Kate Fletcher, Lynda Grose, Paul Hawken-Fashion & Sustainability - Design For Change-Laurence King Publishing (2012)

Fa s h i o n & S u s ta i n a b i l i t y
Published in 2012 by
Laurence King Publishing Ltd
361–373 City Road
London
EC1V 1LR
e-mail: enquiries@laurenceking.com
www.laurenceking.com
Copyright © Text 2011

Kate Fletcher & Lynda Grose
All rights reserved. No part of this publication

may be reproduced or transmitted in any form
or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopy, recording, or any
information storage or retrieval system, without
permission in writing from the publisher.
A catalogue record for this book is available

from the British Library
ISBN: 978 1 85669 754 5
Project Editor: Gaynor Sermon

Copy Editor: Kirsty Seymour-Ure
Designed by Jon Allan

Picture research by Katelyn Toth-Fejel
Cover photograph by Sean Michael; courtesy

of London College of Fashion
Printed in China
Authors’ dedications:
For Daniella, Matt and Betty (LG)
For Jude and Cole (KF)
K at e F l e t c h e r & Ly n d a G r o s e
Fa s h i o n & S u s ta i n a b i l i t y
Design for Change
Laurence King Publishing

4
Foreword: To be Clad
Although few doubt that the fate of the environment has become a major
issue, there is no consensus on the nature, seriousness, or timing of the risks
involved. Most of us believe that other people, experts hopefully, will solve
the problems and we can go on living our lives. Indeed, hundreds of
thousands of scientists and researchers are studying the earth and its systems
to determine what effects industrial civilization is having and what the
limits of human activity are with respect to the capacity of the environment.
These studies include the effect of acid rain on forests, lakes and crops, the
build-up of heavy metals in soils and animals, the increase of greenhouse
gases and their effect on climate and incoming radiation, the loss of
biodiversity including the world’s fisheries, and human and animal
tolerance to the thousands of synthetic chemical compounds that are used
every day in manufacturing, products and food. As critically important as
these studies are, the work of transformation will need to commence
everywhere by people engaged in what they do and know best. It will
depend on shared knowledge, networks, and guidebooks that call upon the
innate instinct of human beings to protect and nurture life. This is the
book you hold.
Lynda Grose and Kate Fletcher pose a critical question: Are there
principles and metrics we can agree upon that are key to a world that is
not only sustained, but also actually restored? Second, with these shared
principles, can we create a framework for change that guides business
activities in the fashion industry, a framework that is practical, scientific,
and economic?
There is no product category that elicits more press and scrutiny, or
has more magazines devoted to it than fashion. Our voluntary attire has
intrigued us since the day we became bipeds, as we are the only animal
that changes its skin every day. We clad ourselves to be warm, cool,
beautiful, functional, professional, or alluring. Many a woman and no small
number of men sweat every day about what they will wear and how they
appear, and for good reason. We consciously and unconsciously give great
weight to others’ appearance. Clothing, shoes, handbags and hats are telltale
as to taste, income, class, upbringing, and attitude. Three-sizes-too-big
‘gangsta’ shorts and opening night designer gowns are both chosen
carefully to signal one’s tribe. Hyperawareness of style, cut, fabric, color, and
design is intense and universal, but it has not included the world behind
the rack, the technology behind the cut, the fiber behind the fabric, the
land behind the fiber, or the person on the land. In short, the true impact
of our clothing choices is barely examined or noticed.
In their book, Lynda and Kate have taken a complex industrial
sector and reimagined it as an ecological system, and have done so
employing two lifetimes of applied knowledge and experience. To do so,
they have stepped back from the exigencies of delivering the fall line and
5
have delivered a masterpiece of systems redesign. In all economic sectors,

the initial conversations around sustainability brought forth a sense of
constraint, a foreclosure of material freedom that was to be replaced by
adherence to rigid standards. The idea that sustainability augurs a lesser
world is true in the sense that it calls for less waste, pollution, harm, devastation,
depleted soils, poisoned workers, dying bodies of water, etc. But it does not
portend a monochromatic world of brown smocks and rice. Sustainability
is the forerunner of greater diversity and choice, not less. It offers
meaningful work, greater multiplicity of livelihoods, the reinstitution of
local production, a safer world, and lives worth living. Truly, the worlds of
biomimicry and ecological design presage transformation and innovation
on an order we have not seen since the Industrial Revolution, and it is the
responsibility of those who understand the metes and bounds of natural
systems, both scientifically and economically, to lead the way and elucidate
these possibilities. This is what Lynda and Kate have done so elegantly.
This is not a tome or diktat. It is a carefully researched description of
a system of production being created by designers, textile companies,
manufacturers, and farmers. Call it ethical, sustainable, green, or whatever-
you-wish fashion, it is in the end a call to come home, a description of
how we can come together in a movement to consecrate the habitats and
resources we share and depend on. There are three things we touch upon
every day that greatly impact the world around us: fuel (energy), food, and
fashion. The first two are now wholeheartedly studied and worked upon. It
is now fashion’s turn to inform and dazzle us with what is possible, to
provide the moral imperative to change every aspect of producing and
purchasing our second skin. I ardently believe that humanity knows what
to do once it knows the task at hand. One couldn’t ask for a better
description of what is happening and what needs to be done in order for
fashion to support life on earth.
Paul Hawken
Contents
Foreword by Paul Hawken 4

Preface 8
Part 1: TRANSFORMING FASHION PRODUCTS

Chapter 1: Materials 12
Chapter 2: Processes 33
Chapter 3: Distribution 54
Chapter 4: Consumer care 60
Chapter 5: Disposal 63
Part 2: TRANSFORMING FASHION SYSTEMS

Chapter 6: Adaptability 76
Chapter 7: Optimized lifetimes 85
Chapter 8: Low-impact use 92
Chapter 9: Services and sharing 100
Chapter 10: Local 106
Chapter 11: Biomimicry 114
Chapter 12: Speed 124
Chapter 13: Needs 132
Chapter 14: Engaged 143
Part 3: TRANSFORMING FASHION DESIGN PRACTICE

Chapter 15: Designer as communicator-educator 157
Chapter 16: Designer as facilitator 162
Chapter 17: Designer as activist 168
Chapter 18: Designer as entrepreneur 174
Glossary 183
Endnotes 184
Index 188
Picture credits 191
Acknowledgments 192
8
Preface
This book embodies around 40 years of our combined experience working

with sustainability issues in the fashion sector. In that time we have worked
in the fashion industry, as consultants, in design research, in various
teaching posts at universities and with non-profit organizations. We have
interacted with many groups, from farmers to politicians, artisans to
academics, chemists to fashion business people. Working across these groups
has exposed us to many perspectives on sustainability, fashion and
commerce, all of which have helped form our own philosophies. Fashion
and Sustainability attempts to bring together some of these perspectives and
learning with the aim of igniting action and change.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, one definition of
fashion is that activity that forms, moulds or shapes either material or
immaterial objects.Yet this doesn’t explain all that fashion is. Fashion brings
together creative authorship, technological production and cultural
dissemination associated with dress,1 drawing together designers, producers,
retailers and all of us who wear garments. At its creative best, fashion helps
us to reflect who we are as individuals, while connecting us to wider social
groups, providing a sense both of individuality and of belonging. Fashion is
a connector, linking people across demographics, socio-economic groups
and nationalities; and an attractor, drawing people into a movement for
change.Yet fashion also has a complex relationship with larger systems;
with economics, ecology and society. The repercussions of the sector’s
activities are becoming better understood; and in this book we explore the
potential of leveraging the fashion sector’s relationship with these larger
systems for sustainability advantage.
Our approach to fashion and sustainability throughout this book is
opportunistic. We started writing with David Orr’s question at the forefront
of our minds: ‘What would sustainability have us do?’2 and set out to
explore how fashion might be practised in a world of natural integrity and
human flourishing; and what roles for designers might emerge to help the
sector make that shift. Arguably, sustainability offers the biggest critique the
fashion sector has ever had. It challenges fashion at the level of detail (fibre
and process) and also at the level of the whole (economic models, goals,
rules, values and belief systems). As such, it has the potential to transform
the fashion sector at root, influencing everyone working within it and
everyone who touches fashion and textiles on a daily basis, though too
often the system-transforming nature of sustainability for fashion is ignored
in favour of making more straightforward adjustments to operational details.
This book aims to offer a coherent view of fashion and sustainability
thinking, and as such references some ideas and working examples that
have been presented before. This is deliberate, for it helps show the
trajectory of development in this nascent field, or in some cases the lack of
development or change. The book is divided into three parts, each of
9
which focuses on modifying and renewing the ‘fashion industry system’

sector at different points or places. Each progressively explores and expands
the ideas and innovation opportunities more deeply and broadly than those
that are seen in the industry today. We see each section as part of a
continuum of change offering many opportunities for designer-led
intervention. We favour a multifarious approach to sustainability in fashion,
working both inside and outside the sector and across all parts of the
economy, for there are many points where change can be fostered, and
through collective effort, each change will affect the whole.
Part One begins in a familiar place, exploring the favourable
conditions for transforming fashion products via fibre selection, processing
routes, use behaviours and reuse strategies; and setting out ways in which
the impact of garments can be reduced and their resourcefulness increased.
It often places these actions in context with natural systems, to give a sense
of the complexities at play even as designers make seemingly simple decisions.
Part Two widens this focus further to take in the design of the
structures and the economic and business models that shape the fashion
industry as a whole and starts to define broader opportunities to transform
fashion systems through, for example, adaptability, localism, speed,
biomimicry and co-design. Here the ideas are less familiar, more
challenging and daring, for they often fall outside the current commercial
fashion perspective.
Part Three shifts the focus again, to transforming fashion design practice,
this time exploring a new set of roles in which designers can be cast in a
fashion sector allied with sustainability ideas. Understanding the different
skills necessary for designers to contribute actively to ‘The Great
Transition’3 makes the process of improving the whole an outcome of
individual practice. This part is shorter than the first two, and deliberately
so, for new roles for designers are emerging all the time and we wanted to
hint at their beginnings while allowing space for additional roles to surface.
In the coming years, we imagine all sectors of the economy becoming
rapidly populated by informed and empowered designers, bringing forth
innovations not yet possible even to conceive.
Lynda Grose and Kate Fletcher

San Francisco and London
TRANSFORMING
FASHION
PRODUCTS
The process of sustainability impels the fashion sector to change.To change
towards something less polluting, more efficient and more respectful than
exists today; to change the scale and speed of underpinning structures and to
infuse them with a sense of interconnectedness. Such change can happen in
lots of situations and in surprising and even confounding ways. Sometimes,
for example, the biggest change comes from a series of small, individual
actions rather than from big international declarations – a realization that
brings change within the reach of us all.
1
11
Experience teaches us that most people start to change their practice by

altering those things that they have most control over. For fashion designers
and clothing brands this tends to be their product and supply chain and
very often their choice of materials. To that end, the first part of this book
is dedicated to sustainability-focused innovation in fashion products. It focuses
on opportunities to influence the environmental and social impact of garments
in their design and development across the entire product life cycle – that is,
from fibre to factory and onwards to consumer, point of disposal and potential
reuse. The importance of taking this complete view of all aspects of the cycle
of production and consumption cannot be overstated. It reflects a way of
thinking that sees each part of a system – in our case the fashion industry
system – as linked to every other; and one that recognizes that in order to
move towards sustainability long-term, it is the whole fashion cycle that has to
undergo improvement and not just a few isolated parts. Much of the
terminology we use to describe the complete or life-cycle view of resource
flows associated with creating, using, discarding and reusing fashion
products is borrowed directly from ecology. The language of natural
systems, of cycles, flows, webs and interconnectedness, is a marked contrast
to the language of industrial production normally reserved for
manufacturing and retail sectors such as fashion.Yet it is not only a different
vocabulary that sustainability ideas bring to bear on fashion, but a different
way of thinking about the world in which our businesses operate and in
which we practise design. This way of thinking transcends the binary (i.e.
either/or) perspective that frames production and consumption activities as
separate and consecutive and the linear view of how resources flow
through the supply chain, sometimes described as ‘take, make, waste’. In
stark contrast, sustainability thinking is based on reciprocity and complexity
and a deep understanding of the patterns, networks, balances and cycles at
play in the fashion system.
So as we look to make improvements to fashion products to enhance
their sustainability characteristics, it is vital that we employ both broad and
deep thinking when making decisions.Yet – and this is equally vital – we
also need to focus on the here and now and take pragmatic, practical decisions
about, say, fibre choices, supplier factories and fabric finishes. Arriving at a
point where these two things happen simultaneously requires that we develop
applied knowledge, or practical wisdom. Aristotle described this as a
‘combination of moral will and moral skill’1; that is, a fusion of experience
built up over time, knowledge of the systems in place and a finely tuned ability
to improvise. It requires us to learn when to make the exception to the
rule and how to reinvent a solution to be appropriate to a given situation
and the people at hand.Yet before we work to reshape or revolutionize
solutions, we have to get to grips with what they are already and, indeed,
what they could be. With that aim in mind, Part One of this book is
dedicated to exploring opportunities for improving fashion products
largely in terms of resource efficiency, improved workers’ rights, reduced
chemicals use and reduced pollution. Part One builds a base of knowledge
from which change at other scales and in other places is possible.
12 Pa r t 1 : t r a n s f o r m i n g fa s h i o n p r o d u c t s
Chapter 1: Materials
Ours is a material world, and materials are essential to sustainability ideas;
materials are the tangible synthesis of resource flows, energy use and labour.
They visibly connect us to many of the big issues of our times: climate
change, waste creation and water poverty can all be traced back somehow
to the use and processing of and demand for materials. Besides being
essential to sustainability, materials are critical to fashion: they make fashion’s
symbolic production real and provide us with the physical means with
which to form identity and to act as social beings and as individuals. Not
all fashion expression takes fibre form, but when it does, it is subject to the
same laws of physics and finite natural limits as everything else. Diminishing
oil reserves influence price and availability of petrochemical fibres.
Insufficient supplies of fresh water change agricultural practices. Rising
world temperatures redraw the map of global fibre production (see fig. 1).
To date, exploration of materials has been the starting point for the
lion’s share of sustainability innovation in fashion. There are many reasons
for this, including the obvious – almost iconic – role played by choice of
materials in commonly held views about what makes fashion ‘eco’, ‘green’,
or ‘ethical’. Received wisdom suggests that if we substitute materials we
alleviate impacts: job done. In reality, however, the issues are far more
complex than this suggests. One reason for the dominance of material-led
innovation is its status as a quick fix. Substituting materials leads to benefits
Fig. 1 Sustainabilica:
that are felt fairly rapidly, introduced into products in months and showing a new continent
up in sales figures soon after. Further, material-led sustainability innovation of fibres.
E
W
N L O W - CH E MICA L
A COTTON P T T
E
S B L
A L
Y E
N
O C
S O
Y
O
L
ORGANIC
COTTON
T
W O O L
T
RECYCLED
P
O
AND M
RECYCLABLE E L O W - W AT E R
COTTON
N Y L O N H
C
ED
-F
RAIN
S I L K COTTON
X E
A BL R
L YC
LA
E
F C T
RE
S
AND E
L ED Y
YC L
C
RE O
P SUSTAINABILICA
A NEW CONTINENT OF FIBRES
P L A
c h a p t e r 1 : M at e r i a l s 13
tends to fall within the control of most designers and buyers, slotting
effortlessly into established working practices and the industry status quo
(more of the same, but ‘greener’) without demanding ground-shaking
business reform. Although the benefits of choosing ‘more advanced’ materials
are always going to be limited by the businesses and supply chain of which
they are part, they are of consequence nonetheless, and not just for the
agricultural workers or resource levels that different material choices
directly affect, but because they demonstrate to us that change is possible.
The sustainability impacts of fibres

