissions, water use and treatment, and recycling programs. They perform

Think Green Initiative (TGI) audits to confirm any sustainability claims (Everlane 2021).

Finally, all of their partner factories must pass an Everlane Compliance audit by Intertek

and ARCHE Advisors. Everlane completes over 50 audits a year, both announced and

unannounced, to ensure that their partners are compliant with their standards and Vendor Code

of Conduct. Everlane’s long-term vision is to have the same level of transparency all the way

down to the farm level. In addition, where possible, they work with their partners to certify their

facilities. Specifically, they strive to receive LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental

Design) Certification. LEED Certification is a rating system for energy efficiency at every level

of operation. To become LEED-certified, factories must provide evidence of reduced energy

consumption throughout all processes—from the machinery used to the design of the building

itself. Some other factory certifications Everlane encourages are WRAP (Worldwide

Responsible Accredited Production) and SMETA (Sedex Members Ethical Trade Audit)

(Everlane 2021).

Everlane’s distribution center selection is also consistent with their sustainability

initiatives. Geodis, their partner distribution center in Kutztown, PA, is a major part of

Everlane’s operations. Everlane proudly shares that this distribution center is also working to

lessen their impact on the planet, starting with stringent requirements for handling waste and has

set a milestone of 100% landfill free. Because the facility handles so many shipping materials

and most of Everlane’s physical products, it is significant to reach a milestone such as 100%

landfill-free. Geodis has established various recycling and reuse programs, with the remainder

done through a waste-to-energy partnership. Everlane also partners with Happy Returns to

implement a reusable shipping carton program that reduces the amount of cardboard that goes

out for recycling (Everlane 2021).

Finally, Everlane retail stores and corporate offices are sustainable as well. Everlane

states, “We want the spaces we work in to be expressions of our ideals, so our stores and offices

are designed for lower impact through natural and recycled materials, energy sourcing, and

educational initiatives.” They embody their mission as stated by pursuing sustainability by

design, renewable energy, waste reduction, and receiving brand certifications. For example, all

their stores use skylights and SHGC (Solar Heat Gain Coefficient)-compliant glass windows to

provide plenty of natural light, and then use efficient LED lighting as needed. The wooden

benches, shelving, and checkout counters use FSC (Forest Stewardship Council)-certified wood

materials. Everlane’s in-store signage is produced from post-consumer fabric content and other

recycled materials that are designed for longevity and repurposed prior to recycling whenever

possible. Their rugs are made of natural materials, and their carpet tiles are made from recycled

rubber (Everlane 2021).

Everlane purchases renewable energy certificates (RECs) for 100% of the power used at

their stores and offices. With RECs, they are investing in large-scale renewable energy

production for the national grid via wind, solar and geothermal power. This practice slashes the

emissions associated with their electricity use while lessening reliance on fossil fuels. Their

stores use no single-use plastic for in-store events; instead, all stores use glass cups and reusable

flatware. On their first day, all new Everlane retail employees receive a kit with reusable

utensils, a MiiR water bottle, and Stasher bags. In their offices, they partner with Fare Resources,

a food program that prioritizes organic and/or locally sourced ingredients, and they have

dramatically reduced single-use plastic and food waste. Everlane’s employee-led sustainability

committee pilots outreach programs to educate their team on subjects from local ballot initiatives

to proper recycling and composting. And lastly, a more sustainable world will be the cumulative

result of small-scale efforts along with more macro strategies like industry-wide working groups

and policy changes. They want to help lead the industry forward with their active participation as

a GFA (Global Fashion Agenda) Associate Member (Everlane 2021).

Not only is Everlane extremely sustainable, but they are also extremely profitable.

Consumers love supporting Everlane because they know their dollars are supporting our

environment - and in result, Everlane’s net worth was $250 million as of 2016 (Everlane 2021).

And wonderfully, Everlane is only one of many modern fashion brands that focus on

sustainability - for example, Miaou is another ready-to-wear sustainable brand, however, they do

not focus on basics like Everlane. Miaou is a maximalist, patterned, colorful, youthful brand with

exciting yet elegant garments. This is a particularly big step in the right direction - Miaou is

proving that fashion brands can be sustainable and go beyond just basics - they can also be

respected in the high fashion community as well. Miaou practices sustainability in multiple

ways: sourcing locally, using sustainable fabrics, and implementing sustainable methodologies

(Miaou 2021).

Firstly, Miaou is locally sourced. An immense carbon footprint is created by the transport

of clothing from country to country during the production process overseas. Miaou ensures that

their overseas production is transported by boat rather than air, in efforts to reduce their carbon

footprint. Boating goods provides lower energy consumption and emissions of products harmful

to the environment than land transport or air transport. Ethical and sustainable sourcing of

materials is also a top priority for Miaou. They source and design locally first, which supports

small and localized businesses. If they cannot find what they need there, they align with a

supplier who meets our ethical standards. Making many of our garments in Los Angeles allows

us to also ensure that the production teams working on our collections are working under ethical

conditions and being paid fair wages, we receive factory certifications to ensure this. Secondly,

Miaou is very mindful of the fabrics they use - all fabrics used are sustainable. Miaou uses only

sustainable fabrics - their three core fabrics - denim, crepe, and mesh - are either made of

biodegradable fabrics or are deadstock fabrics they source locally. Using deadstock fabrics is a

creative way to be sustainable; deadstock fabrics are leftover fabrics from other fashion

companies that were never used and would otherwise go into the landfill. Furthermore, Miaou

does not mill any fabrics; instead, they digitally print which is more sustainable by nature; digital

printing reduces waste by 10% in both fabrics and ink. Here is further information about their

fabrics and methodologies:

● Fabrics - Mesh: Miaou’s mesh is made of 92% Recycled Nylon and 8% Lycra. Recycled

Nylon has the same benefits as recycled polyester: it diverts waste from landfills and its

production uses much fewer resources than virgin nylon (including water, energy, and

fossil fuel). A large part of the recycled nylon produced comes from old fishing nets.

● Fabrics - Stretch Crepe: Miaou’s Stretch Crepe is made of 97% Recycled Polyester and

3% Lycra. Using more recycled polyester reduces their dependence on petroleum as the

raw material for their fabric needs. Diverting PET bottles for this process reduces landfill,

and thus reduces soil contamination and air and water pollution and requires less energy

than virgin polyester.

● Fabrics - Stretch Canvas: Miaou’s Stretch Canvas is made of 98% BCI Cotton and 2%

Lycra. The Better Cotton Initiative (BCI) aims to promote measurable improvements of

cotton cultivation to make it more economically, environmentally, and socially

sustainable.

● Digital Printing - Wash: 90% of Miaou’s production is launder-free. Miaou tries to

eliminate this process whenever possible by sourcing deadstock to help reduce the

consumption of water and energy used. They push for all their products to help conserve

energy and minimize the carbon footprint which helps control the level of toxicity or

pollution to the environment. Miaou does not run any fabric on industrial power washes -

which reduces hundreds of thousands of gallons of water. Softener rinse

● Digital Printing - Printing: Digital printing technologies are by nature more sustainable

than traditional analog alternatives, and offer a way forward towards clean, efficient,

profitable manufacturing. Digital Printing is more ecological friendly than Offset

printing or Screen Printing. No ink or dye is wasted with digital printing since it is all

consumed in the print. There are no plates, blankets, or screens to be washed off

eventually ending up in our environment which does damage to our planet.

● Packaging: All Miaou’s products are packaged in biodegradable eco-poly packaging and

mailers. Their 100% Recycled Poly Mailers packaging is a step toward ending the use of

environmentally harmful materials.

(Miaou 2021).

