The Elephant in the Room of Sustainable Fashion

And What We Can Do About It

Richard Avedon, Dovima with elephants, dress by Dior, Paris 1955

Sustainable fashion is a term that’s thrown around a lot, but can anyone definitively say what that means? A recent Business of Fashion report stated, “with no standardized language or regulated frameworks, deciphering what companies are actually doing is extremely challenging.” The loose definition most subscribe to is: To reduce environmental impact and ensure the wellbeing of workers and animals throughout the supply chain. Most fashion companies are on board, but with little oversight it’s more of a pledge than a requirement for making meaningful change. I’m sure there are some brands that are earnest, but many more do the minimum and market to the maximum their “green” commitment.

What is most at odds with sustainability in fashion is the amount of product that is produced inevitably resulting in overproduction. Vogue Business reports that an estimated 150 billion garments are produced each year and of that 15 to 45 billion are never sold. Overproduction and waste runs rampant in the fashion industry, particularly for cheaper goods. Luxury brands are not immune to this problem. For the purpose of this post I’ll focus on what I’ve witnessed working for designer houses.

Used clothes discarded in the Atacama Desert in Chile | Martin Bernetti/AFP

Fashion Shows

As fashion shows have become more important for brand awareness, the amount of looks shown has also grown, as well as the participation of companies that in the past would not have had a show. The big designers now show an average of 70 looks as opposed to half that years ago. For every outfit on the runway there are plenty of samples that are discarded. It’s part of the process; not every idea is going to work out. The larger the collections the more discards. Each season there are racks of clothing that will never be seen or sold. Some are gifted to the staff, or end up in a sample sale. Many are destroyed. Multiply this by the amount of shows per year and there alone is a mountain of wasted labor and resources. 

The Chanel, Spring 2025 show had 77 looks

Production   

One of the biggest challenges fashion companies face is to accurately project sales. Most companies are forced to do this before they have orders to secure the fabric deliveries. Fabric companies weave the fabric based on the orders received. The mills have a finite amount of machinery and also need time to get the raw materials, thus a long lead time is required. Then projections must be given to the factories to reserve the space to make the garments. This requires a lot of guess work. Who can predict in the fickle world of fashion what will sell (maybe this is an opportunity for AI)? Overproduction is common. When I worked at one NY designer house, there were whispered tales of a warehouse in Queens that once a year some unfortunate sales people would have to go to do inventory of unsold clothes and determine what would be destroyed. Many luxury brands would rather destroy garments than have too much product sold at a discount, which hurts the prestige of the name.

Overproduction of both samples and stock should be a metric for the sustainability rating of a fashion company. This is not easy to track and could only be self reported by the companies, lending uncertainty to the numbers. However, it’s not impossible. All samples are given a number and tracked, while production numbers are well documented and all companies have long since digitized their systems. It’s in the company’s best interest to reduce the amount of waste. Developing samples and producing high end clothes is extremely expensive; waste cuts into the brand’s bottom line. 

I know it’s possible. When I had my own collection, launched on a shoestring budget of 100K (this was the 90’s). I meticulously worked out every piece of the collection on paper, long before fabric was cut. My production was all made in NYC which allowed me to produce only what I sold.

From my first collection, every sample made was produced

Now, luxury brands have at least four full collections a year, often more, leaving little time between collections. The creative team is under enormous pressure to pump out product fast. Without the necessary time to conceptualize, edit ideas and finally develop them. Haste makes waste. 

Like all businesses, the health of a fashion brand is based on growth. This most basic business tenet is at odds with sustainability. This is the true elephant in the room. With multiple, multibillion dollar luxury brands, new start-ups and everything in between, how much growth is feasible in a world of finite resources? The amount of product in the luxury sector alone is staggering. Ultimately it must fall to us, the consumer, to reduce demand. We cannot expect companies to produce less against their own best interests. Only if demand is reduced will companies produce less. I believe if less is produced, the quality and integrity of design will go up. A win for everyone.

Excess has been normalized and even glamorized

I know I sound like a real party pooper, but there is an upside. Clothing is a necessity, like shelter; we need to cover and protect our bodies from the elements. The creativity of us humans has taken this and run with it. Fashion was born and it has made the world a more fascinating place to live in. It’s a form of self expression and damnit, style gets me out of bed in the morning. So I’m not here to diss fashion; I love fashion or as I prefer to say, style. 

Buying more does not amount to better style. It’s time we examine our buying habits and understand what’s driving them. People now are buying more items of clothing than any time in history and keeping them half as long (reference: NRDC). Hours shopping could be better spent trying on looks of what you already have and deciding specifically what would add newness to your existing pieces. A wardrobe built out over time will better define a look that’s unique to you. I like to think of it as collecting. Buy items that you truly love and can see yourself wearing for ten plus years. Spend more for quality and be discerning about the fabric. Synthetics are not biodegradable and they don’t look and feel as good as natural fibers.

Consumers bought 60% more clothing in 2014 than they did in 2000 and kept each piece half as long.

This has always been the underlying theme of my posts. Buy less, buy better and buy with intention. It’s an exciting time to do this with so many options and ways to shop, regardless of where you live. I’m now a total convert to buying from the Real Real. The cashmere sweater I spoke of buying in a recent post came yesterday. The quality and thickness of the cashmere exceeded my expectations. Though it was listed as in good condition, it came with tags on and a tiny pull which was easily fixed. I paid $116, the tag was for $890. Snap! I’m sure I’ll wear it for many years to come.

Let’s get back to a 90’s level of shopping, pre social media influencers and celebrity worship, when models still graced the covers of magazines. Style didn’t suffer!

To my subscribers thanks for joining me on this exploration of personal style and shopping with intention. I promise, less really is more when they are the right pieces best suited to you, you’ll actually feel like you have more to wear. This is nothing new, it’s just going back to the old way of shopping before fast fashion and luxury conglomerates threw things off the rails. For those of you new to What Looks Good, I hope you’ll stick around, there’s much more to come! Your clothes are your friends, choose them wisely and hold on to them!

xxx Jolain  

Dovima with elephants, dress Dior 1955