The sustainability issues influenced by a garment’s material include the full
gamut of impacts: climate change; adverse effects on water and its cycles;
chemical pollution; loss of biodiversity; overuse and misuse of non-
renewable resources; waste production; negative impacts on human health;
and damaging social effects on producer communities. All materials impact
ecological and social systems in some way, but these impacts differ in scale
and type between fibres. The result is a complex set of trade-offs between
particular material characteristics and specific sustainability issues that have
to be negotiated for each fibre type.
In the case of textile materials, most areas of sustainability-led
innovation can be roughly divided into four interconnected areas:
• increased interest in renewable source materials leading, for example,

to developments in rapidly renewable fibres;
• materials with reduced levels of processing ‘inputs’ such as water,
energy and chemicals, resulting in low-energy (sometimes described
as low-carbon) processing techniques for synthetic fibres; and organic
natural fibre cultivation, for example;
• fibres produced under improved working conditions for growers and
processors as exemplified by producer codes of conduct and fully
certified Fairtrade fibres;
• materials produced with reduced waste, spawning interest in, among
others, biodegradable and recyclable fibres from both consumer and
industry waste streams.
The relevance of these areas of innovation is in constant flux, for they are
subject to a continually evolving base of scientific research, which in turn
influences social and ethical concerns. Carbon emissions, for example, have
become a prominent issue over the past decade, linked to recent scientific
revelations on climate change; this has led all industries, including fashion,
to search for ways to respond. Other concerns, such as high levels of
pesticide use, particularly in cotton cultivation, have precipitated expansion
of the market for organically grown fibre (grown without restricted
synthetic pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, growth regulators or defoliants).
This market has also benefited from the widespread public mistrust,
especially in Europe, of genetic modification (GM) technology, which can
now be found in almost 50 per cent of global conventional cotton

production but is prohibited in organic agriculture.2 At the same time,
ethical scrutiny of fibre-production processes has led to the development
of a Fairtrade mark for seed cotton (the raw cotton, before ginning) that
guarantees a minimum fibre price to cotton growers and a further
premium to be used for community development projects. The key to
innovating with materials is to ask questions – of suppliers, of clients, of
buyers – about the appropriateness of a particular fibre for a specific end
use and about whether alternatives exist. This detailed research is made
more powerful if it is accompanied by a willingness to look at and engage
with the big picture – the overall garment life cycle and the fashion system
of which the garment is a part. Connecting a fibre with a garment and its
user is a springboard from which small changes made at the level of
materials can translate into big effects in products and user behaviour.
Renewable fibres
The Earth’s natural resources are limited by the planet’s capability to renew
them. Forests and harvested products are renewable over a number of years
or months, provided that exploitation does not exceed regeneration. Fibre
crops such as cotton and hemp and those based on cellulose from trees,
such as lyocell, have the potential to strike the critical balance between
speed of harvesting and speed of replenishment and to be renewable. In
contrast, for fibres based on minerals and oil, there is a gross imbalance
between rate of extraction and speed of regeneration (which for oil is
around a million years); hence they are described as non-renewable.
Classifying fibres by the renewability of their source material is quick and
easy, and divides those based on plant or animal polymers (cotton, wool,
silk, viscose and PLA, a biodegradable polymer derived from corn starch) and
those based on non-renewable fibres (polyester, nylon and acrylic) – see
fig. 2. Such simple categorizations often reaffirm preconceived notions of
which fibres are ‘good’ in sustainability terms (assumed to be natural and
renewable) and those that are ‘bad’ (manufactured and non-renewable).
However, raw-material renewability alone does not guarantee sustainability,
for a material’s ability to regenerate quickly tells us very little about the
sorts of conditions in which it is created – the energy, water and chemical
inputs it requires in the field or factory; the impact it has on ecosystems and
workers; or its potential for a long, useful life. Bamboo is a case in point.
Recent claims about the sustainability of bamboo fabrics have been based
entirely on the vigorous growth of bamboo grass and its rapid and constant
renewability. But the subsequent processing into viscose of cellulose sourced
from bamboo has high-impact waste emissions to both air and water.3 Truly
enhancing environmental and social quality involves a more complex,
extended view of responsibility, one where rapid regeneration of a fibre’s
source material is pursued not in isolation, but as part of a bigger strategy of
safe and resourceful production in appropriate garments with coherent plans
for eventual reuse.
c h a P t E r 1 : m at E r i a L s 15
FIG. 2 TEXTILE FIBRE TYPES
TEXTILE FIBRES
NATURAL FIBRES MANUFACTURED FIBRES
VEgEtaBLE fiBrEs animaL fiBrEs minEraL fiBrEs

naturaL PoLYmErs sYnthEtic PoLYmErs
VEGETABLE
ANIMAL ORIGIN
ORIGIN
Wool & Hair Asbestos

Vegetable
wool, mohair,
hair
alpaca, Polyaddition
cotton
cashmere Fibre
polyurethane,
Triexta Fibre
elastothane
polytrimethylene
Cellulosic teraphthalate
Bast Fibres Fibres (Ptt)
ﬂax, hemp, Silks viscose
jute, ramie, natural silk, (including Elastodiene
‘natural’ tussah silk bamboo (rubber)
bamboo viscose),
lyocell
Polymer Fibre
Regenerated Polycondensate
polyethylene,
Hard Fibres Protein Fibres Fibre
polypropylene,
e.g. coconut Sucrose-based casein (milk), polyamide,
acrylic
Polyesters soy bean, polyester
polylactic acid crab shell
Alginate
Fibres
acetate
Renewability: a route to extended responsibility

Within this bigger picture of extended responsibility, there are two key
priorities. First, to develop strategies to use and reuse those fibres that are
already in our wardrobes.That is, to find ways to recycle in perpetuity existing
fibres, whether renewable or non-renewable, in order to extend a fibre’s
use for as close to its regeneration time as possible. Second, to pursue
low-impact renewable fibres as a preference to virgin non-renewable ones.
This could, for example, involve specifying fibres that are rapidly renewable
(regenerating within three years) and annually renewable (grown in a single
year). Indeed, a substantial amount of research and development has been
done to bring to market new classes of synthetic fibres that are based at
least partly on renewable polymers. DuPont’s Sorona® (polytrimethylene
teraphthalate, or PTT), for example, was recently designated as a new Jacket in lyocell from
category of polyester fibre (and given a new generic name – triexta) by the H&M’s Garden
Collection, 2010.
US Federal Trade Commission. It combines source material produced by
fermentation of dextrose – up to around 37 per cent by weight – with
traditional petroleum-based feedstock.4 And a biomass alternative to nylon
6 produced by Japanese manufacturer Kuraray is based on castor oil.5
A now well-established low-impact renewable fibre is lyocell – a
regenerated cellulose fibre made from wood pulp. Lyocell differs from
viscose (also a regenerated cellulose fibre made from wood pulp) in that
the raw cellulose is dissolved directly in an amine oxide solvent without
needing to be first converted into an intermediate compound – a
development that substantially reduces pollution levels to water and
air. The cellulose/solvent solution is then extruded to form fibres
and the solvent extracted when the fibres are washed. In this
process, more than 99.5 per cent of the solvent is recovered,
purified and reused6, and since amine oxide is non-toxic, what
little effluent remains is considered to be non-hazardous. Since
lyocell fibres are pure and bright in their raw state, they require
no bleaching prior to dyeing and can be successfully coloured
with low-chemical, -water and -energy techniques. Some branded
forms of lyocell, such as Tencel®, source wood pulp from trees
(normally eucalyptus, which reach full maturity in approximately
seven years) that are grown in fully accredited sustainably managed
forests and some producers are even exploring options to become
organically certified. This would guarantee that cellulose was not
sourced from GM eucalyptus trees, which are currently being
trialled in the US, modified to withstand frost.7
Research and development work is on-going to explore
non-tree-based sources of cellulose, though at present such
options as bamboo cannot be processed in the lyocell
manufacturing chain owing to their subtly different chemistry. In
its low-impact-focused 2010 Garden Collection, Swedish brand
H&M featured pieces in Tencel alongside other materials including
recycled polyester, organic cotton and organic linen.
Biodegradable fibres
Designing garments with the potential to biodegrade harmlessly at the
end of their lives is a proactive and ecosystem-inspired response to the
rising levels of textile and garment waste, overflowing landfill sites and
increasingly proscriptive legislation controlling the ways in which clothes
can be discarded.
Biodegradation processes
The process of biodegradation involves a fibre (or garment) being broken
down into simpler substances by micro-organisms, light, air or water in a
process that must be non-toxic and that occurs over a relatively short
period of time.8 Not all fibres biodegrade. Synthetic fibres, for example, are
from a carbon-based chemical feedstock and are considered non-
biodegradable. They persist and accumulate in the environment because
micro-organisms lack the enzymes necessary to break the fibre down. In
contrast, plant- and animal-based fibres degrade into simpler particles fairly
readily.9 Yet garments are often made from fibre blends, and if synthetic and
natural fibres are combined together (as in a wool–acrylic blend),
decomposition is inhibited. Further, garments comprise more than fibre.
Facings (including fusing adhesive), thread, buttons and zips all break down
at varying speeds, in particular conditions and with different effects. Using
polyester thread and labels or facing with synthetic fusing in a cotton shirt
inevitably slows complete decomposition. Biodegradation is therefore
possible only when it is designed and planned for in advance, so that fibre
blends, non-biodegradable thread and garment trims are avoided at the
outset. This being said, from an energy perspective, electing to compost a
garment rather than to recycle it or, say, incinerate it with energy recovery,
actually wastes the majority of energy embodied in the garment (i.e. the
energy needed to grow and process fibre, manufacture a product, distribute
it, and so on), for it converts a complex, high-energy product (a garment)
directly into a low-energy product (compost) without attempting to
extract higher value first.10
In their book Cradle to Cradle, William McDonough and Michael
Braungart see composting as one of two cycles acceptable in a sustainable
industrial economy.11 They argue that through composting, waste (such as
clothing) from one part of the economy becomes the raw material for
another (production of organic matter for agriculture, for example),
effectively following a natural cycle of growth and decay. The other cycle
described by the authors is an industrial recycling loop, where materials
(termed ‘industrial nutrients’) are perpetually reused. In McDonough and
Braungart’s vision of a sustainable economy, there is no place for products
that fail to fit into either of these categories.
New-generation biodegradable fibres

Increasing interest in waste issues and opportunities for closing natural and
industrial loops has catalysed the development of a new class of polyester
fibres that biodegrade (sometimes called biopolymers), which include Biodegradable T-shirt
fibres made from polylactic acid (PLA). PLA fibres (such as Ingeo™ from from Trigema, Cradle
to Cradle ® certified.
NatureWorks) are made from sugars derived from agricultural crops,
normally corn, and are melt-spun in a similar process to that of conventional
oil-based polyester. These fibres hold promise, but are also associated with a
number of concerns. Corn-based polyesters have restricted processing
temperatures on account of the low melting point of the fibre (170°C/
338°F), which can cause problems in dyeing and pressing, although recent
developments have seen this increase to 210°C (410°F).12 PLA fibres are
renewable and biodegradable, but decompose only in the optimum
conditions provided by an industrial composting facility. This is a rarely
acknowledged critical factor limiting the success of biodegradable synthetic
fibres, for the near-ambient conditions found in home compost heaps do
not provide the required combination of temperature and humidity to
trigger fibre decomposition, and when the right infrastructure of industrial
compost schemes and a collection system to control and channel waste
materials to them is lacking, these fibres can never return to the soil and
close a loop. In fact, evidence suggests that in landfill conditions
biodegradable synthetics produce very high levels of methane, a potent
greenhouse gas.13
Clearly, the issues associated with fibre biodegradability are far from
straightforward. Indeed, an extra layer of complexity has recently been
added by the marketing of some polyester fibres as ‘degradable’ (as distinct
to non- or bio-degradable). For example, DuPont’s degradable polymer
Apexa® (made from polyethylene terephthalate, or PET, resin – like
conventional polyester), apparently decomposes in as little as 45 days, albeit
in rigidly controlled conditions (high temperature, humidity and pH).14
This now makes for three classes of fibre degradability for synthetics:
biodegradable, degradable and non-degradable.
1. Biodegradable synthetic fibres (such as the biopolymers described

above) replace fossil-fuel ingredients with plant-based materials and
meet minimum standards for decomposition.
2. Non-degradable fibres are based on synthetic polymers from oil and do
not break down.
3. Degradable fibres are based on synthetic polymers from oil but do
decompose, though this process typically take several years.
It should be noted that within each class there is variability of speed of

decomposition and composting conditions.
Barriers to the introduction of biodegradable polymers

In addition to the scope for confusion around terminology associated with
synthetic fibre degradability, there are further hurdles to these fibres successfully
delivering on their sustainability promise, in that they increase the potential
for cross-contamination of different waste streams with fibre of different
classes of degradability and can compromise the quality of the final product.
Innovating around a fibre’s biodegradability, therefore, has a number
of significant challenges, including:
1. Design of completely biodegradable garments where all fibres and

component parts compost fully and safely.
2. Development of suitable infrastructure to collect and process
compostable fibres.
3. Better information and labelling for biodegradable fibres, specifying
composting routes and differences from oil-based degradable or
non-degradable synthetics.
Working in the first area of challenge highlighted above, a collaboration

between Cradle to Cradle authors’ consultancy MBDC and German
casual-wear brand Trigema has produced a cotton T-shirt designed to be
fully biodegradable.15 Aiming for rapid and non-toxic biodegradability
impacts through choice of fibre and processing chemicals, the concept also
places restrictions on sewing thread, labels, zips, fastenings and elastomeric
yarn. The piece is created from 100 per cent cotton, chosen specifically to
be free of pesticide and fertilizer residues, is dyed with chemicals that have
passed the Cradle to Cradle® (proprietary) screening and is constructed
with 100 per cent cotton sewing thread. It should be recognized, however,
that while the Trigema T-shirt answers certain questions about fibre reuse,
it leaves many others unanswered, such as: does conventional cotton fibre
already biodegrade safely? Are Cradle to Cradle® recommended processes
reflective of best practice (water and energy use in dyeing, for example)?
And what is the optimum amount of wear before composting? For all this,
it seems that its main contribution is less in the irreproachable application
of Cradle to Cradle® philosophy in practice, and more in the realization
that entirely new types of thinking need to be developed if we are to bring
change on a scale necessitated by sustainability.
People-friendly fibres
Innovating around human health and workers’ issues in order to improve
the sustainability of fibres used in fashion comprises changes, on the one
hand, to specific issues such as health and safety practices, better working
conditions, access to unions and living wages; and, on the other, to larger
questions about business models and domestic and global trading practices
that respect workers and give back to producer communities.
The many issues that influence workers’ lives are brought to light
most frequently in cut-and-sew factories, where garments are assembled.
Attention tends to be focused here because cut and sew is an extremely
labour-intensive part of the supply chain, and the concentration of workers
in one place acts as a flashpoint for labour abuses such as low pay, lack of
contracts, no access to collective bargaining, occurrences of physical or
sexual abuse, and so on.Yet labour issues are also prevalent in other parts of
the fashion supply chain. Farm workers in cotton fields, for example, report
widespread health problems following exposure to acutely toxic pesticides.
The World Health Organization (WHO) suggests that there are
approximately three million pesticide poisonings a year, resulting in 20,000
deaths, largely among the rural poor in developing countries.16 In addition,
the use of child labour in cotton picking is commonplace in countries
such as Uzbekistan, where the government routinely mobilizes children to
ensure that state cotton quotas are met.17 Other pervasive issues for farm
workers include low pay and itinerant work; and for small farm owners,
fluctuating commodity prices, which result in squeezed profits and a
struggle to stay on the land.
The influence of trading and business systems