Parade is another great example of a sustainable brand; Parade is an American underwear

brand that is working to recreate the typical underwear experience. They create underwear that is

soft, breathable, and good for your body and the environment. Parade’s use of eco-friendly

materials reduces its climate impact and limits the amount of chemicals, water and wastewater

used in production. Parade’s core fabric, ‘Re:Play,’ is made of 85% recycled polyamide and all

materials are Oeko-Tex certified, meaning they’re free from harmful chemicals that pollute skin

and waters. Our packaging is compostable and made of 100% corn starch. In addition, Parade’s

underwear is inexpensive ($9 per pair of underwear), sizes are inclusive (ranges from sizes XS-

3XL) and includes truly diverse models across all their marketing. And to ice the cake - they also

donate 1% of our revenue to Planned Parenthood. When a consumer purchases from Parade, they

are also promoting Planned Parenthood (access to sexual education and healthcare, reproductive

rights, gender affirming therapy), size inclusivity, diversity, and the wellbeing of our

environment - all at a great price! Parade is proving that underwear brands can be successful and

profitable without the typical fatphobic, unsustainable, over-priced methods in typical

undergarment organizations (Parade 2021).

Brands have also taken their creativity for sustainable practices a step further - they are

not using any new materials; instead, they are taking thrifted items that would end up in the

landfill and are restyling the garments. This methodology is called upcycling; Frankie Collective

Vintage and Sami Miro Vintage are both brands that use this practice. Frankie Collective

Vintage’s focus is on salvaging vintage garments that would otherwise end up in a landfill, and

all their textile scraps are recycled and repurposed to eliminate textile waste. They create

120,000 pieces of reworked clothing per year, which means they save 65,000 lbs. of clothing

from landfills every year by upcycling them into 1-of-1 garments (Frankie Collective 2021).

Similarly, Sami Miro Vintage specializes in limited run collections made from only up cycled

and vintage fabrics, minimizing waste. Their supply chain starts and ends in Los Angeles, giving

us an extremely low carbon footprint (Sami Miro Vintage 2021).

Another creative approach is the pre-ordering system. For example, House of Sunny is a

sustainable brand that releases their collections as pre-order. This way, they make the exact

number of pieces demanded and prevent excess waste. They also encourage consumers to buy

this way by providing a 10% discount on all pre-ordered items (House of Sunny 2021).

Everlane, Miaou, Parade, Frankie Collective Vintage and Sami Miro Vintage all are

contributing to crucial change in the notoriously unsustainable fashion industry. These brands are

proving that sustainability can be affordable, high-quality, and high-fashion - but most

importantly, they are proving that sustainability is important and should be the standard. In the

next section, we will analyze ethical labor practices in the fashion industry.

Ethical Labor Practices

The global apparel market is projected to grow in value from 1.5 trillion U.S. dollars in

2020 to roughly 2.25 trillion dollars by 2025 (Style Vanity 2020). The demand for clothing and

shoes continues to be massive. However, the high demand for apparel is not equally distributed

across the globe; the US is by far the leader of the over-consumerism movement. In the 1960’s,

95% of the clothing produced for the US market was produced in the US. Today, however, the

US produces only 3% of its clothing demands, while the rest is outsourced to foreign countries

with lower production costs (Style Vanity 2020). Due to this manufacturing shift in the US

apparel market to cheaper global economies and a soaring demand, a new niche was born: Fast

Fashion. Supply has since skyrocketed. The process of outsourcing labor to low-economic

countries has allowed for mass production of clothing at incredibly low prices, at an accelerated

pace. Yet, it is crucial to understand how unethical fashion’s globalized production is; American

brands are profiting from impoverished communities’ desperate need for work, and these brands

have helped normalize inhuman international wages and working conditions with no

accountability.

A core aspect of fast fashion practices is the ability to make prices extremely affordable.

These prices are low because of unsustainable materials and practices; however, they are also

extremely low due to unethical labor practices. For example, the brand Pretty Little Thing is a

popular fast fashion brand that has used labor in Bangladesh. Pretty Little Thing was able to hold

a 99% off their entire website for their 2020 Black Friday Sale. This means every product on

their website ranged from $0.05-$1.00 (Pretty Little Thing 2021). And to clarify, their website

showcases thousands of products, from shoes and accessories to sweaters and dresses. These

prices highlight the question: How much are garment workers getting paid if prices can be

reduced that low? In short, while Pretty Little Thing may have been taking a loss on some of

these items, these prices were so cheap because of 1) outsourcing labor to low-economy

countries and 2) encouraging extremely low wages and harsh working conditions.

The film, The True Cost, documents the detrimental effects of the fast fashion industry

and was viewed widely around the world. The film analyzed the labor conditions in one of the

biggest fast fashion manufacturing capitals of the world: Bangladesh. Bangladesh has quickly

become known for its willingness to produce clothing products for exceptionally low prices. In

the film, Arif Jebtik, a garment factory owner in Dhaka, discusses his conversations with

American fashion brands who want to outsource labor to his factory. American fast fashion

brands negotiate that Arif’s staff will need to make a garment for $4 if their competitor bids $5.

American companies simply threaten Arif’s future in production if he cannot meet the lower

price. Thus, because he desperately needs the work, he will reduce his employees’ wages to

secure the contract. Low economy countries’ laborers also do not have other options; there are

thousands of factories worldwide with desperate employees. The US brand can easily just go

elsewhere. Because of this ruthless cycle, the starting wage is $10 per month. These employees

also work for extremely long hours, in high temperatures with various hazardous chemicals.

These wages and conditions are inhumane and illegal in the US, yet American companies are

tacitly engaging them.

Shima Akhter, a production worker in Dhaka, attempted to change these conditions and

fought to organize a union. Yet, when Shima and the union members attempted to discuss work

conditions with their boss, they were beaten by a group of 30 men. The harsh conditions

surrounding fast fashion production have also led to other tragic disasters, such as the case of

Rana Plaza. Rana Plaza was another large fast fashion production site in Bangladesh that was

poorly constructed. Workers would point out the large cracks in the building to management, but

their concerns were ignored. On April 24th, 2013, the eight-story building collapsed. After two

months of searching for all the bodies, the death toll was declared to be 1,134. Despite playing a

major role in this horrific event, American fast fashion brands escaped blame and responsibility

for this tragedy (The True Cost 2015).

Generally, many fast fashion brands assure their customers that the foreign laborers who

produced their clothing are paid "at least the minimum legal wage;" however, the minimum legal

wage is a variety of different prices depending on the location of the employee. And of course, a

legal wage absolutely does not mean it is a livable wage. And even if the brand does pay them a

‘legal’ wage, that does not mean that ethical labor conditions are implemented; employees can

still be overworked. For example:

● The average working day in most manufacturing countries is 14-16 hours.

● The normal working schedule for garment workers is 7 days a week.

● The normal working hours per week for garment workers is 96 hours.

● Garment workers must work until 2:00 or 3:00 am during peak season to meet deadlines

imposed by fast fashion brands.

(SustainYourStyle 2021)

In addition to low wages, foreign laborers can also work in hazardous conditions. These

employees usually work in unsafe buildings with no ventilation, breathing in toxic substances,

inhaling fiber dust or blasted sand. Accidents, fires, injuries, and disease are frequent

occurrences at textile production sites. In addition to the building or chemical hazards, clothing

workers also regularly face verbal and physical abuse from supervisors. In some cases, when

they fail to meet their excessive daily target, they are insulted, denied breaks, and not even

allowed to pause to drink water (The True Cost 2015).

Another shameful issue in the fast fashion industry is the noramlization of child labor.

The International Labor Organisation (ILO) estimates that 170 million kids are engaged in child

labor, with many helpings produce textiles and garments to satisfy the demand of consumers in

Europe and the US. Fast fashion has created a race to the lowest cost levels, pushing companies

to find the cheapest possible sources of labor, no matter the ethics. Child labor is available in

many of the countries where textile and garment production take place with little oversight. Sofie

Ovaa, global campaign coordinator of Stop Child Labor, states: “There are many girls in

countries like India and Bangladesh, who are willing to work for very low prices and are easily

brought into these industries under false promises of earning decent wages” (Child Labour in the

Fashion Supply Chain 2021).