Other issues that influence labour communities are linked to overarching
rules and values of the system of trade and business. Textile fibres such as
cotton are cash crops and, when sold in the global market, are an important
source of foreign currency for a producer country. In some places, the
political pressure to turn productive land over to cash crops has led to
countries that were once self-sufficient in food terms now having to
import produce, making their population vulnerable to rising global food
prices. One well-known response to these vulnerabilities is Fairtrade, the
purpose of which is ‘to create opportunities for producers and workers
who have been economically disadvantaged or marginalized by the
conventional trading system’.18 Fairtrade farmers receive a minimum price
for their product, covering the cost of production, with a Fairtrade
premium paid in addition for investment in social, environmental or
economic development projects.
Yet the fact that Fairtrade certification exists at all is an indicator of
an economic and trade system that is essentially off-track: a system that is
so large that connections within supply chains have been lost; where a
designer or company no longer knows the maker. In effect, Fairtrade is a
market-based response that has emerged from the need to maintain
industrial production (including fashion production) within safe (people-
friendly) limits; an organizational fix for the deeper problem of eroded
trust in the system. The real challenge for designers is to develop these
relationships ourselves; to know our makers and to understand the scale at
which personal connections work and the point at which they break
down. For when we build an industry around different scales, relationships
and values, then certification may no longer need to be the main focus.
The Fairtrade mark was introduced in 2005 to ensure that farmers
receive a minimum price for seed cotton along with a premium for
community investment. In order to meet certification standards, Fairtrade-
mark cotton farmers are also required to wear protective clothing when
spraying pesticides, to reduce the risk of poisoning.19 Yet the speed at
which Fairtrade has been accepted by the market has in some cases
outpaced the ability of education programmes to induct all farmers in best
practices for growing cotton. Furthermore, ensuring a fair price to the

farmer does not necessarily guarantee the same to the farm worker.
Balancing market demand with the natural time it takes to conduct
training around cultivation and understanding the limits of existing market
mechanisms to deliver on the broad goals of sustainability in cotton are
critical and point to the complexities that designers, companies (and
consumers) must consider.
The European-based high-street clothing retailer C&A has partnered
with the Textile Exchange and the Shell Foundation to establish a new
entity named Cotton Connect, whose aim is to transform cotton supply
chains by addressing sustainability issues from farm to finished garment. As
part of its original organic cotton strategy, C&A joined with selected
agricultural enterprises, asking their suppliers of organic cotton fabric and
products to purchase yarn from spinning mills that were themselves buying
from these selected farm groups. The company communicated information
on its expansion plans and expectations through a series of conferences,
which brought together suppliers, business partners and farmer partners,
working with Textile Exchange to identify key progress indicators, such as
critical food situations, shortage of water, and training in farm practices, as
well as to build awareness of necessary social practices. Cotton Connect
now plans to partner with other brands and retailers in order to enable
scalability, building on the learning of the original partnerships. In this way,
by engaging partners throughout the whole supply chain, market growth
and demand is synchronized with the ability of producers to supply fibre
in a manner that is economically, socially and ecologically viable over the
long term.
Low-chemical-use fibres
For certain fibres – most notably cotton – reducing the amount of
chemicals applied to the fields during cultivation would bring substantial
positive effects to both the lives of workers and the levels of toxicity in soil
and water. Currently, US$2 billion’s worth of chemicals are sprayed on the
world’s cotton crop every year, almost half of which is considered toxic
enough to be classified as hazardous by the World Health Organization.
Cotton is responsible for the use of 16 per cent of global insecticides
– more than any other single crop. In total, almost 1 kilogram (2.2lb) of
hazardous pesticides is applied for every hectare of global cropland under
cotton.20
Options for reducing chemical use in cotton growing

There are many routes to reducing the chemical load in cotton growing.
Perhaps the best known is organic agriculture, which has been popularized
over the last two decades by Katherine Hamnett and scores of others.
However, additional routes include biological IPM (integrated pest
management) systems, where farmers use biological means to control pests
and pathogens; and those including GM (genetically modified) fibres that
use biotechnology to resist pest infestations and make weed management

simpler. The fact that these options exist at all is due to cotton’s commercial
value and its status as the most scrutinized fibre in the world. Cotton has
become a lens through which to examine all other fibres; and its issues
– including high levels of chemicals use – are a microcosm of the debates
played out in practices of fashion and sustainability as a whole.
Cotton is grown in more than a hundred countries, each with its
own unique biological conditions and challenges. Not all of those
challenges are linked to use of chemicals. Water resources are of major
concern in Central Asia, for example, where the Aral Sea has been depleted
to a fraction of its former size because of water from inflowing rivers being
diverted to use for the irrigation of nearby cotton crops. However, in West
Africa, where rainfall is high, it is the use of chemicals rather than diversion
of water that is the sustainability priority (though water contamination
from chemical run-off is still an issue). Such differences have led to the
development of regional cotton strategies that address the needs of a
specific area and acknowledge that very few of the issues we face can be
solved by a one-size-fits-all ‘universal’ solution.Yet in spite of this certain
knowledge, current economic models favour grand universal solutions over
small-scale regional ones because they are easier to roll out. In the case of
cotton, this is exemplified in extremis by the rapid growth of GM
technology in cotton cultivation. Introduced for the first time in 1996, GM
now accounts for almost 50 per cent of all conventional cotton produced
in the world21 and 88 per cent of the US crop.22
Genetically modified cotton

Peer-reviewed scientific papers suggest that the most successful variety of
GM cotton for achieving chemical reduction is Bt.23 Bt cotton has been
engineered so that the genetic code of the plant includes a bacterial toxin
(Bacillus thuringiensis, hence Bt) that is poisonous to pests, meaning that the
crop comes under attack less often and therefore requires fewer pesticide
sprays. Although the biotech industry claims that this saves the farmer
money (owing to less outlay on pesticides and on crop management/
labour costs) and maintains fibre yields and quality,24 there are many
questions of GM technology that remain unanswered – not least regarding
its safety and its effectiveness to reduce chemical use over the long term, as
well as the likelihood of genetic resistance developing in the pests exposed
to Bt toxin, which then allows them to thrive and reinfest the GM crop as
well as crops on neighbouring farms.25 Interestingly, however, questions can
also be raised about the organic approach, specifically in highly efficient
growing regions. Organic yields can be as small as 60 per cent of those of
conventionally grown cotton, and (depending on the usual volume of fibre
harvested per hectare) such reductions can represent significant financial
losses for the farmer, especially if the market does not support the
necessary increase in price. This and other challenges have fostered
scepticism within the cotton industry about the viability of organic
24 Pa r t 1 : t r a n s f o r m i n g fa s h i o n P r o d u c t s
methods as the key tool to reduce chemical use in cultivation. Indeed,

organic cotton currently represents just 0.24 per cent26 to 0.74 per cent27
of global cotton production.
Innovating around reduced levels of chemical use in fibres is almost
impossible without being drawn into the many commercial and
philosophical points of difference between GM on the one hand and
biological IPM and organic methods on the other. Achieving clarity on
these issues is complicated by the lack of independent scientific research
into the effectiveness of the various approaches: currently, most published
research in this area is funded by the biotech industry into its own GM
products. The sheer volume of papers that exist about GM fibres tends to
give an impression of biotechnology as ‘scientific’ and ‘verifiable’; by
contrast, the lack of peer-reviewed studies into organic and other similar
FIG. 3 EXPANDED OPTIONS FOR ‘SUSTAINABLE’ COTTON
‘ s u s ta i n a B L E ’
human needs, other species’ needs, maintaining ecosphere
Wat E r + E n E r g Y + L a B o u r
6 5 4 3 2 1
organic
transitionaL
BioLogicaL iPm (non-gm)
i n t E g r at E d P E s t m anagEmEnt
* g E n E t i c a L LY m o d i f i E d
( GM)
h i g h V o L umE LoW VoLumE

+ t o X i c i tY ‘conVEntionaL’ + toXicitY
Expanded options for ‘sustainability’ in cotton.28 organic production is one tool that provides a
stepping stone to more sustainable practices in cotton growing. additional biological farming systems
broaden ecological goals through scalability. *gm Bt cotton may provide a stepping stone to
biological systems29 in areas that are so degraded that chemical dependence is too high to transition
immediately to organic, but the threat of evolving genetic resistance in insects is widely
acknowledged.30
methods can make them appear ‘ideological’ and

‘unproven’.Yet this is a false deduction; both camps
bring with them a set of values through which
scientific data is interpreted. For proponents of GM,
these values are based on a faith in technology to solve
problems. For representatives of the organic movement,
faith is instead placed in nature-based, co-operative
solutions. The former group tends to work within the
status quo, accepting the conditions that created the
problem (in the case of cotton, existing agricultural
practices) and acting to reduce its adverse effects (by, for
example, developing a new, more pest-resistant and
herbicide-resistant seed). The latter group, in contrast,
attempts to transform the problem system (industrial
agricultural practices), so that the problem itself
disappears. Thus the seemingly simple act of selecting
one fibre over another is in fact intimately connected
to global questions and personal values; to whether we
prefer deep, slow change over fast-acting process
improvements; and to which sorts of interventions and
scales we think are necessary in order to make
sustainability happen.
Non-genetically modified cotton

The Home Grown T-shirt by Prana was the first item to be made using Home Grown T-shirt by
California-grown Cleaner Cotton™, fibre grown with significantly reduced Prana (2006), the first
garment made in
toxicity. Cleaner Cotton has similar goals and rules to those of organic agriculture Cleaner Cotton™.
(see fig. 3): both approaches aim to reduce chemical use in the field, require
seed to be non-GM, and make use of biological farming systems, such as the
release of beneficial insects to control pest populations and trap crops to draw
pests out of the field. Cleaner Cotton methods disallow the 13 most toxic
pesticides used on conventional cotton. If, when faced with an economically
damaging pest infestation, farmers use the more toxic materials on the ‘do
not use’ list, the fibre is no longer eligible as Cleaner Cotton and goes into
the conventional market. This ‘safety net’, combined with the fact that the
system maintains fibre yields, makes Cleaner Cotton scalable at the farm
level. The programme has reduced chemical use on Californian cotton by
several thousand kilograms and provides a viable alternative to GM crops.
Low-energy-use fibres
Energy use is a key issue for fibre choice in fashion. It is, of course, closely
tied in with prominent global issues such as climate change and a host of
contributing factors including carbon emissions and the use of
petrochemicals. The burning of fossil fuels to generate energy is ‘carbon
positive’, in that it moves carbon stored deep in the Earth (in the form of
coal, natural gas or oil) and releases it into the air as carbon dioxide, a
26 Pa r t 1 : t r a n s f o r m i n g fa s h i o n P r o d u c t s
principal greenhouse gas. Using less fossil-fuel energy in fibre production Opposite: magenta
and so reducing the amount of carbon dioxide produced is both dress by Bird textiles,
australia’s first carbon-
environmentally and economically compelling as we experience such neutral business.
phenomena as peak oil. The term ‘peak oil’ reflects the fact that any finite
resource will at some point reach a level of optimum output (the ‘peak’),31
after which the oil, in this case, becomes more risky, difficult and expensive
to extract as oil fields age and become less productive. The twin challenges
of climate change and the rising price of oil, which reached a record high
of US $147 a barrel in 2008, have converged to drive energy-saving
practices in fibre production, to increase interest in alternative energy
sources such as wind and solar, and also to bring a new focus on low-
energy, and in some cases, low-carbon fibres.
A much overlooked though significant low-energy route to fibre
production is recycling. Estimates suggest that even the most energy-
intensive forms of synthetic fibre recycling, where polyester or nylon is taken
back to polymer and then re-extruded into a new product, is around 80 per
cent less energy-intensive than the manufacturing of virgin fibre.32 For those
fibres that are recycled using traditional mechanical methods – shredding fabric
and then re-spinning fibres into a new yarn – the savings are also substantial.
If virgin fibres are selected based on the energy profile of their
production alone, natural fibres are generally considered lower in energy
consumption than regenerated ones such as viscose or lyocell, which in
turn are less energy-intensive than synthetics such as polyester and acrylic
(see fig. 4).33
Carbon footprinting
Recent popular interest in carbon dioxide as a key indicator of
sustainability activity in fashion has been catalysed by the analysis of a
standard garment’s carbon footprint. The UK-based organization the
Carbon Trust measured the carbon footprint of a large unisex cotton
T-shirt as 6.5 kilos.35 Corporate-wear brand Cotton Roots, working in a
pilot project with the Carbon Trust, claims to have reduced this value by
FIG. 4 ENERGY CONSUMPTION OF FIBRES 34 Energy (mJ/kg)
cotton rain-fed
cotton irrigated
flax
hemp
Wool
Lyocell
Viscose
acrylic
nylon
PEt
PLa
Ptt
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
90 per cent, to approximately 0.7 kilos per T-shirt, by switching to organic

farming methods in developing countries (which make use of hand-picking
rather than energy-intensive machine-picking and avoid petroleum-based
pesticide sprays), by utilizing wind- and solar-powered manufacturing and
by distributing through carbon-neutral warehouses in London.36 While
these savings represent an impressive factor 10 reduction in carbon dioxide,
it is vital that we do not confuse measures of low carbon dioxide specifically,
or reduced energy use more generally, as proxies for good sustainability
practice in fashion, for they reflect impacts as measured along a single scale.
The challenge is to use innovation around energy as a gateway to a greater
understanding of interconnected sustainability issues and influences.
Bird Textiles, Australia’s first carbon-neutral business, started out
producing its fashion and homewares lines ‘off the grid’ using renewable
sources of energy.37 This meant hand-printing fabric and having seamstresses
work on foot-powered treadle machines or those powered by electricity
from photovoltaic cells and wind turbines. With the advent of publicly
available ‘green’ electricity through the conventional power grid, Bird Textiles’
network broadened to include suppliers buying green power from utility
companies as well as those with autonomous energy supplies. The result is a
fusion of low- and high-tech responses to energy use and carbon emissions.
Low-water-use fibres
Water moves in a continuous cycle, above and below ground, but its
volume is fixed. The demand for this finite resource is growing and as
industrialization spreads and populations expand, pressure on limited water
resources increases. According to figures produced by UNEP, over the next
20 years humans will use 40 per cent more water than they do now, if
current trends continue.38 And yet even as demand for water is increasing,
we face the prospect of reduced supply of clean water, thanks to growing
levels of pollution. The result is that water, or lack of it, will soon become
the headline geopolitical issue around the world. According to both
UNESCO and the World Economic Forum, we are facing ‘water
bankruptcy’, which will likely have even greater global effects than the
financial meltdown now destabilizing the global economy.39
Water: a major issue for fashion