A recent report (pdf) by the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (SOMO),

and the India Committee of the Netherlands (ICN) revealed that recruiters in southern India

convince parents in impoverished rural areas to send their daughters to spinning mills with false

promises of a well-paid job, comfortable accommodation, three nutritious meals a day and

opportunities for training and schooling, as well as a lump sum payment at the end of three years.

Their field research shows that “in reality, they are working under appalling conditions that

amount to modern day slavery and the worst forms of child labor” (Child Labour in the Fashion

Supply Chain 2021).

Child labor is a particular issue for fashion because much of the supply chain requires

low-skilled labor and some tasks are better suited to children than adults. In cotton picking,

employers prefer to hire children for their small fingers, which do not damage the crop.

Children are also seen as obedient workers who slip under the radar, making them easy to

manage. Ovaa says: “There is no supervision or social control mechanisms, no unions that can

help them to bargain for better working conditions. These are very low-skilled workers without a

voice, so they are easy targets.” American brands can escape backlash because the fashion

supply chain is hugely complex, and it is hard for these American companies to control every

stage of production. That makes it possible for these international facilities to employ children

without big brands and consumers knowledge (Is There Child Labor In The Fashion Industry?

2021). However, as we have learned, some companies are aware of the unethical labor practices

of an international production facility, but do not care.

Large clothing brands can profit massively from the lack American oversight and their

global partners' poverty, because the US brands don’t ‘officially’ employ the foreign workers or

own any of the factories or buildings they work in (The True Cost 2015). Any difficulties posed

by these countries are easily solved by relocating production to other countries. Governments of

low-cost economies, therefore, are desperate to retain American fashion companies’ business

because of the constant threat that these brands will relocate to other low-cost countries. Thus,

the benefiting government keeps costs down for the American companies by ignoring the

industry’s low wages and horrible working conditions. The threat of relocating production is a

true threat (The True Cost 2015). For many years, China was the lead manufacturer for fast

fashion brands. However, once China increased labor costs and proved reluctant to produce these

low-cost goods, American brands went elsewhere. Since the start of Donald Trump’s presidency,

large brand names such as Uniqlo, Levi’s, Crocs, Calvin Klein, and Tommy Hilfiger have moved

their entire manufacturing base out of China. The cost of production was further increased in

China when President Trump increased existing tariffs on $250 billion worth of Chinese goods.

These increased costs drove American brands to move their manufacturing to countries like

Vietnam, Bangladesh, Cambodia, and Indonesia due to their lower production costs (The True

Cost 2015).

The fast fashion industry has consequently fostered an innate structure of harsh working

conditions for the countries where it outsources its labor needs. These workers endure extremely

low pay and hazardous conditions because of the need to undercut competition. Yet, some of

these desperate workers do protest and fight for their rights for better pay and conditions. The

outcome for many of these vocal workers, however, is abuse or termination, and even worse

death. Governments, unfortunately, also fail to protect its citizens from being exploited by their

bosses and the American fashion brands. These governments rely heavily on globalized

production to support their local economies; thus, laws are not enacted to protect these workers

from the detrimental consequences of fast fashion (The True Cost 2015).

Unethical practices are hopefully going to be a thing of the past with time. Brands, such

as Everlane, are striving to create a new norm. Not only is Everlane sustainable, but they also

seek to practice fair wages and maintain safe labor conditions. Everlane shares extensive

information related to their labor practices on their website, which is part of their ‘radically

transparent’ initiative. Everlane’s ethical labor mission states, “To ensure the continued integrity

of our factory partners, we develop strong relationships with the people at the facility and work

with third-party auditors to evaluate factors like fair wages, labor conditions, reasonable hours,

and a safe work environment.” Their website maintains photos of each of their facilities, in

addition to sharing complete details about their relationship with the facility: what service they

provide, location, number of employees, the year they were established, and information about

the owner (Everlane 2021).

Additionally, Everlane also is radically transparent about how much each item costs to

make. Everlane believes that their customers have a right to know how much their clothes cost to

make. They reveal the true costs behind all their products—from materials to labor to

transportation—then offer them to the consumer without the traditional retail markup (Everlane

2021).. However, despite their pricing being reasonable, Unfortunately, small businesses with

sustainability and ethical labor laws are unable to compete with crazy low prices like Pretty

Little Thing is and many more brands. However, Pretty Little Thing’s low prices does not attract

all buyers. Fast fashion has started gaining negative attention for their environmental impact;

thus, buyers will avoid fast fashion brands for ethical reasons. This has encouraged emerging

brands implementing CSR practices.

However, there is one part of Everlane that is unclear: exactly how much they pay their

employees. They do not publicly share the exact wages of their garment workers. This

unfortunately leaves to the assumption that they do not show it because it does not align with

their promise of ethical labor practices. Despite this let-down, Everlane is still educating

consumers about the importance of ethical practices and contributing to the conversation.

The fast fashion industry has sadly created extremely unethical norms. Unfortunately, the

fast fashion industry has been extremely successful, meaning that millions of people around the

globe buy from these brands that further contribute to these immoral norms. Unethical practices

have become so normalized and common, that it can be difficult to shop ethically in the fashion

industry. Luckily, there are some companies within the fashion industry that disagree with these

norms and have been highly successful in educating the consumer. Consumers are now more

actively searching for ethical brands. Thus, some brands are now focusing on reducing their

impact on the environment and implementing fair labor practices. While the fast fashion industry

has created immense damage to laborers, the future of fashion is clear. The true cost of a $10 t-

shirt is too much.

Diversity

The fashion industry is known to be exclusive, the industry values very skinny, white

bodies with traditional, feminine, European features. And of course, these values are highlighted

in many ways, but we are going to focus on models and sizing. Because trends and norms are all

established on the runway, let us begin there. As we know, most brands use models that are

white, have traditional European features (small nose, smaller lips, blonde, blue eyes), and are of

course, very skinny. Skinny models became the norm in the 60’s, but it wasn’t until the 80’s

where high fashion brands exclusively used rail-thin models. And as we know, runway models

are exclusively skinny - no other body types or and shapes are represented. This means that

designers only make and sell sizes for the skinny body type - normally women’s sizes 00, 0, 2,

and 4. And just further to prove how small of a size range this is, the average size of women in

the US is a size 14. It was unheard of until recently to hear of a mid-size or plus size model on

the runway. In 2017, Ashley Graham became the first plus size model in history to walk at

Michael Kors. Versace cast plus size runway models for the first time ever in 2020 showing the

Spring/Summer 2021 collection. Furthermore, it wasn't until very recently that black models

were accepted on the runway. Peggy Anne Donyale Aragonea Peugot Luna (August 31, 1945 –

May 17, 1979), better known as Donyale Luna, was known as the first black model in the 60s.

She was one of the very few black models represented. Beverly Ann Johnson was the first

African American model to appear on the cover of American Vogue in August 1974 and in 1975,

Johnson became the first black woman to appear on the cover of the French edition of Elle.

However, it is crucial to understand that this is still a very prominent issue today; Maria Borges

became the first black model to walk the Victoria Secret runway with her natural hair in 2015.

And in addition, as we know, most models we see are female or male, with very binary features.

The fashion industry has been afraid to become more gender fluid. Caroline Cossey, also known

as Tula, made headlines as the first transgender model to pose for Playboy magazine in 1981.

Yes, it is worth celebrating that these norms are beginning to change through the representation

of plus-size models, racial minority models, and transgender models, however, there is still so

much work to be done. These are the very few available examples of change; this is still not the

norm.

As mentioned earlier, the trends and norms established by major fashion houses create

the trends in ready-to-wear fashion. This means that basically all fashion brands are exclusive.

This is exemplified in two ways: through models and available sizing. The same norms on the

runway apply in ready-to-wear fashion: the models are typically blonde, skinny, and of course,

white. Let’s discuss Urban Outfitters, which is a very successful on-trend brand catered to Gen Z

and Millennials. Their models match this exclusive norm. Furthermore, they have very exclusive

sizing- XS - L or a 00-8. Neither of these size ranges are inclusive. They have no plus size

availability anywhere on their website. This makes it clear that Urban Outfitters only wants

people that can wear these sizes in their clothes. It can’t get much more fatphobic then that. And

of course, Urban Outfitters is one of thousands of brands that are doing this. Almost all brands

are like this. Brandy Melville is known for creating one size for all items, which is equivalent to

a size S. Their slogan is “One size fits most.” Revolve, a very popular retailer, carries hundreds

of brands, yet their largest size option is XL and has very few options. For further clarity, a size

XL is equivalent to a size 12, which means that the average US woman can’t even fit in their

sizing. Some brands have a plus size section; however, they release one collection annually with

only a handful of pieces. So, in short, they are doing the bare minimum (McCall 2018).

There are a few brands focusing on the plus-size inclusivity. One of the most famous

plus-size brands is Lane Bryant. Lane Bryant is a plus-size only brand, which carries sizing 12-

28. However, Lane Bryant’s section is more minimal, conservative, and non-trendy; their items

are more focused on clothing appropriate for the workplace. Nothing is wrong with Lane

Bryant’s style, however, that style is not for everyone, particularly a younger audience. This

once again highlights the issues with the current state of plus size fashion: they have about 1% of

the options that ‘regular size’ fashion has (McCall 2018).

In some past few years, some brands have caught on to this gap. Some brands have begun

to really prioritize curvy women by releasing lots of plus size items, rather than just a few. Some

brands with the best trendy and stylish items for plus women are Pretty Little Thing, H&M and

Fashion Nova.

Although it is amazing some brands are prioritizing plus size fashion, the only brands that

value plus-size fashion are fast fashion brands. It is the very unfortunate truth. It is basically

impossible for a plus size woman to find brands that are size inclusive (that is difficult enough),

but also sustainable and with fair wages. This means that plus size bodies are left with way less

options, low quality materials, and unethical brands.

So, as we are seeing here, very few brands are making size inclusive clothing. This means

that brands are only making clothes for a small percentage of women in the US. This leads to the

question: why don’t brands want to create inclusive sizing where they could have a much greater

pool of potential customers, and make them feel powerful in the brand's clothing?

Like we shared earlier, this sizing issue comes from fatphobia and the belief that designs

are no longer high fashion on bodies that are not white, cisgender, and skinny. The message

designers are sending is fatphobic, racist, and transphobic. To clarify, I am not arguing that

anything is wrong with skinny, cisgender, or white bodies. However, I am saying that all bodies

need to be represented - all are beautiful, and all need clothing that fits and makes them feel

fabulous- whether that is couture and high fashion or ready-to-wear basics or trendy, youthful

items.

Rihanna’s lingerie line, Savage X Fenty, is a perfect example of the value of inclusivity

so valued that it has generated a net worth of 1 billion US dollars. The brand marketing strategy

was to focus on inclusivity in all areas of customer interface. Their Instagram account (with

millions of followers) includes photos of a variety of body types, ethnicities, sexualities, and

shapes. The brand does an incredible job at being inclusive, offering sizes from XS–3X and bra

sizes 32A–46DDD (Savage X Fenty 2021). Their lingerie and loungewear cover a wide range of

styles: the brand includes everyday basics and conservative options, as well as sexy and bold

pieces. This reinforces the idea that everyone deserves to dress exactly the way they choose, and

however they present themselves, they are sexy and included.

Savage X Fenty’s diversity was highlighted particularly in the most recent Savage X

Fenty Show, which is available on Amazon. It countered the traditional lingerie show, the

Victoria’s Secret Show, with diverse models, bold and energetic energy and confidence. The

problems with the Victoria’s Secret Show—the one-type-of-beauty models, the jealousy and

envy it encouraged, and overall stiffness—were all addressed in the Savage X Fenty show. As a

result, people were obsessed. The Savage X Fenty show was so incredibly successful that

Victoria’s Secret cancelled their runway show the next season all together. Victoria’s Secret

knew they would be found wanting in comparison and likely to receive backlash from reviewers

and consumers alike (Savage X Fenty 2021).

Some brands argue that they are unable to be size inclusive because they don't have the

resources available to bigger brands like Savage X Fenty or H&M. However, the small

Australian brand Dyspia is proving that this is no excuse. Because all their items are made post

purchase, Dyspia is willing to make any size. When shopping for an item on their website, they

list sizes XS––XXXL as well as a ‘custom’ option —which takes inclusivity to another level

(Dysnea 2021)!

Another amazing size-diverse brand is Girlfriend Collective, which is a sustainable and

ethically made women’s activewear brand. Their sizes range from XXS-6XL (Girlfriend

Collective 2021)!

It is ridiculous that due to prejudice, brands are missing out on a massive opportunity to

widen their audience. Fashion’s lack of diversity has real costs. Society expects a greater

representation of differences. There are also strong economic reasons for diversity. The more

consumers are visibly represented and feel bound to the brand in terms of shared values, the

greater the turnover to purchasing for the fashion companies (SaveMyCent 2021). The standard

sizing is XS-L or 00-12, yet the average size of a US woman is 14. Plunkett Research estimates

that 68 percent of American women wear a size 14 or above (Racked 2021). Including plus-size

women seems very profitable. As per studies conducted by Alibaba.com, the plus-size-women's-

clothing market is expected to be valued at 46.6 billion USD by the end of this year which is

double what it was valued at just three years earlier (Racked 2021). We have seen an increase of

inclusivity over the past few years, and this will only continue. Size-inclusivity will be a crucial

aspect of a brands success in the future of fashion, and brands will be forced to become ethical

all around, not just in size diversity.

Concluding Thoughts

To clarify, I am not arguing that the unethical fashion industry, which includes fast

fashion and size-limited brands, will cease to exist or lose all profitability. As mentioned earlier,

fast fashion goods have a place in the market for consumers that cannot afford other brands or

aren’t affected by limited sizing. However, I am arguing that there are limitations. Even if fast

fashion has a place in the market, that does not mean it is ever lasting or even promising. Fast

fashion brand’s popularity and profitability often rise quickly due to their extremely low prices

and ability to mass produce thousands of options for consumers. However, once they are in the

spotlight, it is common for these brands to become ‘top news’ in the fashion community on how

horrible their practices are in terms of lack of sustainability. In result, lots of people refuse to

support them any longer and often share publicly that they don’t support the brand’s ethics.

People do not want to support harming the environment or inhuman labor practices, which has

led to decrease in sales and overall net worth. In terms of size-inclusion and prejudice brands,

people also want to support brands with similar ethics to their own. However, as we saw with the

available plus size options, only some people have the opportunity to shop ethically.

I am hoping for a more ethical future of fashion, and luckily, we seem to be heading in

that direction. Brands are recognizing that being more ethical gives them multiple competitive

advantages. Being ethical, in terms of sustainability, labor practices, and diversity, has become

the ultimate marketing tool today. Brands like Everlane and Savage X Fenty know that

consumers are proud to support them. These brands do not have to worry about making headlines

because they are unsustainable or racist. When brands are genuine about their dedication to CSR

and their stakeholders, they can use their practices as an amazing marketing strategy. Ethical

brands know that massive consumer groups do value environmental impacts, labor practices, and

diversity and love supporting brands with similar values. People like to feel a part of the

progressive, inclusive, and happy movement, and brands like Everlane and Savage X Fenty

provide them that feeling by just purchasing from them. Furthermore, the anti-fast fashion

movement isn’t even limited to brands. Entrepreneurs are utilizing the rising popularity of

secondhand shopping to create fashion organizations that are ethical and cheap. Apps like Depop

and Poshmark were created so anyone can buy and sell used items internationally all in the

convenience of their phone. The industry is changing. We are observing the rise and fall of

unethical fashion. I am arguing that although unethical brands, particularly fast fashion brands,

have a platform right now, it is crumbling. Brands that prioritize stakeholders, employees, and

consumers, are not going to last. Brands with a foundation of Corporate Social Responsibility are

creating a platform that can succeed in the future of fashion.