Water is a key issue for fibres and therefore for fashion. However, levels of
water use vary widely from fibre to fibre and from one growing region to
the next. For example, globally, 50 per cent of the land under cotton
cultivation is artificially irrigated, with a wide-ranging set of practices and
efficiencies. In Israel, where water is scarce and expensive, highly efficient
irrigation equipment is used to deliver water to the plant at specific times
and in controlled quantities as needed; whereas in Uzbekistan, where the
cost of water is low, over-irrigation is common.40 The remaining 50 per
cent of the global cotton crop is rain-fed, and fluctuating rain cycles result
in variable fibre yield and quality. Since the world’s water circulates in a
c h a P t E r 1 : m at E r i a L s 29
FIG. 5 WATER USE IN FIBRES42 Water (l/kg)
cotton rain-fed
cotton irrigated
flax
hemp
Wool
Lyocell
Viscose
acrylic
nylon
PEt
PLa
Ptt
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
closed system (known as the hydrological cycle), its use on cotton affects
access to water for other purposes (such as drinking, food-crop irrigation
or industry), and contamination of water from fertilizers and pesticides
makes it unfit for other uses. Cotton is not the only thirsty textile fibre; the
production of viscose, for example, draws on approximately 500 litres per
kilogram of fibre produced.41 In contrast, many synthetic fibres (most
notably polyester) use fairly low levels of water in their production.
Likewise, some other natural fibres grown in areas of high rainfall, such as
wool, hemp and linen (flax), require no artificial irrigation (see fig. 5).
Innovating to reduce water use in fibres is an inescapable part of nano Puff Pullover by
fashion’s future. Water scarcity will drive up the cost of water resources, Patagonia, with a
water footprint of 69
making safeguarding water as much of an economic imperative as a litres from raw material
sustainability one. Commentators predict a similar scenario for water as has to distribution.
been described for oil (sometimes dubbed ‘peak water’), namely that from
now on water will become increasingly difficult and
more expensive to access. The implications of peak
water for a sector like fashion, whose products rely
on a cheap and plentiful supply of water to grow,
produce, process and then launder them, cannot
be exaggerated. As UNESCO states, ‘conflicts
about water can occur at all scales’. For
fashion, these scales are both micro and
macro and reflect individual decisions about
fibre cultivation, processing and laundry
routes that cumulatively conflict with the
water needs of producer countries and
continents.
US outdoor sportswear brand and
sustainability pioneer Patagonia has acted
on the broader business trend towards
greater transparency of supply chains by
publishing online the ‘footprint’,
including the water footprint, of a small
but growing number of its products from design to delivery.43 This action
both exposes the problems that exist in manufacturing chains and gives
Patagonia the opportunity to demonstrate its response to them.
Measurements of water consumption vary substantially between garments.
For example, to get a cotton/Tencel-blend women’s top to the point of
purchase takes 379 litres of water, compared to 206 litres for a men’s nylon
waterproof jacket and 135 litres for a polyester fleece top.Yet there seems
to be a trade-off here, as products that draw upon relatively small amounts
of water in production are often energy-intensive, reinforcing the need
once more for these issues to be seen in the round. Interestingly, of all the
garments that Patagonia has assessed on water use, the ones that we are
likely to own the most number of – cotton or cotton-blend T-shirts – are
the most water-consumptive. This illuminates both our past attitude when
resource intensiveness of a particular fibre or garment was no barrier to its
production, and also the scale of the challenges we face as we look to
sustainability and the future: that our most ubiquitous garments and widely
consumed items are also the most thirsty.
Predator-friendly fibres
‘‌In wilderness, ecology in action can be seen in a naked and overwhelming way.
Many people have ecstatic experiences in wilderness.They come away
changed… Wildness can inspire us to live from nature’s bounty without
destroying it.’
‌Ernest Callenbach44
While such farming practices as organic have been highly successful in

helping designers to connect fabric choices and purchases to land
cultivation and rural economies, they have done little to explain the
relationship of our practice to the larger landscape around the farm – to
wild and uncultivated areas. As Fred Kirschenmann notes in the
introduction to Dan Imhoff ’s book Farming With the Wild, organic farms
remain isolated ‘pristine areas of production’.45 But land-use practices by
humans disrupt ecology far beyond the farm gates. Land that is segmented
to facilitate ownership by humans for residential, industrial or agricultural
use fragments the migration paths and territories of other species. This is
especially critical in the case of large carnivores, such as wolves, mountain
lions and bears, which need ‘freedom to roam’, to hunt and to breed.46
Although the link between large predators and our design choices
may seem tenuous, predators directly relate to one of our best-known
fibres, wool. The US’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS)
reports that up to a quarter of a million lambs and sheep fall victim to
predators each year.47 And just as conventional cotton farmers defend their
fibre crop by using chemicals on insect infestations in their fields without
considering the wider ecology that causes the imbalance to begin with, so
sheep ranchers defend their stock from predator species without necessarily
‘Guard llama’ on
considering the impact elsewhere. Indeed, with an increasing human Thirteen Mile Farm,
population and already declining resources, it is inevitable that competition Montana, used to
for land between humans and other species, including large predators, will protect sheep from
large predators.
intensify. Reports already indicate, for example, that 80,000 coyotes are
killed by Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services per year, at a cost of US
$10 million.48
In recent years, environmentalists and a federal recovery effort have
helped re-establish wolves in such areas as the Northern Rockies. While it
is widely recognized that re-establishing predator species in wild areas
benefits biodiversity in the regional ecology, including holding prey
populations in check, ranchers’ flock losses to predators are reportedly high,
and with ranch finances already barely manageable, a contentious battle
between wolf advocates and ranchers is inevitable. On the one hand, flock
losses to predators clearly reduce income for commercial sheep operations,
and it is understandable that ranchers act to protect their already tenuous
finances.Yet the circumstances that contribute to the economic pressures
on sheep ranchers are complex, and include low commodity prices for
fibre, market competition from strong wool-producing nations such as
New Zealand and Australia, and competition from synthetic fibres such as
polyester as well as other meat industries including pork, beef and poultry.
Integrating fibre-growing areas with surrounding ecosystems

Recognizing these and other complexities, a nationwide movement has
formed in the US that aims to integrate farming and ranching more
thoroughly into surrounding ecosystems. This effort involves co-operative
range management, which links cultivated land to national parks and
privately held areas to create wildlife corridors, thereby expanding habitats
for larger predators and better ensuring their connectivity and genetic
diversity. It also involves the planting of habitats to invite wildlife on to the
ranch and better integrate cultivated fields with surrounding wild land.
Parallel to these efforts, ‘predator-friendly’ ranchers are working to
maintain economic viability without killing predators. Instead, ranchers
employ deterrents such as electric fences or conventional fencing in good
condition, keeping such animals as burros (donkeys) and guard dogs present
on the ranch, and even the selection of ‘savvier’ livestock! Complementing
these ranch efforts, government incentives to offset financial losses are also
being negotiated. And on the marketing side, Predator Friendly®
certification is now available to generate a small premium, which offsets
the economic risks of farming with sensitivity to the wild. Combined
efforts such as these are helping ranchers and wildlife to co-exist.
Thirteen Mile Farm is a 65-hectare piece of land located in Montana
that was placed in a permanent conservation easement by owners Becky
Weed and Mike Tyler. This arrangement ensures that the land is protected
from development in perpetuity. Two adjoining properties are similarly
protected; together they form a 160-hectare space that links into and
expands a wildlife corridor.49 Predators around the ranch are controlled
with guard dogs, guard llamas and electric fences. Sheep losses are higher
than they would be if the predators were killed, but the couple devised
some innovative routes to offset this economic challenge. Rather than
selling their lambs at auction, they sell organic grass-finished lamb direct to
consumers. And rather than selling their wool fibre into the commodity
pool, the couple helped establish a niche market for predator-friendly wool
fibre. They also invested in a small wool spinnery and identified a network
of local women adept on domestic knitting machines, and so are now able
to provide predator-friendly yarn and finished sweaters, thereby adding
further value to their fibre. These combined efforts enable them to piece
together a decent farm income that so far works both for the ranchers and
the wildlife alike. Since they first began ranching, Weed and Tyler have
expanded from having just 12 ewes to a flock of 250 and have doubled
their land area.
c h a p t e r 2 : P ROC E SS E S 33
Chapter 2: Processes
‘‌The longer the chain of our technologies, the more distant we are from nature
and her capacities and our effect on them.’
‌David Brower
Processing is an essential part of converting raw fibre to fabric to fashion

garment, and a key contributor in sustainability impact. Many fashion
designers find the technical complexity of textile processing bewildering
and struggle to understand what goes into achieving the look or hand of a
given fabric. Sustainability issues have added an extra layer of complexity to
this situation. As designers, we simply specify the feel we want or respond
to the latest developments that a mill offers and leave the technical decisions
– and their implications for watercourses, air quality, soil toxicity and
human and ecosystem health – in the hands of textile scientists. Perhaps
this is because the technical aspects of fibre and fabric processing intimidate
designers or because we simply feel less qualified than the ‘experts’. This
‘intellectual timidity’50 widens the knowledge gap and hinders our taking
responsibility, further marginalizing the role of designers in developing
solutions. Here environmental legislation remains someone else’s problem.
And government intervention and industry standards – rather than design-
led innovation – become the primary tools for taking forward ecological
advances.Yet standards and legislation tend to be punitive and create a
negative feedback loop to industry, resulting in a restricted and narrow
approach to sustainability. Design, by contrast, is an affirmative approach
that can create positive feedback loops, and because of its position at the
front end of the manufacturing chain can dramatically influence subsequent
processing steps and even prevent impact from occurring in the first place.
Working closer to nature

Although a nature-based approach to fashion and sustainability is most
commonly expressed through a clichéd ‘natural’ look in unbleached and
undyed fabrics made from natural materials, ironically it is precisely by
designers becoming more engaged in the industrial and technical processes
that we can actually move closer to nature. Direct experience raises our
awareness in an immediate and visceral way and starts to build a reference
or framework for assessing future decisions. Furthermore, when designers
are actively involved in the technical aspects of processing, it prompts
further questioning of technicians, leading to wider disclosure of ecological
impacts. The more clearly our questions and goals are articulated, the more
serious the response and the more quickly they are met; and since
designers are the market for the industry, we can be the catalysts for
completely new developments. It is this creative and scientific symbiosis
that ignites the capacity to define new landscapes for action in sustainable
textile processing. Together the technical and creative functions start to
transform the supply chain from one of segmented specialists operating with
negative feedback loops and restrictive action, to one of collaboration,

positive feedback and expansive opportunities. In concert, the technician
(or scientist) and designer develop approaches to processes that bring us
closer into balance with the natural systems on which our industry depends.
Broad principles to support best practice

The specific sustainability impacts of textile and garment processing vary
from one fibre type to the next and depend on fabric specifications and
garment design.Yet within the inevitable complexity of processing impacts,
there are some broad principles that can be applied to guide design decisions
to support best practice. The general intention from an environmental
perspective is to specify processing routes that cumulatively use fewest
resources and cause least impact. Sometimes this may mean electing not to
have a certain finish so as to completely prevent impacts from a particular
processing step. However, not all processes or chemical treatments can be
avoided; indeed, many are essential to the production of useful and
wearable fashion products. The broad principles for best practice are:
GOAL ACTION
• Make wise use of natural resources. • Minimize the number of processing steps.
• Reduce the risk of pollution. • M

inimize the number and the toxicity of chemicals
used and eliminate harmful processes.
• Minimize energy consumption. • Combine processes, or use low-temperature processes.
• Minimize water consumption. • Eliminate water-intensive processes.
• Reduce load on landfill. • Minimize waste generation at all stages.
In the following pages, we examine a select number of processing

and manufacturing steps, setting out best practice and exploring design
opportunities to enhance the sustainability profile of garments. Those
included were chosen to reflect the scope and the challenging nature of
environmental and social issues for the sector, rather than to offer a
comprehensive review of impacts associated with processing. They frame
the resource-, waste-, pollution- and worker-related challenges of fibre,
fabric and garment processing in the context of a specific part of the
manufacturing chain in order to generate insight into innovative practices
in these areas and beyond. They include: issues arising from bleaching and
dyeing fabric, both of which are archetypal high-impact processes that
consume copious amounts of water, energy and chemicals and that are
often the focus of environmental scrutiny; the waste that arises from
pattern-cutting; the intricate challenges of labour issues and workers’ rights
in garment assembly; and the impact of garment hardware and trims; with
associated design opportunities offered for each.
Low-chemical bleaching
‘Unbleached and undyed’ was one of the mantras in ‘eco’ fashion in the
early nineties, influenced by the well-publicized campaigns against chlorine
bleach in paper production. Chlorine-based compounds, such as sodium

hypochlorite and sodium chlorite, can form halogenated organic compounds
in waste water, which have been shown to bioaccumulate in humans and
wildlife, are linked to abnormalities in physiological development and are
suspected human carcinogens.51 In the fashion industry, bleach is employed
in the prepare-for-dye stage of textile processing and is critical to achieving
a uniform white-colour fabric that can then be dyed evenly and with high
repeatability. Bleaching is therefore crucial for achieving sustainability goals,
for it ensures right-first-time dyeing and avoids highly resource-intensive
and potentially polluting reworks – stripping, shade adjustments, and so on.
Bleaching also influences the long-term durability of a garment: an item
that is poorly dyed as a result of inadequate pre-treatment may fade
through washing and be discarded more quickly. The ‘cost’ of bleaching as
measured in resource-consumption and pollution-generation terms clearly
has to be balanced against visual desirability and long-term durability in
the hands of the wearer.
Alternatives to chlorine
Chlorine has not been commonly used in textile processing for about 20
years,52 and most textile facilities in the EU and the US now use hydrogen
peroxide to prepare fabrics for dyeing. Hydrogen peroxide is a readily
available and economically feasible bleaching agent, but it is active only at
temperatures above 60°C (140°F), which results in a relatively energy-
intensive bleaching process. Moreover, chemical additives, including
sequestering agents, are required to stabilize hydrogen peroxide and
optimize the bleaching process; these are highly polluting if left untreated
in the discharge water. Ozone is a newer bleaching option that can be used
without using any water at all; in highly processed products such as denim
finishing it is claimed that the technology can save up to 80 per cent of the
chemicals normally used.53 Ozone is, however, relatively expensive and the
equipment is not yet widely available. Although alternative bleaching
processes may be more expensive, the reduced cost of cleaning waste water
often offsets up-front costs. Further savings are made by combining several
processing stages into one, thereby eliminating in-between washes, energy
and water use.54
Enzyme technology
With the evident balances and trade-offs between available bleaches and
bleaching systems, renewed attention has been given to enzyme technology.
Enzymes are proteins that are able to catalyse specific reactions, and have
been used for some time in the textile industry to aid in a number of
textile processing stages, including defibrillation or ‘biopolishing’ fabric
surfaces, as well as in waste-water clean-up. Enzymes can be used in tiny
quantities and act in a very narrow range of conditions, and are therefore
relatively easy to control by changing pH or heat or both. In the bleaching
process, peroxidase enzymes can be used to kill the action of peroxide
36
Shirt and trousers by

The North Face in
fabric processed in a
Bluesign-accredited
factory.
bleaching and have a much lower pollution index than typical reducing
agents. However, the Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS) prohibits
the use of enzyme treatments because they are derived by genetic
modification. The long-term consequences of GM both in processing
technologies such as enzymes and in such crops as cotton must undergo
further public scrutiny before they are fully accepted.
The contribution these new processes bring to sustainability extends
beyond substituting one chemical for another less benign alternative. They
start to bridge segments of the supply chain, requiring co-operation between
each stage of textile development and creating fertile ground for additional
‘collective intelligence’. Designers need not remain in isolation from this
new way of working, for our knowledge of colour theory can help adjust
shades and colour combinations to be desirable against the softer white
hydrogen peroxide base. Our understanding of what appeals to the consumer
can help target more expensive ozone bleaching for products with greater
visual value and price elasticity at retail. And perhaps we could even help
speed wider industry integration of new technologies like ozone by
collectively promoting a new ‘high-tech white’ T-shirt, thereby reinvigorating
the ubiquitous white ‘T’ – this time into an icon for sustainability.
Processing standards and accreditation