However, the work doesn’t just end there. Establishing a brand's values through CSR will

create an incredible foundation for a brand, but there are some essential marketing strategies that

need to be implemented to 1) help the consumer understand brand values and want to support

and 2) be able to become a flourishing brand in the fashion industry. These strategies, social

media, trend forecasting, pricing, and leadership practices, will create a business model that is

built for the future of fashion.

Chapter 2:

Essential Marketing Strategies

Social Media

Although online shopping began in the early 1980s, it was nothing like what we have

today (The True Cost 2015). It began as a way to view on TV what was readily available in local

store fronts, but now, we have access to millions of fashion brands around the world at our

fingertips. The globalization of the fashion industry was not limited to massive companies, small

businesses are also able worldwide.

Of course, ecommerce was further emphasized and globalized through the introduction of

social media and in particular, Instagram. Because Instagram was initially created to showcase

photography and daily life, it attracted a lot of creative people, including fashion creatives.

People started to create fashion blogs with their Instagram accounts. This included mood boards

of fashion trends and looks and the blogger’s personal outfits. Fashion brands caught on to

Instagram’s potential—and saw an opportunity to use the platform and fashion bloggers as

marketing tools. Fashion brands created their own Instagram accounts as a way to connect to

their consumers and hopefully market their products to increase their audience. This has been an

extremely beneficial strategy for fashion brands because it is a free, easy-to-use, global platform

that can easily market garments and reach new audiences.

Furthermore, the presence of brands on Instagram encouraged fashion bloggers to tag the

brands they are wearing. Tagging brands became beneficial for the fashion blogger and the brand

- the blogger has a professional blog wear their audience can easily find pieces, and brands get

free marketing! Fashion brands realized that they could partner or work with fashion bloggers -

which created the Fashion Influencer. Brands will reach out to a fashion blogger with a larger

audience and a similar style to the brands and offer a discount code the blogger can advertise in

exchange for a free clothing piece from the brand that the blogger must take a photo in, tag and

post. The brand normally re-posts the bloggers photo on their page as well - making it mutually

beneficial marketing for the blogger and the brand. It is now extremely common for brands

(especially brands with an audience of age groups that are very present on social media - 18-35)

to reach out or respond to influencers and collaborate. Now, being a Fashion Influencer can be a

full time, 6 figure job. Danielle Bernstein, @WeWoreWhat on Instagram, is a perfect example of

the creation of the Fashion Influencer. She started her Instagram account around 8 years ago, and

now has 2 million followers and has worked with hundreds of fashion brands. Her massive

following comes from her daily outfit pictures, along with all the pieces tagged with the brands

she wore, to make it an easy experience for her audience to buy the pieces she wears. To post

outfits daily, she needs a lot of clothes —so she ends up tagging and creating exposure for a lot

of brands, and lots of small brands in particular. Small and big brands pay her to share content in

their pieces because they know her followers are loyal and often purchase the stuff she wears and

recommends. Brands negotiate to pay her in different ways; some provide items and pay her to

post their products once a month, or some brands send her a free item in hopes she will market it

for them on her page.

Now let’s look at an example of a brand doing a great job utilizing ‘Instagram

Influencers’ and social media. Savage X Fenty, Rihanna’s lingerie brand, is killing it. Savage X

Fenty spends most of their resources on advertising through influencers. Savage X Fenty has

reached out to thousands of Influencers. Savage X Fenty offers to pay the influencer to promote

their items; in particular, every month, the influencer receives the brand’s newest items.

Depending on each influencer’s contract, this can be exemplified through Instagram stories and

posts; and of course, the brand needs to be tagged and advertised constantly throughout the

content. This is an incredible advertising strategy. Savage X Fenty is partnered with diverse

influencers. These influences are diverse in many ways; in terms of identity, these influencers

have different body sizes, races, abilities, sexualities, and religious perspectives. Of course, this

means all their content is quite different. Some focus on body positivity, some are artists, some

are writers, some post daily fashion inspiration, etc. And of course, this means that Savage X

Fenty is able to reach many different people, and each potential consumer is represented in some

way due to the diversity of influencers. In addition, this is a great strategy given that most of

their consumers are Gen X and millennials, which we all know are staple users of social media.

And in addition, because consumer’s favorite influencers are promoting Savage X Fenty, they

have over 4 million followers, where they constantly repost influencers and non-influencers

content in their pieces. And naturally, their feed includes a diverse group of Savage X Fenty-

wearers, which creates a happy, inclusive, and body-positive place for followers. The Instagram

page promotes the idea that ‘everyone is a savage’ and is beautiful, which inevitably attracts a

large audience that passionately supports the brands as well.

Social media advertising is only going to become more profitable, common, and efficient.

Savvy brands like Savage X Fenty are building a stable platform for the future by embracing this

new norm right now. Here’s how the organization’s efforts have paid off; while only established

in 2017, the brand is currently worth $1 billion US dollars (Savage X Fenty 2021).

As we have learned, the fashion industry is globalized now, which means that the fashion

industry is increasingly competitive. Although Savage X Fenty is great, the brand does not

prioritize sustainability practices, giving them a huge advantage in terms of pricing. This

competition is even more stressful for brands committed to CSR practices such as sustainability,

ethical labor, and diversity, because of course they are more expensive. When brands have

higher prices because of their CSR practices, they must employ a superior marketing strategy so

the consumer would rather buy from their brand than fast fashion.

This is not easy of course; however, it is doable. Let’s take Everlane for example. As we

established, they are passionate about their CSR. On the brand’s Instagram page (followed by

over one million users), their bio reads “Exceptional quality. Ethical factories. Radically

transparent” (Everlane 2021). When a potential consumer lands on their page, they instantly see

what their money would support if they purchased from this brand. In addition, Everlane

constantly posts educational content about the detriments of fast fashion on their Instagram

stories, which further establishes Everlane as a thought leader and encourages people to buy

from brands that are ethical, like Everlane. Their messaging on Instagram is consistent and

clearly expresses their corporate values.

They have posted videos providing information about sustainability practices of

particular garments, shared their acknowledgement and commitment to the Black Lives Matter

movement, and provided transparency to their labor practices, such as posting photos of their

facilities. Everlane understands that if they do not clarify the difference between themselves and

fast fashion brands, they will lose customers strictly due to price.

Whether brands embrace it or not, social media advertising is the future of the fashion

industry. The last decade saw a step back from traditional advertising, such as magazines,

billboards, and radio. Brands that embrace digital marketing and advertising are setting

themselves up well for the future. Social media advertising has proven to reach more people with

less effort for the brands. The sooner brands establish a strong social media presence, the sooner

they will increase their profits.

Trend Forecasting

As we learned earlier, fast fashion brands mass produce styles they see trending; this

means that they often copy exact styles from smaller (more expensive) designers. And the

smaller designers forecast trends based on designs in fashion houses such as Louis Vuitton,

Gucci, Balmain, Dolce & Gabbana, and many more. Thus, fast fashion brands do not have to

prioritize trend forecasting as much as the designers creating the trends fast fashion brands are

copying.

To exemplify this practice, let’s use Danielle Guizo as an example. Danielle Guizo is a

boutique small brand designer with features in massive fashion organizations such as Farfetch,

Ssense, and Revolve. Her designs are not mass produced; they are hand-made and designed

herself with high quality materials. Naturally, this makes her brand more expensive. Between

2019 and now, Danielle had one particular item go viral: the ‘Tie-Dye Knit Safety Pin Sweater,’

which costs $348 US dollars (Danielle Guizo 2021). Within weeks of this item’s release,

multiple fast fashion brands had copied her design – and they copy it identically. And of course,

they were listed at much cheaper pricing. This wider availability at a cheaper price point often

leads to customers buying the fast fashion brand’s knock off, rather than spending their money to

support the actual designer and creator, Danielle Guizo. To make matters even worse, there is

almost nothing small brands can do when other companies usurp their designs. Fighting in court

will most likely only absorb their funding and it may prove impossible to beat a massive brand

like Pretty Little Thing with limitless resources.

Fast fashion brands normalize these incredibly low prices, making the small brands

pricing seem ridiculous in comparison; however, it is expensive to pay employees fairly and use

quality materials. And to make things even more complicated, when brands use only sustainable

materials, pay employees fairly, and do not copy small brands ideas, it takes much more time to

produce the products. This of course means these brands must put in the work of forecasting the

trends themselves and have to plan years ahead so be able to continue their CSR efforts

(sustainability, fair wages, original ideas). Luckily, there are lots of organizations that can help

with this; small brands can pay these organizations in to learn detailed information and research

about upcoming trends:

● WGSN

● Fashion Snoops

● Trend union

● Trend bible

● EDITD

● Trend council

● Trend stoop

● F-trend

● Spate

● Heuritech

● The future laboratory

(Sourcing: Trend Forecasting Agencies 2021)

There are some established brands that have perfected this practice. For example,

designer Stella McCartney uses lots of trend forecasting research. Stella McCartney has been

ahead of the game in terms of sustainability practices. This brand has focused on three main

ways to be sustainable: sustainable materials and innovation, social sustainability and measuring

their impact. Stella McCartney is paving a new path: sustainable luxury. In most designer brands,

it has been normalized that animal materials, such as crocodile skin or leathers, are the only

materials labeled as ‘luxury.’ However, Stella McCartney is proving that luxury can be animal-

free; Stella McCartney is notoriously known for using all vegan leathers. In addition, Stella

McCartney has implemented multiple other initiatives, such as:

● The use of numerous eco-friendly materials including recycled polyester, organic cotton,

and regenerated cashmere.

● They have waste-reduction strategies in place across their entire supply chain, and they

measure and report on their direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions. Taking it a step

further, they have set an approved science-based target to reduce greenhouse gas

emissions, and a 2020 deadline for the elimination of hazardous chemicals in their

production line.

● They are also doing well on the waterfront – with water reduction targets in place, and a

solid treatment and discharge practice for wastewater.

● The brand has partnered with PETA on various projects and never uses real fur in her

designs and is aiming for sustainable animal material options. The brand does not use

leather, down, fur, angora, shearling or exotic animal skins or hairs (however, it does use

wool and cashmere)

(The 25 Most Sustainable 2021)

However, of course valuing these ethics means that the brand must compromise in some

way, and they choose to plan design launches year in advance. By valuing trend forecasting

research, they can comfortably plan years in advance, which is always the time to implement the

brands ethics. Stella McCartney states, “When you work in a sustainable way in any industry,

you have to be so much more ahead with timing. I have to work three or four years in advance to

source sustainable viscose, for example” (The 25 Most Sustainable 2021). Although it is much

more work to have CSR values, it means that the brand must be extra savvy in their marketing

and strategies.

Stella McCartney emphasizes that this is the future of fashion, “The question more than ever is

‘What is luxury?’ It’s certainly not a bloody crocodile handbag, I can tell you that much. For me,

luxury is having a healthy planet and making the right choices, being conscious of your place on

the planet. It’s not a fashion question. This is a lifestyle question. The big brands are going to

have to stand up and pay attention, and certainly they’ve seen that at Kering. And I know now

from Mr. Arnault and working with the LVMH group that the investment they have shown with

me absolutely supports that. They’re not stupid; they know this is an area where they can do

better, and they want to. Also, these are big ships, and it takes time to turn them from the iceberg.

And I’m an agile little pirate ship” (The 25 Most Sustainable 2021).

Small brands are the ones creating a better future of fashion, which is why consumers'

money should support these brands instead of fast fashion brands. However, it is unfortunately

not that simple; fast fashion has created a cycle of the ability to over consume at unethically

cheap prices. We need to support these brands to also prove that consumers want more brands

with CSR values. And big brands are catching on to this; they know that they will limit their

future success if they do not consider implementing CSR, and of course, that means trend

forecasting is the future as well.

Leadership

As we learned earlier, there are a lot of fashion brands that do not value Corporate Social

Responsibility or their brand’s stakeholders. This means that their leader is implementing these

values, or lack of. The historical ruthlessness of the high fashion industry and fast fashion

industry have both made the industry feel cold and greedy. Fashion entrepreneurs must be

unstoppable and somewhat rigid to be successful in the industry, however, there are ways to still

be a fashion powerhouse but still value and be kind to stakeholders. Let’s consider what some

fashion leaders are doing to counter this negative norm in the fashion industry, and instead, are

kind leaders.

Let’s take Danielle Guizo. We discussed her brand earlier, but let's review quickly;

Danielle created Danielle Guizo, which is a luxury ready-to-wear women’s street style brand.

The brand was established in 2014 and is now seen on fashion moguls like Hailey Bieber, Bella

Hadid, and many more. Although the brand has become immensely successful, Danielle Guizo is

still able to connect with her consumers intimately. She accomplishes this by sharing her design

process on her own personal Instagram, responding to fans via direct message, and asking for

consumer’s insights on new colorways and designs. She also shares people on her team, which

makes the consumer feel like they know exactly who their money would be supporting. In

addition, she often posts on her Instagram stories relevant social issues, such as racial hate

crimes and gender issues. This concern for her community has been consistent for years.

During the rise of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement in the summer of 2020,

Danielle Guizo took initiative as a leader. Using her immense influence, on her brand’s

Instagram page as well as her own personal page, she consistently posted resources, ways to

donate, and content that emphasized her support for the black community (Danielle Guizo 2021).

In addition, instead of sending her regular emails that highlighted new arrivals and item

restocked, she would highlight different black creators in the fashion industry. She shared dozens

of black creators, in addition to their Instagram links, websites, and photos of their work.

Danielle’s stakeholder-focused leadership has been consistent for years, which is why it felt so

genuine during the BLM movement. Danielle has found the perfect balance of being a fashion

powerhouse leader, but never becoming greedy.

There were many other fashion brands that put forth genuine effort to highlight their

value for the black community. The London skate brand, Palace, pledged $1 million to BLM-

related causes, with initial funds going to The Stephen Lawrence Charitable Trust and the BLM

organization. In addition, Palace shared a statement on Instagram emphasizing that their

commitment to the black community is a journey, rather than a one-time thing. Nike has pledged

$40 million to support the Black community and committed to investing in “organizations that

put social justice, education, and addressing racial inequality in America at the center of their

work.” In addition to this, Michael Jordan and the Jordan label have pledged $100 million across

the course of the next ten years to a series of similar causes (Here are the Brands 2021).

After protesters broke into Marc Jacobs’ Rodeo Drive store, the designer shared a photo

of its defaced plaque. The ‘Marc Jacobs’ sign was struck through and replaced with the names

‘George Floyd’ and ‘Sandra Bland,’ the designer wrote ‘A life cannot be replaced. Black Lives

Matter’ in an accompanying caption. Since Floyd’s death, Marc Jacobs has also been posting

learning resources, links to charitable causes, and messages of solidarity on both his Instagram

grid and his stories (Here are the Brands 2021). All these immensely successful fashion brands

have proven that brands need to use their influence and resources for their community. These

brands have proven that not only can a brand be successful and caring, but these characteristics

go hand-in-hand. Consumers appreciated these brands efforts, and in result, it made them want

to support the brands even more.