Over the past few decades, a number of ‘eco textile’ standards have been
developed. These standards ensure a certain level of environmental and social
quality and are valuable in that they identify sincere efforts towards sustainability.
When set at a high level, they can also prompt innovation and new technological
developments. However, standards can just as easily be used to drive ‘exclusivity’
and effectively block market access. When used in this way, niche industries
result and the cumulative ecological gains that could be made through
scalability are lost. The ‘sweet spot’ where integrity and innovation come
into balance with pragmatism and scalability is an on-going point of active
debate, and demands trust across the industry to maintain both consistency
and progressive improvement. In recent years third-party assessors have
emerged to help traverse this terrain, some of which analyse and assess
processing facilities in the supply chain supporting better practices.
One such third-party assessor, Bluesign,55 has developed a standard
built around five principles: resource productivity, consumer safety, air

emissions, water emissions, and occupational health and safety. The standard
is designed to provide solutions concerning environment, health and safety
(EHS) issues along the entire textile manufacturing chain using a solid
methodology for documenting a facility’s current activities and measuring
progress. Through an established screening process, the organization looks
at all the chemical raw materials that are in a textile mill, rating them into
three categories. Raw materials passing the screening are labelled blue and
are good to use. Raw materials that have moderate impacts and are
considered less than the ‘best available technology’ are labelled grey. Those
that cannot be handled cleanly are labelled black; their use is forbidden under
the Bluesign standard.56 In bleaching, chlorine is disallowed, hydrogen
peroxide is allowed, enzymes are considered best available technology and
are allowed, and since ozone equipment is not readily available in the
industry, ozone bleaching is not a requirement of the Bluesign standard.
Yet even when a third-party assessor takes the load of technical
decisions in processing, relationships are still key, for, as Bluesign
acknowledges, it is the continued dialogue between supplier and retailer
that ensures that the changes implemented remain in place long-term.57
Moreover, designers tend to be proactive and concerned about ‘what ought
to be’ and are therefore valuable in the continual improvement of best
practices. Bluesign’s standard and methodology have recently been opened
up to the industry at large, allowing for widespread use and greater
cumulative gains, as well as allowing space for critique and for open debate
on how to ensure the standard is progressive over the long term. This
approach builds a web of positive competition and co-operation across all
fashion industry sectors. Many brands have signed up to work with
Bluesign-accredited processes, The North Face being one of them – their
products are made from fabric developed in a Bluesign-certified facility.
Low-chemical dyeing
Colour is one of the single most important factors in the commercial
appeal of apparel products and is a primary focus of short-term fashion
trends as it is the quickest, cheapest and surest way to change appearance,
attract a customer and ensure an additional purchase.
There are many factors that influence the sustainability profile of a
particular colour choice.These include: fibre type, dyestuff, auxiliary chemicals,
method of application, type and age of machinery, and hardness of water,
among many others. Ultimately, though, it is nature that determines whether
or not our colour choices are ‘sustainable’, for nature both supports the
resources going into the mill, and carries and processes the effluent coming
out. Understanding the tolerances and limits of natural water cycles and
their relationship to industrial applications such as dyeing helps build a
touchstone for our decisions on colouring cloth. Globally the textile industry
is estimated to use 378 billion litres of water each year58, and while surface
water may be renewed by rainfall, underground aquifers take hundreds or
thousands of years to refill once they have been drained; if water is pumped
from ‘ossified’ aquifers, which have solid tops, the water is in fact non-
renewable.59 Both redirecting water for textile industry use and contaminating
local water bodies with processing waste deny fresh water to other species
in the ‘watershed’ where the dye house is situated, threatening diversity and
the ecological robustness of the region overall. Following, then, is a series
of contextual lenses through which to observe sustainability and dyeing.
Ecology of a dye bath

Over the past decade, no class of dyestuff or single colour has emerged to
be singled out as having a greater or lesser impact on the environment
– with the exception of turquoise, bright blues and kelly greens, which
require copper, a heavy metal that is associated with the production of
toxic effluent, to achieve commercial colour-fastness; and darker colours in
general, which have lower exhaustion rates.60 Exhaustion is important
because the higher the fixation rate, the less dye remaining in the dye bath,
the lower the level of dye chemicals emitted to waste water and the lower
the risk of pollution.
In conventional dye systems, reactive dyes, which are the most common
dye for cellulosic fibres such as cotton, have the lowest fixation rates:
approximately 65 per cent, with the remaining 35 per cent of dye flushed away
after dyeing. New developments in dyeing techniques and dye chemistry have
reduced these inefficiencies; bi-functional reactive dyestuffs achieve as high
as 95 per cent fixation to the cloth. Besides the use of dye chemicals in the
dye bath, auxiliary chemicals are also needed to facilitate the dyeing process,
which can further increase the risk of pollution.When dyeing cellulosic fibres
with reactive dyes, for example, salt is used in large quantities to achieve greater
exhaustion. And for polyester fibres dyed with disperse dyes, auxiliaries include
dispersing agents and carriers. Low-salt reactive dyes are now readily available for
use on cotton; and some dye systems for polyester, such as supercritical carbon
dioxide, eliminate the need for carriers, though they require much higher
temperatures, increasing energy use overall, and are not yet widely available.61
Since chemical dyes and additives are used in solution, their volume
is calculated in relation to the volume of water used and the mass of
material to be dyed. The ratio of water volume to material is known as the
liquor ratio and can vary widely depending on the dyeing equipment used.
Some equipment requires as high as a 20:1 liquor ratio, though the
industry standard is 12:1 and the most water-efficient systems require as
little as 5:1 liquor ratio.62 The use of low liquor ratio techniques reduces
both the volume of water diverted from nature and the volume of
potentially toxic waste dispelled into streams after dyeing. A low liquor
ratio also minimizes the energy use required for heating the dye bath (since
there is less water volume), and associated carbon dioxide emissions that
contribute to climate change and further water scarcity are also reduced.
Some dye systems, such as cold pad-batch, operate at room temperature
and eliminate the need for heating altogether.
Ecology of a dye house

Although careful choice of dyestuffs, auxiliary chemicals and low liquor
ratios helps to slow the flow of inputs and outputs in dyeing, still the dye
process itself remains a linear system: resources enter, are processed and are
dispelled. In contrast, dye bath reuse and reconstitution (where chemicals
are added to refresh the bath at the end of the dye cycle) enable the dye
bath to be cycled as many as six times before contaminants in the process
solution interfere with the quality of the dyeing operation.63 In most
facilities, wet-finishing is complex, with a variety of shades, dye classes and
fibre types being handled at any one time, so opportunities for reusing the
dye bath may be limited. Still, for those mills using repeat colours, such as
in denims, chinos, hosiery or uniforms, dye-water reuse is a relatively
simple procedure, since incompatible dyes and chemicals are not mixed in
the recycle system. Research is now under way to develop ‘universal’ dyes
that can be used over a variety of fibre types, thereby simplifying wet-
processing and accommodating dye bath reuse across a range of facilities. In
the meantime, seeking out these dye bath reuse systems and using them for
large-volume, repeat fabrics and colours or designing with tonal colour
palettes can help influence the expansion of this technology in the industry.
Ecology of the region (or watershed)

Shifting focus from dyes to dye baths to dye houses greatly expands the
design perspective on the sustainability of colouring cloth. But the fact that
the process of dyeing textiles is both supported and limited by the natural
world is perhaps most clearly seen in the environment where the dye
house is situated. For this is where industrial systems and natural systems
interface directly. Region-wide zero-waste textile systems have the greatest
potential for harmonizing industrial dyeing with ecosystems and can
reportedly reduce water drawdown by as much as 80 to 90 per cent.64
Whereas individual facilities may use standard water-cleaning treatments
such as flocculation and biological digestion, region-wide collaborations
can augment these actions with advanced systems such as ultrafiltration,
nanofiltration and reverse osmosis (which removes salt from the waste
water), with the financial burden often shared between private entities and
the local municipality. In this way, treated water is recycled back into the
mill in a closed cycle with zero external contamination. Although this type
of complex treatment is beyond the typical scope of influence of fashion
designers, being aware of technological developments and percolating future
marketing ideas around their use can have an active and positive influence.
‘Low-impact dyes’, then, present designers with a Rubik’s cube of
considerations. Some of these complex choices are evident in the low-
chemical cotton yarn produced by Tuscarora Yarns,65 which is coloured in a
process that involves a pre-treatment with cationizing chemical agents. This
acts to make cotton more reactive and easier to dye.Yarns are pre-treated
to varying degrees, knitted into stripes and then dyed in a simple garment-
dye process to produce complex surface effects. When dyeing with
reactives, the cationic pre-treatment completely eliminates the need for salt, T-shirt made from
reportedly using 50 per cent less energy than dyeing with reactives on ‘cationic cotton’ yarn
by Tuscarora Yarns.
untreated cotton. These savings are due to reduced dyeing time, increased
dye fixation and reduced effluent. However, cationizing agents are in
themselves often moderately toxic and carry a medium pollution risk, a
factor that needs to be traded off against their positive effects in subsequent
processing. It is recommended that cationizing treatments be amalgamated
with scouring into a one-step process to further reduce resource use.66 But
besides mitigating materials and energy use, cationization reduces the need
to stock multiple colours of yarn, for the yarns remain in ‘greige’ form
until orders of specific colours are made, and the garment-dye process
accommodates a quick turnaround on delivery, so inventory is vastly
reduced. This technology illustrates the innovation that can arise from
fusing an intimate knowledge of the industry with customer expectations,
technical know-how, aesthetics and sustainability goals.
Colour without dyeing

Colour is one of the most visually stimulating and vital aspects of fashion.
Each season, designers begin development with a piece of inspiration and
start to spin a colour palette from it, pondering slight variations of tone
and hue to balance a print or yarn dye pattern. Achieving colour in a
fabric or garment without dyes forces deeper creative explorations; over
the long term naturally existing fibre colours contribute much more than a
lower-impact choice over dyes. Engaging in the process of selecting only
those fibres with naturally occurring colour draws us all the way up the
supply chain to plant fibre cultivation and animal husbandry and
reconnects us directly with all that nature has to offer us. Designing into
and around these limits and capacities can easily be achieved within the
current fashion-design skill set, and each point in the supply chain provides
an opportunity for creative innovation and connecting the wearer to
natural systems.
Regional colour variations

In order to provide a consistent range of synthetic colours, the textile
industry strips out all the unique character of the fibre and in so doing also
erases its particular narrative or history, thereby contributing to the
ubiquitous aesthetic of commodity clothing and the surface relationship
we have with garments. In contrast, natural colour is as much an indicator
of place as it is of fibre; its character, like that of a good wine, is influenced
by the naturally occurring minerals in the local soil and water, and even by
the diet of the animal (in the case of protein fibres). Natural fibre colours
also reflect the weather patterns in a given year or season – as in the darker
natural tones of linen, for example, caused by rains and additional moisture
during growing and retting – and more readily reveal the techniques of
traditional processing in a particular region of production. Just as a
designer’s trained eye swiftly recognizes the historical reference or period
expressed in the particular shape or nuance of a collar, so over time the eye
becomes intimately familiar with and appreciative of the subtleties and
reasons for natural colour variations. Natural colour connects us more
closely to people, their local economies and the land.
Ardalanish is a textile manufacturer based in the Scottish Highlands,
specializing in tweed fabrics with a unique regional character. The wool is
sourced from local breeds of sheep – Hebridean, Shetland and Manx Loaghtan
– and supplied by a number of farms across the Highlands and Islands of
Scotland. Much of the processing, from fibre sorting, grading, spinning and
weaving, is carried out locally, providing work for the surrounding community,
and a company-supported weaving apprenticeship programme provides
opportunities for the next generation to make a decent living while also
continuing the local textile traditions. Using mostly undyed wool, with the
occasional addition of madder and woad, Ardalanish’s distinctive fabrics are
created in subtly beautiful patterns and shades. Colours range from black
and charcoal-brown, through fawn and silver-grey to a rich creamy white.
Fashion designer Eloise Grey uses Ardalanish fabric in her clothing
collections and notes that the natural colours have the broadest appeal
among her clients. Since each colour is comprised of hundreds of different
natural hues, Grey notes that they light up people’s skin tone much more
than the flat neutrals provided by synthetically dyed fibres, and that people
recognize that the garments feel very different from most other garments.
For older people in particular, touching the fabric triggers a memory of
how tweed used to feel. It is these tactile and visual characteristics in the
fabric that Grey’s customers find most appealing, rather than the eco
credentials or the origin of the cloth. This illustrates how a sustainability
42
De Beauvoir coat in naturally coloured

wool by Eloise Grey.
43
Naturally dyed yarns

by Sasha Duerr.
Colours are made
from food waste
including onion skins,
avocado rinds, carrot
tops, coffee grounds,
blackberries and
turmeric, and require
no toxic mordants.
aesthetic can achieve a universal resonance and bypass the need for overt
communication – a task that is infinitely more difficult with an industrially
produced product where the ‘green’ benefit is invisible to the wearer and
has to be much more actively promoted to justify its price and value.
Natural dyes
Natural dyes are most often criticized by industry for their limited supply
of raw material and corresponding questionable repeatability and scalability.
Colour-fastness over the long term, especially on cellulosic fibres, is also an
expressed concern.Yet for many natural dyers these objections miss the point.
Their purpose in using natural dyes is often not to meet self-imposed industry
standards, but first and foremost to work within the limits of nature and then
adapt creativity and practice accordingly. Planning around seasonally available
materials, using scraps or fallen leaves as colour sources, relishing the variations
and character of the uneven dyeing: all challenge our modern perceptions
of what an acceptable colour is, and reveal how influenced we are by what
commerce communicates as desirable. The explorations of these natural dye
practitioners are more directed to a deep connection with the land, often also
twinned with a sense of community.They are part of the ‘slow’ movement (see
page 128) and resist being scaled up, speeded up and packaged to industry
‘standards’. In fact, they intentionally provide a tonic to this industrial paradigm.
A changing cultural landscape for natural dyes

Natural dyes have passed by the mass-market textile industry, mostly
unappreciated, for decades. But with increasing interest in sustainability, new
technical innovations are now being applied and are starting to blur the lines
between industrial and artisanal objectives, and between what is a natural
dyestuff and what is a synthetic one. Higher yields of plants per hectare, and
higher yields of extract per plant, begin once again to impose human-centred
industrial goals on to nature. Acceptance of new technical development in
natural dyes will demand our sharpened cognitive skills to assess their sustain-
ability profiles along measures that account for far more than their ‘naturalness’.
The following questions give examples of a new range of considerations
that we might take into account when reviewing new dye technologies:
• Are there new technologies for applying colour?

• If so, what indicators do they improve?
• What are their water, energy and chemical use in cultivating,
processing and implementation?
• Do they speed up or slow/stop the flow of natural resources into
industry?
• Do they slow or stop the flow of industrial or biological waste into
natural systems?
• Do they shift flows to cycles?
• Whom do they benefit?
• Do they work within or beyond the boundaries of natural systems?
• Could there be unforeseen consequences?
• Are any identifiable risks reversible?
Sasha Duerr’s work epitomizes a slow textile approach to colour. Foraging

for materials in her neighbourhood and using plants directly rather than
extracts, Duerr is directly engaged with plants’ life cycles, seasonal
availability and colour potential. Duerr keeps a calendar on what plants are
available and when, and plans projects and commissions around this to
ensure that projects can be completed, much like an organic chef plans a
menu around locally and seasonally available food.
Minimum waste in cut and sew

Fashion designers approach their practice in a variety of ways. Some
develop first prototypes in 3D and use draping as the primary method of
arriving at a final design. Others work with flat patterns, and are able to
predict the silhouette and details of the final garment through the 2D
shapes on the paper. In industry, the design and development system is set
up for industrial ‘efficiency’ and to maximize idea throughput. Designers
working for medium to large companies therefore almost always create in
sketch form, delivered with specifications to a pattern-maker who then
makes the first prototype for review. With a great number of styles to
design and develop each season, the designer has little time to pay attention
to issues beyond styling; fabric-cutting efficiencies are the speciality of the
Opposite top:Sam
technical support team. And suggestions to amend designs to accommodate Forno’s Low to No
waste reduction are rarely made by the technicians, for that would Waste jacket, made
encroach on the expertise (and ego) of design! Often, then, final cutting by morphing pattern
pieces into the
efficiencies are calculated and set by the supplier’s computer-aided design negative space on
(CAD) software, which is now prevalent throughout the fashion industry. the fabric layout.
As Timo Rissanen, an early pioneer in minimum-waste garments,