Unfortunately, Danielle’s and other brands’ caring, and supportive leadership style is not

the norm in the fashion industry. There are many brands that have always been silent when it

comes to CSR, their business practices, and general societal issues, so it is hardly surprising that

they remained silent during the BLM movement. Additionally, there are some brands that

publicly show support for the BLM movement, but their leadership practices showed otherwise.

One such brand, Aritzia, is a fashion brand known for its sustainability and ready-to-wear

basics. This summer, they initially received praise for their $100,000 donation to BLM and the

NAACP. However, they quickly received backlash for the gap between their public values and

what actually happens in their organization (Ex-Aritzia Employees 2021).

Former employee Karissa Lewis responded to Aritzia’s social media post about their

BLM donation by sharing her personal experience working as an associate manager for the

brand. In an Instagram story, Lewis shares that during her five-month tenure as the only Black

manager on her team, she was treated differently by other managers, blatantly disrespected by

customers, and given cashier shifts despite being an associate manager. In an email to FLARE, a

spokesperson for Aritzia stated: “These allegations were never reported to Aritzia through any of

the multiple channels available to our employees.” Regarding Lewis’s claims about being given

cashier shifts, Jennifer Wong, Aritzia’s President and COO said in an email: “At Aritzia we are a

team. No task is considered unimportant, and no employee is seen to be too senior to pitch in and

help where and when required. This is true all the way up to our CEO, who jumps on the cash

desk, takes out the trash, and helps on the floor when he’s in our stores. Regardless of title or the

task, we are all expected to do whatever needs to get done, period” (Ex-Aritzia Employees

2021).

In her Instagram story, Lewis also shared a particular incident in which she claims that a

Black employee was fired for speaking up about racism in the store, a decision Lewis says she—

as the store’s associate manager—was not made aware of until after the employee was fired. In

the same email to FLARE, the spokesperson for the company said that as Lewis was not this

individual’s supervisor or manager, she wouldn’t have been involved in decisions related to their

performance and her involvement wouldn’t have been appropriate (Ex-Aritzia Employees 2021).

In a follow-up June 10 interview with Huffington Post, Lewis described the overall

culture of the company and its stores as “very clique-y, very exclusionary,” and alleged that

Aritzia taught their employees “code words” to describe certain types of customers, “so you

would know that you should spend your time with certain people and not others,” Lewis said. Per

HuffPo, “A” would stand for Asian “as they were seen as being rich” and “TW” would stand for

“time waster,” AKA someone who would use up an associate’s time and not buy anything.

According to Lewis, this could include Black customers (Ex-Aritzia Employees 2021).

Other users on Twitter and Instagram also responded to Aritzia’s donation

announcement, recounting incidents in which they, as staff, were told to follow young Black

customers around the store until they left. Narineh Panosian responded on June 8, 2020 via

Twitter, “I worked at @ARITZIA in Ottawa, Canada for one month many years ago. The

manager at that time would instruct employees to approach black youth every 2 minutes asking if

they “need help” until they left the store because they felt unwelcome and harassed. Never with

white youth.” Another former employee responded as well, sharing that as the only black

employee, they were told to straighten their hair to maintain the store image (Ex-Aritzia

Employees 2021).

Aritizia exemplifies that a brand’s public values and CSR practices are only powerful if

the organization’s leadership implements these values as well. Despite their donation, this brand

is viewed as problematic (rightfully so) because they only value the black community publicly to

receive praise. Aritizia’s responses to these former employees were way less caring than

necessary and the company didn’t take enough corrective action (Ex-Aritzia Employees 2021) .

It is crucial that fashion leaders value CSR and their stakeholders. Not because it's

always more profitable or results in higher ROI, but because it’s the right thing to do. Fashion

brands have the power, influence, and resources to take care of their employees, consumers, and

communities. Doing so should not be a tough decision to make.

Pricing

As we have established, fair pricing is exceedingly difficult. And of course, pricing is an

especially important element to the consumer. In order to create an effective price point for a

product, material, production, and labor costs all need to be considered, as well as a profit margin

for the company. When a company does this ethically and profitability, the product will not be

the cheapest version on the market; unfortunately, people have been programmed to regard fast

fashion pricing as a baseline of how much clothing should cost. But as established, fast fashion

costs are problematic in many ways. This leaves brands to struggle with the question, “How do

we achieve a profit margin at a price that consumers will accept?”

Of course, there is a lot to consider when answering this question (type of product,

manufacturing costs, etc.), but we are going to focus on one especially important part: what is my

audience willing to spend?

Let’s look at a brand that did a great job of answering this question. In the sustainability

chapter, we discussed the underwear brand, Parade. This is a sustainable, size inclusive

underwear brand. The brand understood that the colorful designs, its presence on social media,

models, brand values, and overall trendy brand aesthetic would likely gather a young audience,

more specifically, women that are around ages 15-30. When answering the question, “what is my

audience willing to spend?”, Parade's team knew that their audience was likely going to have a

much more conservative budget. All of Parade’s underwear is between $8-$14 which is very

affordable (Parade 2021). In result, their brand has been remarkably successful; they are

growing exponentially on Instagram and have collaborated with the large brand, Juicy

Couture. Parade has proven that sustainable and size inclusive products can also be affordable,

in addition to showing a great consumer understanding.

Now, let’s look at an example of where the price did not agree with the audience. It was

recently announced by luxury conglomerate, LVMH, that Rihanna’s fashion line, Fenty, will be

paused indefinitely after only two years of existence. This was a massive shock, given that

Rihanna’s other brands, Savage X Fenty, Fenty Beauty, and Fenty Skin, are all extremely

successful. But all of these brands had one thing in common: an affordable price point. These

brands are able to be consumed by people with a variety of budgets. On the other hand, Fenty,

was Rihanna’s only luxury brand. Fenty was under the luxury goods company, LVMH that also

owned fashion houses such as Christian Dior, Louis Vuitton and more. Thus, the prices were

similar to major design houses, which is of course, very expensive.

According to fashion analysts, despite Rihanna’s massive fanbase, the Fenty label’s

prices were just too steep for the audience (Saadan 2021). In fact, when the first fashion

collection was first introduced in May 2019, many potential consumers were shocked at the

prices, which resulted in some backlash. Because of Rihanna’s cult-following, Fenty’s team was

quick to assume that Rihanna’s fans would be willing to buy anything at any price from her

brands. They failed to consider that Rihanna’s empire, which includes all of her brands, has a

very young audience, which is why her more affordable brands have been immensely successful.

The first Fenty collection priced in the entry designer category: Jogger pants cost $280,

T-shirts started at $180, hoodies at $300, an oversized padded denim jacket for $940 and dresses

between $600-700 US dollars. Initially, the drops were averaging every six to eight weeks, with

seven deliveries in 2019 and six in 2020 (Saadan 2021). This meant a very high supply with too

low of a demand because Fenty’s price did not reflect the audience. Fenty’s audience ranges in

ages 15-30 years old. And of course, this is not the average budget of a teen or young adult.

Fenty’s failure to assess what their audience is willing to spend encouraged their

downfall. Fenty had so many powerful aspects: Rihanna’s incredible following, the immense

success of her other brands, a collaboration with powerhouse LVMH, and the ability to create

beautiful, on-trend, unique pieces. The rise and fall of Fenty proves how crucial pricing is.

Concluding Thoughts

The combination of implementing Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives and

Essential Marketing Strategies: early trend forecasting, thoughtful leadership practices, and

audience-based pricing creates a business model that is built for the future of fashion.

Social media presence is only becoming more crucial with time; working with fashion-

influencers and creating a social media marketing strategy similar to Savage X Fenty is almost

foolproof. The ability to forecast trends is essential when creating an original, ethical brand.