Low to
Opposite below:
points out, these systems can reduce cutting-waste by as much as 10–20 per No Waste jacket
cent in most cases.67 Although this amount may seem minimal, these scraps pattern layout.
Left: Endurance shirt
by timo rissanen
featuring zero-waste
pattern-cutting
techniques.
Below: Endurance
shirt layout.
Opposite: dress by
matEriaLBYProduct
designed with
reduced waste using
a novel system of
cutting, marking and
joining cloth.
a: Body
B: sleeve (including top sleeve lining)
c: Yoke
d: cuff
E: collar & stand
f: Elbow patch
g: sleeve placket
h: internal waist stay
i: internal back pleat stay
J: cB Yoke appliqué
are more than just a physical manifestation of our segmented development

chain and pattern-cutting method. In fact, they comprise a ‘hidden history’
of industrial processes that mine, divert, extract, shovel, waste, pump and
dispose of billions of kilos of natural resources in order to produce and
deliver the fabric that is destined to fall to the cutting-room floor.68 Further,
the efficacy of CAD systems is restricted by the original logic of their
programming: CAD programs work on efficiencies within the set
parameters of an existing industrial pattern-cutting system.They do not have
the capacity to accommodate completely new concepts for building clothing
and they can therefore stifle the emergence of new innovations around
reducing waste and the corresponding new aesthetic that these might
reveal. Moreover, any reduced cutting-waste achieved with CAD systems is
invisible in the final garment, so the designer and wearer develop no
awareness about ecological impacts or savings. Sustainability improvements
remain ‘captive’ as abstract calculations or data somewhere in the industrial
supply chain.
New concepts in waste reduction

In recent years, a number of design-for-sustainability concepts around cutting-
waste have emerged, from utilizing scraps in patchworked garments to
recycling them into new yarns. Such ideas are helping to slow the flow of
waste in the fashion industry, and hold much promise. But emergent design
ideas can build further on these advances by developing altogether new ways
of conceiving clothing construction. These techniques remind us that it is in
the designers’ skills and craft of practice within the context of sustainability
where the real promise and drivers of change lie. Technology may provide
us with new tools, but it is the creative design mind that informs and
directs their effectiveness. And it is the designer’s creativity and ability to
make quantum leaps of imagination that holds the potential to transform
not just the way we make things, but also the way we think.
Sam Forno’s Low to No Waste jacket resulted from melding design
and pattern-making processes together and allowing the pattern pieces to
be shaped by the negative space (the space between the pattern pieces) on
the fabric layout. This process generated a garment with a unique aesthetic
where the intimately interlocked pattern pieces formed design lines and
directed the mode of fastening at centre front – a process that reduced the
quantity of fabric usually required for a jacket by more than 25 per cent.
Here, rather than imposing a preconceived garment design and its pattern
on to the fabric, the designer becomes a facilitator, allowing the form to
emerge and guiding its evolution: as Sam realized, ‘the jacket designed itself ’.
Timo Rissanen uses what he describes as a ‘jigsaw puzzle’ approach to
design and pattern-cutting that involves remodelling the shape and size of
pattern pieces so they adjoin each other. His flat patterns and the resulting
garments have slightly altered forms because the fabric cut loss that would
ordinarily be wasted is instead an integral part of the garment. Effectively this
approach increases material input at garment design, without increasing cost.
Rissanen describes his work as attempting to ‘simultaneously design a set of

garment pieces that take up a given length of fabric in two dimensions…
and the garment in three dimensions’.69
Australian fashion design house MATERIALBYPRODUCT works
with a novel system of cutting, marking and joining cloth that uses both
the positive and negative spaces of a pattern to create a garment, poetically
described as ‘cutting with both sides of the scissors’.70 The company has
developed a unique layout programme that uses grading and sizing lines as
integral parts of the garment’s shape and surface pattern.Vertical folds
replace cut lines and give the garments a new silhouette that uses all fabric
from one selvedge to the other. Each garment is made to measure and
finished by hand with a signature ribbon binding that loops through the
piece, creating a blouson effect.
Just and fair labour issues in cut and sew
‌‘What is work?
In whose interest is it done?
How well and to what end is it done?
In whose company is it done?
How long does it last?’
‌Wendell Berry
Over the past two centuries, the industrialization of the textiles and clothing
supply chain has led to economic independence for a number of countries.
From the UK and the US to Japan and Hong Kong among many others,
this innovation combined with the globalization of trade has been critical to
growth and development. Labour-intensive industries such as fashion and
textiles are particularly effective at lifting people out of poverty, bringing
income gains for women in particular.71 But while they have brought major
opportunities for the working poor, they also bring huge threats, for the
sheer scale and power of the trading system can simply run over individuals.
This is especially true in the cut, make and trim (CMT) sector of the textile
and clothing industry, which generally employs women aged around 16–25,
often migrants from rural areas, who are unaware of their rights, seldom
have the courage to speak up, and are therefore easily exploited.72 Although
consumer purchases in richer nations may help provide jobs with a ‘living
wage’, markets alone are not sufficient to guarantee worker welfare.
Several forces have created a global textile industry rife with
opportunities for worker abuse. The fashion industry is particularly fluid
and mobile and over the past 40 years, as wages in developed nations
increased, apparel companies moved their manufacturing facilities from
industrialized countries to lower-wage countries overseas – resulting in an
enormously complex supply chain with hundreds of facilities spread across
scores of countries. As a result, much of the responsibility for worker
welfare has fallen upon suppliers – and beyond the immediate influence of
brands. Tracking and monitoring are therefore easily subject to corruption

and manipulation, with greatly increased opportunities for human rights
abuses: for what we cannot see, we cannot know or monitor.
The role of NGOs and labour movements

Just as the deprived conditions of workers in the ‘dark satanic mills’ of
18th-century England spawned the global labour movement, so today,
exposure of human rights violations in the textile industry is bringing
positive changes to the mainstream. Since the early nineties, NGOs and
public sector interest groups have used ‘name and shame’ techniques in the
press to demand supply-chain transparency and accountability of apparel
brands.73 Consumer boycotting initiatives such as those spearheaded by
Oxfam, the Clean Clothes Campaign and other NGOs have been
important drivers in the development of corporate codes of conduct,
which are now commonplace in modern apparel businesses.74 Yet these
practices are only a partial solution to labour abuses. Despite the goal of
the International Labor Organization (ILO) to eliminate child labour,
violations remain endemic in the fashion industry, especially among
subcontractors and home workers. And factories routinely keep double and
triple books in order to ensure successful inspections.75
Even the most responsible companies may inadvertently perpetuate
poor working conditions, for deep tensions still prevail between corporate
social responsibility departments that demand higher compensation for
workers and production departments that demand lower prices for
products.76 Designers are also culpable, for specifying elaborate styling within
set target price-points forces factory owners to accept tighter margins; and
late production approvals squeeze factory schedules for meeting fixed retail
deliveries. Both pass pressure on to workers to labour faster, for longer
hours, at reduced pay, and chronically undermine the efforts of NGOs for
worker protection. In 2008, Hennes and Mauritz (H&M), despite having
one of the most robust corporate social responsibility programmes in the
industry, reported that 73 per cent of their new supplier production units
had compliance violations of legal monthly overtime hours, and 49 per
cent had compliance violations of legal overtime compensation.77
NGO partnerships with corporations

While direct action campaigns or boycotts organized by NGOs have been
an effective strategy and have resulted in strengthened corporate terms of
engagement, ironically it is the partnerships between private companies and
NGOs that have guided standards being written into law, harmonized the
industry as a whole, and driven the most effective changes at the factory
level. An unscrupulous factory owner, for example, may reject the high
standards demanded by an ethical brand and favour working with a less
demanding client. But if several brands collaborate to adopt the same policies,
perhaps supported by an NGO, their combined purchasing power leverages
factory owners to comply with requests.78 Moreover, given the complexities
of the supply chain, individual companies can realistically inspect supplier

factories only a few times a year. But when brands sourcing from the same
factories work together, they can, in effect, expand their in-factory presence,
with local NGOs supplementing inspections on an as-needed basis.
In spite of the advances in textile workers’ health and safety that these
partnerships have accomplished, studies reveal that salary levels for workers
in the fashion industry remain low.79 Legal minimum wage in developing
countries is often below living wage, sewers frequently work with
temporary contracts or no contract at all and delayed payments are
common practice.80 These conditions in the fashion industry represent a
microcosm of globalized industry as a whole. Oxfam International reports
that while 400 million people have moved out of poverty since the
mid-seventies, still 1.1 billion people are reportedly struggling on less than
US $1 a day, the same number as in the mid-eighties.81 A critical part of
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) then, is to ensure not only that
codes of conduct are in place and enforced, but also that financial gains are
distributed to workers. This realization is now leading to the expansion of
Fairtrade programmes in the fashion industry – for whole garments and
not just fibre (see page 21 for more on Fairtrade cotton fibre). Fair Trade
USA, the US Fair Trade Labelling Initiative and members of Fairtrade
Labelling Organizations International (FLO), are now testing a Fair Trade
approach for apparel assembly. Though still quite new, the programme aims
to build on tested models of CSR collaboration and multi-stakeholder
initiatives to improve labour conditions, working with local NGOs to
provide factory support through training, grievance channels and monitoring.
The standard is based on core principles of Fair Trade agricultural products,
such as empowering workers to have a voice in the workplace through
democratic structures, and bringing economic and social benefits to
workers, families and communities through a Fair Trade premium.
Design strategies for just and fair labour conditions

Designers can help build momentum in this effort. For example,
developing awareness of the effects that design decisions have on speed and
costing in the supply chain, ensuring timely sign-off, and developing
innovative ideas to add value to the garment with little cost can all ease the
financial pressure on factory workers and buffer supplier profit margins.
Designing with non-commodity fibres and steering away from product
categories with low to zero price elasticity at retail can also help bring
higher margins into the supply chain. But ensuring that this extra income
finds its way into the hands of the working poor requires additional
strategies beyond the product itself. Choosing Fair Trade suppliers or
working with vertically integrated or local companies where employee
conditions can be easily observed and monitored are viable options, while
trading directly with artisans and worker-owned co-operatives to spawn
small-scale production structures demands more direct and personal
engagement, which we explore in more detail later (see page 110).
Low-impact hardware and trims

Hardware and trims punctuate our designs, bringing a crispness to the
whole garment. Trims are a tiny percentage of the product, and it is
perhaps precisely because they are small that they are often overlooked.Yet
trims contribute a significant ecological impact to the garment, drawing on
the mining industry (in the case of metals for zips and snaps) and the oil
industry (in the case of raw material for plastic buttons), with all their
associated impacts on global warming, land degradation, human health, air
emissions and toxic contamination of water bodies. And it is not only at
the beginning of the garment’s life cycle that trims have an effect, for they
directly influence the longevity of clothing and can hinder its ultimate
recyclability. Buttons, for example, usually last a long time and even when
they fall off the garment, they can be stitched back on with relative ease
and few skills. Zips, on the other hand, break more easily and require
machine-sewing abilities and special zip foot attachments in order to be
replaced. Consequently, articles of clothing with failed zips are much more
likely to be discarded sooner than those featuring simpler closures. And at
the end of a garment’s life cycle, in large-scale textile recycling plants, items
must be free of all trims to facilitate efficient processing. But since trims are
often difficult and labour-intensive to detach, they often remain on the
garments, meaning that articles of clothing that would otherwise be
recycled into new yarns and fabrics are passed by and sent to landfill or
baled for shipment overseas.
Electroplating
Although trims remain largely under the designer’s sustainability radar, clearly
they do warrant more of our attention. A key sustainability challenge for metal
hardware is electroplating, a process that prevents rusting in a base metal by
coating it with another, non-corroding metal. Typically, the process involves
dipping the items to be plated into a series of tanks containing metal salts
in solution. An electrical current is then passed through the solution so that
metallic ions are deposited on the trims. Rigorous washing removes excess
processing chemicals after each stage of processing and produces copious
amounts of water that contains such contaminants as acids, bases, cyanide,
metals, brighteners, cleaners, oils and dirt. The waste water from this
process can destroy biological actions in sewage plants, and is toxic to
aquatic species. It has been estimated that 500 grams of hazardous sludge is
produced for every 3,300 metal buttons produced. This sludge must then
be treated before disposal in a specially lined landfill.82
Alternatives to electroplating
There are viable alternatives to electroplating. Several non-corroding metal
alloys combining copper, zinc, nickel and iron in percentage are readily
available in sheet metal form and can provide a variety of colours to meet
designers’ needs. Each metal has particular physical properties and a specific
appearance: copper is soft and moulds with little difficulty, but may also be Stainless steel buttons
easily scratched or dented; J brass has a warm pink-yellow cast; H brass has by Levi Strauss, which
avoid electroplating.
a cooler brilliant yellow hue; alloy 752 has a warm silver tone; stainless steel
is a cooler grey and is strong and resilient, but also brittle and resistant to
bending. All options provide a means to eliminate waste at the source rather
than cleaning up contaminants at the end of the electroplating process.
Although further life cycle interrogations of metals and alloys are
warranted – investigating how much energy and resources each embodies
from extraction to final finishing – still, non-electroplated hardware
provides a first step to achieving significant reductions in ecological impact
for metal trims. In this case, the fashion designer’s role is transformed from
making simple aesthetic choices and delivering specifications to one of
engaging with professionals of many backgrounds – collaborating with
engineers, metallurgists and suppliers to develop products balancing
ecological goals with commercial requirements.
The stainless steel buttons that Levi Strauss and Co uses on its jeans
represent no compromise on aesthetics or quality for the designer. The main
challenge is in meeting production requirements for volume, for each snap
or button is punched from a standard piece of sheet metal using cutting tools
that are already set to a standard sheet size. As a consequence, for the more
unusual alloys, inventory in the supply chain may not be readily available
without a consistent demand from the market (designers); consequently,
minimums required will reflect the number of buttons punched per sheet.
The Global Organic Textile Standard already accepts non-electroplated
metal hardware and this option seems set eventually to become standard
industry practice. In the meantime, by specifying non-electroplated trims,
designers can help foster collaborations and commitments between companies
to better ensure that inventory in a variety of alloys is readily available for
supplying quick turnaround and small to medium-sized orders.
Chapter 3: Distribution
A world map, tracing the shipping routes of any garment and its components
through sourcing and production, reveals an astonishing mass of intersecting
transportation lines, each generating a calculable number of carbon emissions.
These can be offset by various means, including switching from air and truck
to rail and sea transportation as the preferred mode of transport; converting
vehicles to biofuel, gas power or electric power; and carbon offset programmes.
But studies suggest that transport accounts for only 1 per cent of carbon in
the life cycle of a product.83 Though this revelation might seem to redirect
design efforts on sustainability to other areas of greater impact, further scrutiny
shows that distribution consists of several specializations, with materials
acquisition, forecasting and production management in addition to delivery.
These specialities manage the flow and volume of materials into and around
the distribution system and present several opportunities for intervention.
Material volumes and flows in the fashion industry are designated by
projected retail sales. Mill set-up for fabric, machinery allocation, orders for
trims and notions, organization and hiring of workforces, training,
engineering of production systems – all are orchestrated by sales forecasts.
And more: fibre is grown, compacted and baled; oil is extracted; mines shift
into operation and metals are gleaned from ore for trims; wild water is
diverted for processing; coal is mined and burned for the production of
electricity. This massive infrastructure of resources circulates from one part
of the planet to another, and all of it moves into place under the direction
of ‘pencil-meeting-paper’ on a purchase order.
Efficient distribution and retailing

In recent years, ‘lean retailing’ has effectively passed the risks inherent in
this system of forecasting from the retailer to the manufacturer, who now
has to carry large inventories for indefinite periods of time to ensure
fulfilment of rapid replenishment requests. High-tech information collectors,
such as Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tags, are placed on every
product, and analytical systems have been developed to optimize the flow
of garments through the supply chain. Together, these technologies provide
data for producers and retailers to track, analyse and redirect material stocks
to match product sales, thereby reducing excess inventory and production.84
At first glance, optimization of inventory flows is a winning situation for both
business and the environment, since reduced volume of excess goods at any
point in the fashion system benefits both.Yet these technologies effectively
‘grease’ the distribution system, enabling greater numbers of items at
ever-increasing speeds to be pushed through to the consumer, often
resulting in post-season discards at retail. There is still waste: it is simply
located at a different point in the system. Indeed, as Hardin Tibbs, specialist
in futures analysis, strategy and scenario planning, notes, the overall flow of
materials through the industrial system has doubled every 20 years.85
It could in fact be argued that RFID technologies optimize the flow
of goods only for commercial gain and often at the expense of sustainability.
For they abstract transactions of trade: sales are simply expressed as sets of
c h a p t e r 3 : DISTRI B UTION 55
data to inform analysis; humans become mere enablers of material flows;

the items of clothing we design, make and sell are reduced to anonymous
units, their value judged solely on volume of throughput. While analysis
and data feed our intellect and undoubtedly build our knowledge of
industrial flows, they do little to address – and in fact they inhibit – our
ability to link to natural, social and cultural conditions.
Managing supply chain information

This disconnect between commerce on the one hand and nature and social
considerations on the other has combined with increased awareness of
sustainability to prompt evolutions in tracking technology that start to
reconnect people and place in the supply chain. String technology, for
example, developed by Historic Futures, is a software tool that enables
companies to collate and centralize information at each point in a garment’s
manufacture. Suppliers upload information about the material inputs and
processing that go into making a garment, providing specific supply chain
data to brands that they can then choose to disclose to customers, normally
through a Web interface. Product information provided by companies is so
far brief and limited. Nonetheless, tools that facilitate this level of transparency,
where previously there was none, fundamentally change the supply chain
culture. Indeed, when Walmart announced in 2009 that it would open up its
supply chain it sent a ripple through the ‘big box’ store industry. For
transparency means that things can be seen and therefore regulated, and by
extension that retailers will be more easily held to account. Consequently,
such tools as String technology start to influence the industrial environment,
which in turn governs the flow of goods.Yet though they begin to unmask
and reveal the system, they fail to change it at root. They help to shift the
supply chain to a ‘value’ chain, but it is nonetheless still a chain.The challenge
ahead is that we not only change the products and the information we provide
to the customer and supply chains, but that we also redefine the means of
supply from chains and flows to loops; and that we change our businesses
from managing products to managing cycles – of materials and of innovation.
Carbon offsets
Over the last few decades, the looming threat of global warming and rising
oil prices has prompted responses from a range of industries, including fashion.
Tools such as carbon and energy footprint analysis and life-cycle assessment
(LCA) have been developed to help companies capture environmental inputs
and outputs of entire value chains from raw material supply to product use
and disposal, and to identify sources of wasted energy. Once the collected
data is ‘normalized’, it is used to develop energy-use improvement strategies
and to guide the amount of carbon offsets needed in order to mitigate the
company’s own greenhouse gas emissions and achieve ‘carbon neutrality’.
While LCAs are very effective at providing a comprehensive view of
impacts, they are enormously difficult to build and apply in practice, for they
require actual data, which the apparel supply chain structure does not make
readily available or accessible. Energy is viewed by the industry as part of general

overhead expenses – and never specifically calculated per garment. Besides,
since the common practice of retailers is to purchase apparel as complete
packages, often through an agent, they rarely, if ever, interact with individual
producers who could supply the data. Moreover, company supply chains
are most often erratic, flexing primarily to accommodate fluctuating market
demand and last-minute orders, with no time or incentive to conduct the
slow and careful data collection necessary for carbon calculations.
Cultural barriers to carbon measurement

As with many sustainability challenges, developing carbon footprints and
offsets is as much cultural as it is scientific and data-based. In many cases,
simply knowing the producers in the supply chain is a significant first
step.86 This is especially true for large companies with a low-cost, fast-to-
market fashion business, where the supply chain is most elastic. Companies
with slower product lines are more likely to have long-standing relationships
with established suppliers, which can be more easily leveraged. Nonetheless,
the harvesting of information can take several seasons and even years to
complete. Even for the outdoor company Patagonia, a leader in sustainability,
carbon footprinting began modestly, with information on just five
garments provided to customers in 2007. Once its ‘Footprint Chronicles’
mini-site was launched, additional suppliers were persuaded to participate;
now information on three to five products is added every six months.
Designers are accustomed to accessing generic physical and functional
attributes across all fabrics and expect the same for energy performance.
But there is no generic energy profile for fabrics and fibres. Energy consumption
is directed by a complex of production and processing circumstances including
the provenance of the fibre (see page 14), where it was made and how far
it travelled, the energy efficiency of the factory, the dye process used (see
page 37), the weight and colour of the fabric and even consumer care (see
page 60). But by starting simply, perhaps by asking for carbon footprint
information when viewing fabric lines, suppliers can be encouraged to
participate in data collection. Carbon calculation for trend-driven fast
fashion items, with their volatile and unpredictable business, will remain a
challenge to document, and this might suggest alternative design strategies
for reducing energy, such as closed-loop recycling (see page 17) or design
for adaptability (see page 76). All these strategies require that designers step
back from the usual styling and drive-to-market imperatives and view
carbon reductions as the result of changing the way we design and produce
clothing, rather than a target in itself.
Clothing and footwear brand Timberland has taken a multilevel
approach to addressing carbon dioxide emissions from its business activities. By
pursuing energy efficiency and renewable energy procurement in all its owned
and operated facilities, the company has reached its 2010 targets for CO2
reduction. Now looking to address the large portion of greenhouse gas
emissions that come from within the supply chain that it does not control,
c h a p t e r 3 : DISTRI B UTION 57
Timberland has provided design teams with a materials rating system in order
to support the selection of less carbon-intensive materials from the outset,
a strategy that has potential to leverage change up and down the supply chain.
Transportation systems and logistics
‘‌Most of the time we live our lives within these invisible systems, blissfully
unaware of the artificial life, the intensely designed infrastructures that
support them.’
‌Bruce Mau et al 87
The size and global reach of the fashion industry requires numerous means
of transport in various parts of the world arranged into a complex network to
move product inventory from fibre through processing to final garments and
to retail. As stated earlier, some reports indicate that transportation represents
just 1 per cent88 of a product’s carbon footprint, but others suggest that shipping
of goods can account for as much as 55 per cent89 of company carbon emissions.
The discrepancy between the two lies in the ‘scoping’ of each study: when the
lens of scrutiny is made wide enough to accommodate consumer behaviour,
then garment care, rather than transportation, often accounts for the greatest
energy use in the total life cycle of the garment. But when narrowed to focus
solely on company activities, transport and energy use in stores are the highest
contributors. Thus it is critical for designers to be aware of the benefits and
limits of establishing research boundaries, for they direct the feedback that
the research provides, which in turn influences design strategy and action.
Without understanding the shifting contexts, action can be misplaced.
The limits of manageable parameters

Action to reduce energy use in distribution is best directed by gathering
information from the specific supply chain of a given company. But this requires
the co-operation of numerous suppliers and interpreting data comparisons
from a variety of factory circumstances, types of equipment and shipping
companies. Energy consumption and associated carbon emissions by necessity,
then, tend to be calculated within a narrow scope. Energy use in retail stores and
distribution centres, total miles travelled by employees, and product distribution
routes are typical first-tier investigations. British retailer Marks and Spencer,
for example, conducted an investigation that revealed that aerodynamics can
account for up to 50 per cent of a delivery truck’s fuel consumption. This is
largely influenced by the vehicle’s shape and profile, which can cause resistant
drag and turbulence, reducing its fuel efficiency. The company’s redesigned
truck takes a streamlined teardrop form with a continuous full-length curve on
the roof, which reduces turbulence and drag by approximately 35 per cent
in comparison with a standard trailer. Besides cutting the M&S fleet’s overall
fuel consumption by 10 per cent, the redesign also increased the truck’s stock-
carrying capacity, accommodating as much as 16 per cent greater loads and
thereby potentially decreasing the number of trips needed to make deliveries.90
Renewable fuels
Conversion to renewable fuels is another strategy that may seem simple to
adopt – a new fleet of biodiesel delivery trucks, and the job is done.Yet this
too demands a consideration of the context when applied in practice, for
renewable fuels themselves are not necessarily a benign technology. Although
they may be manufactured from fast-growing or rapidly renewable crops that
burn more cleanly than fossil fuels, renewables are linked to a complex of
cultivation, extraction and processing systems, each of which is itself dependent
upon petroleum. Corn, for example, one of the main sources for liquid biofuel
exploration to date, is grown as a vast, intensive monocrop and as such
requires large volumes of petroleum-based fertilizers and pesticides. Much of
the processing required to refine corn into fuel is also powered by coal-fired
electricity plants or gas reserves. All told, it is estimated that one gallon of
biofuel requires two-thirds of a gallon of gasoline to produce – achieving
only a one-third gain in reducing fossil-fuel dependency.91 Furthermore,
arable land is a commodity in chronically short supply, and under increasing
pressure as rising human population and per capita wealth push global energy
and food needs upwards. In 2007–8, world food prices soared to all-time
highs, partly because the use of land for fuel crops drove global food stocks
down. Every hectare planted to produce biofuel means another acre is
taken out of food production.92 All in all, grain-based ethanol is considered
a stepping stone to other crops such as sugar cane, switchgrass and Chinese
myscanthus, which promise to yield higher efficiencies; and most agree that
biofuels can be only a part of a comprehensive energy strategy.
Creative opportunities provided by a comprehensive energy policy

These deliberations on distribution, energy and fuel draw us far beyond the
physical parameters of the textile and fashion distribution chain. They also
direct responses away from a surface checklist of sustainability
considerations and make obvious the need to develop integrated and
diverse energy strategies for fashion. Thinking critically about distribution
systems, inventory management, transport and energy use in stores, as a
whole, can lead to innovative carbon reduction strategies. Clothing
company Nau, for example, developed small retail stores and stocked them
with sample garments primarily for the customer to see styling options and
assess fit. The company provided 10 per cent discounts to consumers who
ordered products online for door-to-door home shipment. Although this
delivery option may seem counter to reducing CO2 emissions, the
company’s own research indicated that the combination of minimal retail
footage and simplified inventory management for restocking shelves and
clearing unsold items had knock-on effects: simpler transport logistics
greatly reduced the company’s carbon footprint overall. When reflected
upon in a particular context, then, ‘end goals’, such as local production, Opposite: Nau store
installation of solar panels, and the use of biodiesel fuel, each become including ordering
point for home
simply one possible element in a comprehensive energy policy that evolves delivery to reduce
best from analysing a particular set of circumstances. carbon footprint.
Chapter 4: Consumer care

Designing to reduce the impact of the laundering or consumer-care phase
of the life cycle has the potential to bring great benefits with some clothes.
For many frequently washed garments, the resource consumption
associated with use patterns dominates all other life-cycle stages; the energy
needed to launder a polyester garment over the course of its life is around
four times the energy needed to make it. Of course, this is not the case for
all garments – coats, for instance, are rarely cleaned and so the impacts of
laundering are small relative to the impacts of production. But for those
items that are washed frequently, laundering is likely to be the most major
source of resource use and pollution across the garment’s life – so much so
that the United Nations Environment Programme has launched a
campaign specifically targeting the jeans-laundering habits of young people
as a way to reduce energy consumption.93
The knowledge that washing and drying clothes creates considerably
more impact than growing fibre, processing yarn and garment cut and sew
perhaps feels counterintuitive, for the impact of clothes care is largely
invisible and widely distributed – in every home in every land – rather
than concentrated in the archetypal resource-consuming, polluting mill or
factory. But when recent figures from the UK are put into the mix, the
extent and potential impact of home laundering is made more real: 21
million washing machines (in a population of 60 million), 11.5 million
tumble dryers, and between 274 and 343 loads of washing per household
per annum.94 Collectively, UK washing machines consume 4.5 TWh
(terawatt hours) of energy every year (roughly equivalent to the annual
energy output of an average power plant): clearly a substantial value.
The realization that most impacts associated with a garment occur in
the laundry suggests that one of the most influential sustainability strategies
would be to change how people wear, wash and dry clothes. Even a small
change here could have a big effect, and might include changing garment
labels to encourage lower-temperature cleaning, specifying particular
colours that tend to be laundered less frequently and on cooler
temperatures, and designing with quick-drying fabrics.
Care labels
Some cultures (notably Japan) wash most of their clothes in water at room
temperature (around 20ºC/68ºF); however, elsewhere most domestic
washing machines have programmes that wash clothes at temperatures
between 30°C (86ºF) and 90°C (194ºF). The lower the temperature at
which clothes are washed, the less energy is consumed; though this is
sometimes disputed, since detergents are sometimes seen to be less effective
at lower temperatures with the result that more frequent washing of
garments is needed in order to get clothes clean.95
Care labels in garments set out the maximum washing temperature a
garment can withstand to avoid damage. Synthetic fabrics such as polyester
have a lower recommended washing temperature than cotton fabrics.
Recently a number of brands and retailers have started using care labels to
61
Levi’s 501 jeans

care label.
advise consumers to use lower washing temperatures: in the UK, for

example, Marks and Spencer uses the slogan ‘Think Climate, Wash at 30°C’
in its labels in an attempt to influence the environmental impact of
consumer behaviour. Statistics suggest that in the UK, the effect of a shift
to washing at 30°C (86ºF) rather than 40°C (104ºF) and a move away from
tumble dryers to line drying would reduce the energy burden of today’s
domestic washing by a third.96
Levi Strauss’s recent evaluation of the life-cycle impacts of its design
classic – the 501 jean – revealed that for a single pair of jeans, 60 per cent
of the total CO2 emissions (32.3 kilos) was attributed to consumer care/
washing and 80 per cent of that attributed to the energy-intensive method
chosen for drying.97 And of a total of 3,480.5 litres of water used during its
life cycle, home washing accounted for 2,000 litres.98 These findings prompted
Levi’s to launch a company-sponsored campaign to educate consumers
about the benefits of shifting washing habits, including a low-temperature
wash label for all garments. Levi’s has also collaborated with Tide washing
powders (marketed as effective at low temperatures) and Walmart, to display
Levi’s Signature brand products and Tide laundry detergents on the same
pallets in Walmart stores, to make clear the connection between CO2 and
garment-washing and to enable consumer action at the point of cognizance.
Low-energy wash and dry

Perhaps the most obvious drive to save resources in laundering is to
improve the efficiency of laundering hardware (machines) and other inputs
(such as detergent). A new generation of washing detergents has now made
it possible for effective cleaning of clothes even at low temperatures (down
to 15°C/59ºF). However, the limiting factor for most people is the
functionality of their washing machine, as many current machines do not
have the capability to reduce temperatures below 30°C (86ºF). Enhanced
machine functionality could also help reduce the energy intensity of
washing in other ways. Washing machines are most efficient when fully
loaded, yet most studies show that consumers only half-fill their machines;
so a ‘smart’ interface that weighs the load and adjusts water volume and
washing time accordingly could deliver benefits. Perhaps if this were
coupled with new emerging technologies such as RFID tags embedded
into clothing, which could ‘communicate’ directly with the machine, the
resource efficiency of laundering could be improved even further.
New technologies
In 15 prison laundries in the American state of Missouri, a different sort of
technology – ozone – has been installed as a part of a push to cut water and
energy consumption and to lessen the load on the municipal sewer system.99
A typical Missouri prison processes around 16,000 kilograms of laundry
each day, much of which is heavily soiled and requires intensive cleaning.
Ozone gas (created by passing high electrical voltage through oxygen
molecules) is a powerful cleaning agent that breaks down organic material
such as soil, bacteria, mould and grease. Once broken down, these particles
are removed from the fabric by detergent in the wash cycle. Ozone works
best in cold water, thereby negating the need for water heating. It requires
less chemistry to remove stains: fewer detergents, bleaches and softeners. It
also reduces the need for pre- and post-wash rinses and so shortens wash
time, saving both water and energy – and because the garments undergo
less mechanical agitation, wear is significantly less and longevity is increased.
The drying of clothes involves behaviours equally as involved as
washing. Tumble-drying is a convenient solution for many people, but it is
extremely energy-intensive. A zero-energy option is outside line-drying;
however, not everyone has access to outdoor space suitable for clothes
drying and in some countries bad weather is a key limiting factor. Access
to safe space in order to line-dry is also important, while in some
neighbourhoods, clothes lines are considered unsightly. Such organizations
as Project Laundry List in New Hampshire are working to make air-drying
and cold-water washing both desirable and acceptable, by combining
education, lobbying and a line-drying products shop.100
Ozone gas equipment

at Missouri prison
laundries, using cold
water and fewer
chemicals.
chapter 5: Disposal 63
Chapter 5: Disposal
Disposal – into first a rubbish bin and then a landfill site – is the end point
for many clothes. In the UK, statistics reveal that almost three-quarters of
textile products (garments, furnishings, household textiles, carpets and so
on) end up in landfill after being used101 and this is a pattern repeated in
many Western countries.Yet the resources that go into making garments
(otherwise known as the ‘embodied energy’ of the garment, or any other
product) are rarely fully epitomized before we part ways with them. The
materials, energy and labour that comprise a garment have the potential to
meet our creative and business needs several times over – even, in some
cases, an infinite number of times. Effectively, it is not just physical
garments that are deposited in landfill: design and business opportunities
also end up buried beyond reach in a hole in the ground.
Designing clothes with future lives requires a radical overhaul of the
way we currently deal with waste. This is a revamp that has implications
for design decisions, waste collection strategies, and even business
engineering. At its core is an attempt to redefine our notions of value and
to make best use of the resources inherent in garments either as items of
clothing, as fabric or as fibre, before finally throwing them away. This aim
has given rise to clusters of activity in fashion sometimes loosely described
as recycling, such as around reuse of garments, reconditioning of worn or
dated clothes, remaking of items from old garment pieces, and recycling of
raw materials.
Slowing the flow of materials