Forecasting trends allows a brand to create unique pieces that can drop right when the consumer

is starting to want it. Sustainable materials and being size inclusive is more time consuming and

planning ahead allows for these practices to happen smoothly. A brand’s leadership is crucial;

fashion brands are notorious for being greedy and inconsiderate, but consumers are now wanting

to support brands and leaders that are ethical. And a fashion entrepreneur needs to be willing to

give their 110%, or else their business will quickly fail. And lastly, a brand’s pricing strategy has

to be a reflection of their audience. As we saw with the rise and fall of Fenty, no matter how

many powerful resources a brand has, prices will make or break their success. These strategies

allow the audience to understand organizational values and create opportunity for the brand to

flourish.

Conclusion

The fast fashion industry has massively changed the way consumers buy clothing. Firstly,

it normalized globalized labor. Secondly, it has encourages over-consumerism, and has caused

people to buy more than they ever had before. And lastly, the fast fashion industry has

normalized extremely unethical methods of production.

Because of how competitive the fashion industry is, brands wanted to find a way to mass

produce trendy pieces at the lowest cost possible. Unfortunately, these brands accomplish this by

using international labor, exploiting child labor, paying inhumane wages, and using facilities

with dangerous working conditions. Furthermore, fast fashion methodologies include detrimental

environmental practices, which have had an extremely negative impact on our Earth. Thus, the

fashion industry has normalized the absence of Corporate Social Responsibility. But the industry

is changing; consumers no longer want to support brands without ethics. In order to create a

successful fashion brand, leaders will need to implement essential marketing strategies in order

to compensate for the cost of CSR. The utilization of essential marketing strategies, such as

utilizing social media, specific leadership approaches, trend forecasting, and pricing that reflects

the consumer, can be used to highlight the importance of corporate social responsibility in the

fashion industry.

The fast industry has begun to shift, but we are just at the beginning. As of right now, it is

still difficult to find a brand that is truly ethical and does not take any shortcuts. Although we are

not where we need to be yet in terms of ethical brands, we are moving forward. The exponential

rise of concern about ethical brands proves where the future of fashion lies. Consumers want to

know what values they are supporting when purchasing from a brand. The industry and

consumers are changing; consumers expect brands to do more than just sell trendy items.

Bibliography

“ABOUT SMV.” SAMI MIRO VINTAGE, samimirovintage.com/pages/about-smv.

“About Us " Manifesto: Parade Underwear.” Parade, yourparade.com/pages/manifesto.

Cavusoglu, Lena, and Mourad Dakhli. "The Impact of Ethical Concerns on Fashion

Consumerism: A Review". Digitalcommons.Uri.Edu, 2021,

https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?h

l=en&as_sdt=0,5&q=consumerism+fashion+definition&httpsredir=1&article=1019&context=m

gdr Accessed 9 Jan 2021.

Chandler, David (2020). Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value

Creation (5

edition). Los Angeles: Sage Publishing.

“Child Labour in the Fashion Supply Chain.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media,

labs.theguardian.com/unicef-child-labour/.

DANIELLE GUIZIO, www.danielleguiziony.com/.

“DYSPNEA e-Boutique: Join the Pussy Possé.” Dyspnea, dyspnea.com.au/#open-

promotion.

"Ex-Aritzia Employees Call Out Company's Anti-Black Racism". Huffpost Canada,

2021, https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/aritzia-black-employees-

racism_ca_5ed5672fc5b66a1b4ba8c47f.

“Fashion & Environment.” SustainYourStyle, www.sustainyourstyle.org/en/whats-wrong-

with-the-fashion-

industry?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIlpLX0dar7QIVkzytBh1TgwJrEAAYAyAAEgJDQPD_BwE#an

chor-working-conditions.

"Fixing Fashion: Clothing Consumption And Sustainability - Environmental Audit

Committee". Publications.Parliament.Uk, 2019,

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmenvaud/1952/full-report.html.

"Here Are The Brands Who Have Posted In Support Of Black Lives Matter". Dazed,

2021, https://www.dazeddigital.com/fashion/article/49432/1/black-lives-matter-protests-support-

fashion-marc-jacobs-versace-jacquemus.

"Is There Child Labor In The Fashion Industry?". Dressember, 2021,

https://www.dressember.org/blog/is-there-child-labor-in-the-fashion-industry.

Maiti, Rashmila. "Fast Fashion: Its Detrimental Effect On The Environment". Earth.Org

- Past | Present | Future, 2020, https://earth.org/fast-fashions-detrimental-effect-on-the-

environment/.

McCall, Tyler. “Luxury Fashion Has a Plus Size Problem.” Fashionista, Fashionista, 2

May 2018, fashionista.com/2018/05/luxury-designer-plus-size-clothing-problem.

Rauturier, Solene. "What Is Fast Fashion?". Good On You, 2020,

https://goodonyou.eco/what-is-fast-fashion/. Accessed 9 Jan 2021.

“Responsibility.” HOUSE OF SUNNY, www.houseofsunny.co.uk/responsibility.

Saadan, Andrea. “Why Rihanna's Fenty Fashion Line with LVMH Didn't Work

Out.” Tatler Singapore, 11 Feb. 2021, sg.asiatatler.com/style/rihanna-lvmh-fenty-fashion-line-to-

close-down.

SaveMyCent. “40 Breathtaking Fashion Industry Statistics for 2021.” SaveMyCent, 17

Feb. 2021, savemycent.com/fashion-industry-statistics/.

“SAVAGE X FENTY: Lingerie by Rihanna.” SAVAGE X FENTY | Lingerie by Rihanna,

www.savagex.com/dmg/5EF930?utm_source=google&utm_medium=search_branded&utm_con

tent=none&utm_campaign=US_SXF_Branded_Savage%2Bx%2BFenty&pcode=DSCID_71700

000036261320&plabel=US_SXF_Branded_Savage%2Bx%2BFenty&scode=DSAGID_5870000

5519357242&slabel=fenty-savage-

x&ccode=DSKWID_p50437444962&subchannel=GOOGLE&keyword=savage%2Bx%2Bfenty

&aid=%7BAdId%7D&ds_rl=1268959&gclid=CjwKCAjwg4-

EBhBwEiwAzYAlsm4rlu7t9nmUBT7i0BkNtX4d0vZU-

ToyBKcsBNMxr25rYtehFIaRvhoC_ucQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds.

Sherman, Lauren. "Unravelling The Myth Of ‘Made In America’". The Business Of

Fashion, 2016, https://www.businessoffashion.com/articles/news-analysis/the-myth-of-made-in-

america-ttp-agreement. Accessed 25 Apr 2021.

“Sourcing: Trend Forecasting Agencies.” WeConnectFashion,

www.weconnectfashion.com/businesses/section/trend-forecasting-agencies.

“Sustainability.” Everlane, https://www.everlane.com/sustainability

“Sustainability.” Miaou, www.miaou.com/pages/sustainability.

"Sustainable Practices". Frankie Collective, 2021,

https://frankiecollective.com/pages/sustainable-practices.

“The Impact of Globalization on Fashion.” Style Vanity, 18 Mar. 2021,

stylevanity.com/2020/07/impact-of-globalization-on-fashion.html.

The True Cost. Directed by Andrew Morgan, 2015

“The 25 Most Sustainable and Ethical Luxury Fashion Brands.” Ecocult, 17 Jan. 2021,

ecocult.com/sustainable-luxury-fashion-brands/.

“@PRETTYLITTLETHING.” Women's Fashion Clothing & Apparel | PrettyLittleThing

USA, www.prettylittlething.us/.

2021, https://www.everlane.com/factories. Accessed 25 Apr 2021.

"68% Of American Women Wear A Size 14 Or Above". Racked, 2021,

https://www.racked.com/2018/6/5/17380662/size-numbers-average-woman-plus-market.