Reuse, reconditioning and recycling slow the linear flow of materials
through the industrial system by intercepting and diverting used resources
away from landfill sites and back into the industrial process for use as raw
materials. The energy and materials needed to make reuse, reconditioning
and recycling happen vary and have given rise to a hierarchy of strategies
for managing waste. The least resource-intensive option is reuse, since it
generally involves collection and resale of garments ‘as is’. More resource-
intensive is reconditioning, which requires labour and energy to rework
old fabric or garments into new pieces. More resource-intensive still is
recycling, where garments are shredded and fibres extracted either in
mechanical processes or chemically. It is worth emphasizing, however, that
even this most resource-intensive of the strategies is ‘resource-light’ when
compared with virgin fibre production. All these strategies are influenced
by a larger trend of downcycling – that is, a downgrading of the quality of
reclaimed materials into cheap, low-value end uses.
Yet while the benefits of reuse, reconditioning and recycling are
positive and enjoy an easy popularity in today’s increasingly sustainability-
conscious fashion sector, it is important to place these activities within a
broader context. Although they help treat waste and contain its negative
effects, reuse and recycling do not prevent waste from being produced in
the first place. They do not address the root cause of the waste problem in
fashion or change the fundamentally inefficient industrial model – they
simply minimize its ill effects. In short, reuse and recycling processes call
for very little in the way of more profound change in buying habits or
production goals.Yet in their favour, they are strategies that work well in
the short term and help build confidence to work with sustainability ideas;
a confidence that when fused with different ways of thinking and action
may begin to transform the fashion sector. Indeed, the conventional sets of
relationships involved in making fashion goods available for reuse and
recycling rather than disposal are given extra impetus by (and have themselves
influenced) end-of-life ‘take-back’ schemes, developed out of ideas of extended
producer responsibility, life-cycle thinking and chains of accountability.
Take-back schemes
Take-back schemes oblige those who make a product to accept it back for
possible remanufacturing, reuse or disposal once the user has finished with
it. Philosophically and practically, making the designer or retailer accountable
for the future disposal of products completely changes the logic of clothing
production, distribution and sales. It actively, and legally, extends the
activity focus of producers beyond the upstream manufacturing chain to
include downstream actions, resource flows and future consumer behaviour.
It draws the work of previously unconnected organizations such as textile
recyclers and public bodies such as those dealing with waste disposal into
the production decisions and balance sheets of brands and retailers.
The actual implications of take-back schemes for distribution
practices are yet to be worked out in the fashion sector. In the product
grouping of electronic goods, producer responsibility legislation has been
on the statute book in Europe since 2001, requiring manufacturers to
recover and recycle 90 per cent of large household appliances and 70 per
cent of all other electrical and electronic products.102 On the ground this is
organized by a third-party organization, funded by the manufacturers. It is
likely that if such legislation is enforced in other product sectors, such as
fashion, that a similar third-party scheme would deal with recovery and
recycling. While not a formal take-back scheme, a partnership launched in
2008 between the aid and development charity Oxfam – which runs the
UK’s biggest charity shop network – and the giant British retailer Marks
and Spencer to promote increased rates of clothing recycling demonstrates
producer responsibility in practice. The Clothes Exchange rewards shoppers
for recycling clothing by remunerating them for their donations of
unwanted M&S clothing to Oxfam with a £5 money-off voucher to
spend at M&S. According to the partnership, more than half a million
shoppers are now recycling their clothes in this scheme and have raised an
extra £2 million for Oxfam. In 2009, the scheme was extended to include
soft furnishings, such as cushions, curtains, throws and bed linen.103
Also in 2008, Filippa K, a Swedish producer of mid-priced mens-
Opposite: Alternative
and womenswear, opened a second-hand store in Stockholm stocked strategies for keeping
entirely with Filippa K pieces no longer wanted by their owners. The store, resources in use.
Repurpose
High-end thrift
Broker
Individual
MATERIALS
& ENERGY DISPOSAL
R E U S E A N D R E C YC L I N G
MATERIALS
DISPOSAL
& ENERGY
V I N T AG E
MATERIALS DISPOSAL
& ENERGY
SHARING
MATERIALS DISPOSAL
& ENERGY
MODULAR
MATERIALS DISPOSAL
& ENERGY
I N D U S T R I A L E C O L O GY
MATERIALS DISPOSAL
& ENERGY
E M O T I O N A L A T T AC H M E N T
MATERIALS
& ENERGY
CLOSED LOOP
run as a not-for-profit enterprise by the company, gives consumers a

chance to resell their no-longer-wanted Filippa K items, for a commission.
The company is selective about what it takes, and what does not sell is
returned to the owner. In bringing an individual company’s second-hand
garments back into the stable of that same company’s brand, both its new
collections and its second-hand offers appear to benefit. The existence of
the Filippa K Second Hand store makes a powerful statement about the
lasting value of its new products. And the cachet of its new range increases
interest in its second-hand pieces.
The Filippa K
Second Hand store
in Stockholm, which
sells on used Filippa K
garments for a
commission.
Reuse
Sustainability ideas are strongly rooted in careful use of resources, and few
ideas demonstrate this assiduousness in fashion as much as reuse of clothes
‘as is’. According to some figures, clothing reuse activities conserve
between 90 and 95 per cent of the energy needed to make new items.104
The reuse cycle is long established – and is as old as the textile production
industry itself – yet the dynamics of clothing reuse are changing in the face
of rising levels of consumption and disposal and the predominance of the
cheap – sometimes called ‘value’ – market.
Establishing a cycle where unwanted, old or worn clothes are
channelled back into the fashion and textile system for sorting,
redistribution and resale has for many decades been facilitated by voluntary
and charitable organizations, including Oxfam and the Salvation Army in
the UK and Goodwill in the US. Within the broad category of reuse, there
are various levels of activity; each offers different opportunities for
innovation. The most obvious is direct reuse, which involves quality pieces
being sorted and redirected to high-end second-hand and vintage stores
and the remainder bought up by dealers for the less specialist second-hand
market. Both of these routes generate employment and keep garments in use
for longer – thereby saving resources. However, only around 10 per cent of
c h a p t e r 5 : DIS P OSA L 67
clothes are reused in this way; the remainder are baled up for shipping to
used-clothing markets abroad.105 For US-based clothes-reclamation charity
Goodwill, the largest percentage of items in clothing bales is chinos,
followed by logo/printed T-shirts and men’s jackets.106 This suggests that a
point of innovation could be to target reconditioning strategies at those
particular garment categories, since these represent the biggest problem.
Reactive position
These organizations can only sort and resell what is donated to them. From
this reactive position, they can do little to influence consumers’ disposal
habits or the quality of product designed and sold. The recent retail trend
of lowering prices and quality to increase profit margins has led to a rapid
rise in what is bought and discarded and is hitting reuse organizations hard.
Simultaneously overwhelmed with volume and underwhelmed with
markets for poor-quality second-hand clothes, reuse systems, already
bursting at the seams, will collapse unless the fashion and textile industry
radically revises its view on waste and the value placed on all materials,
both virgin and used. It will take nothing less than the reframing of
reclamation charities as fully integrated and proactive partners in fashion
production to change this bleak outlook.
At Goodwill San Francisco, garment donations arrive on a daily basis
and feed a constant stream of variety into their retail store.Yet lower-value
items often remain unsold on the shop floor for more than a month, after
which time they need to be channelled to alternative routes to make room
for the steady flow of new donations. The company’s ‘As Is’ store provides
one such outlet for unsorted items selling for as little as 15 cents a piece,
and attracts a cross-section of regular buyers from street sellers to
international jobbers. But even these rock-bottom prices fail to catch all
left-over goods. More than 130 bales of unsold clothing a week still make
their way to rag merchants, overseas markets, incineration or landfill.
Though these bales represent only 0.3 per cent of Goodwill’s total
recycling stream (which includes furniture and electronic goods), they total
approximately 30,000 kilograms of clothing a year and illustrate the
cognitive dissonance of consumers dropping purged closet contents at the
local thrift store. Effective recycling requires that consumers close the loop.
In other words, that they not only deposit garments at but also buy from
thrift stores. Designing for resale suggests that items should be made to as
high a quality as possible the better to ensure that garments will hold their
value and be re-bought many times over.
Reconditioning
Breathing new life into discarded, torn or stained garments diverts, or
delays, waste from being sent to landfill. The techniques involved in
bringing a disused garment back to pristine condition are many and varied
and have become the specialist territory of a growing body of designers
who fuse thrift with creativity and embellishment. Such techniques as
reshaping, re-cutting and re-stitching entire garments or panels of garments Opposite: Dress from
Goodwill pictured on
together with off-cuts, vintage fabrics and trims are used to produce bales of unsold
unique pieces, crafted sometimes by hand and sometimes involving the garments.
latest technology. These pieces defy the general trend of downgrading the
value placed on already-used materials, and are evidence that ‘upcycling’ –
that is, adding value through thoughtful reclamation – is possible.
The resource benefits of reconditioning are obvious: new garments
are made from old or used ones, so that each unit of resource that goes
into making a fibre or fabric is more fully optimized before it is discarded.
Reconditioning does require inputs: maintaining or restyling garments
needs a reliable source of waste materials, parts (everything from thread to
inks if over-printing) and labour. Indeed, job creation is an important boon
of activities like reconditioning, and one that could be given added
impetus by forward-thinking legislation, such as tax breaks to reduce the
cost of labour for reuse and repair. Another important part of
reconditioning is the development of business models that make its
activities profitable. Reconditioning, by its very nature, is labour-intensive
and based on a non-standard, unpredictable source of raw materials
(particularly when using post-consumer waste). While many companies
have used these features successfully as a point of difference to create
unique, hand-crafted and bespoke collections, a major challenge is how to
scale up operations to a point at which more significant volumes of waste
can be reused. In the UK, for example, the well-established reconditioning
brand From Somewhere has overcome sourcing issues by buying post-
industrial waste material from the cutting-room floor of high-end Italian
mills, which gives them a more predictable raw product than post-
consumer waste streams; and reconditioning supremo Junky Styling no
longer simply trawls charity shops looking for second-hand suits, but also
buys seconds straight from manufacturers.
The other key challenge for reconditioning business models is how
to use hand labour to maximum effect and, where appropriate, integrate
technology into key parts of garment assembly. Goodwill San Francisco’s
‘William Good’ line made use of laser-cutting to create modern-looking
appliqué details. More recently, designers have begun to see old clothes less
as a ready-made garment to be reshaped and updated and more as a source
of fabric from which to create new garments. This has allowed brands to
evolve more standardized patterns made up of panel pieces cut from old
clothes and has potential to allow technology to ease the burden on hand-work.
The signature garment of UK-based reconditioned fashion brand
Goodone is made from a patchwork of around ten pattern pieces, designed
to minimize cutting loss and yet still be economical to produce. By using
many small panels, every scrap of rag that constitutes the raw material for
the company’s operations is used to its maximum potential. Goodone’s
pieces are made from ‘the best rag possible’, carefully sourced and hand-
picked from textile recyclers trading in post-consumer waste. Regardless of
how carefully rag is sorted, colour consistency is difficult to achieve and so
when the right colour is found for a design, it is used sparingly as an

accent. New collaborations have enabled Goodone to scale up operations
– a project between Goodone and House of Cashmere, for example,
involves reworking faulty stock (pre-consumer waste); and an initiative
with Britain’s biggest retailer, Tesco, initially uses obsolete (pre-consumer)
stock and then, over the longer term, will combine post-consumer waste
with virgin organic or Fairtrade fabric. Economics are the driving force of
many decisions around reuse; in the Tesco project, combining virgin fabric
with post-consumer fabric removes from the garment production equation
the cost of hand-cutting rag to create new pattern pieces.
Like other waste-management strategies, reconditioning occurs
downstream of mainstream fashion production operations and has limited
influence over upstream priorities or values. It exists as an after-the-fact
‘mopping-up’ operation, dealing with some of the waste (or inefficiencies)
of the industrial fashion production model; yet these same skills and
techniques and the inventiveness that drives them will likely be central to
fundamentally more sustainable business models for fashion in general.
Recycling
The actual process of recycling involves reclaiming fibres from existing fabrics
using either mechanical or chemical methods. Chemical methods are suited
only to synthetic fibres, whereas all fibre types can be recycled mechanically.
Mechanically ‘opening’ a fabric using garneting machines does not
just break down the fabric structure but also tears the individual fibres,
making them shorter and suitable only for reprocessing into lower-quality
bulky yarns. The general trend towards deteriorating material quality in
recycling (sometimes called downcycling) is compounded by the lack of
research and development in mechanical recycling methods, which have
used unchanged technology for 250 years. Recycled materials that used to
be converted into woollen blankets and overcoats are nowadays more likely
to find their way into insulation materials and mattress stuffing. In resource
terms, mechanical recycling provides significant savings over virgin
material production. It uses less energy and, if waste raw materials are
sorted by colour and then processed in colour-specific batches (as they are
in Italy’s Prato region), the need for re-dyeing, with all its associated water
and energy impacts, is also eliminated.
Recycling synthetic fibres

A largely mechanical approach is also used to recycle some polyester fibre.
Here the fibre can be recovered from a mixture of post-industrial fibre
waste and post-consumer plastic (the most ubiquitous being the PET
drinks bottle). These materials are chopped, ground and melted to reform
polyester chip, which is then extruded, processed and textured just like
virgin polyester. More recent polyester recycling technologies are based on
chemical breakdown of the polyester polymer into monomers, the building
blocks of polyester. The feedstock is then repolymerized to produce a
recycled material that is purer and of a more consistent quality than that
produced by the mechanical method, although it is far more energy-
intensive. The significance of recycled polyester (in both forms) is growing
rapidly. Recent figures suggest that more than half of all staple polyester
fibre in Europe is now made from recycled materials,107 while innovations
such as Japanese company Tejin’s Eco Circle technology, enabling material
quality to be maintained through the polyester recycling process, may
signal the end of the inevitable downgrading of material quality in recycling.
Like polyester, nylon 6 is recyclable using techniques that break
down the polymer chemically. Recent developments have overcome a
challenging repolymerization process, and recycled nylon 6 yarns are now
Bodice dress made
available made from post-industrial waste such as substandard yarns from post-consumer
rejected as part of manufacturing. The claims made for the energy savings waste by Goodone.
of recycled polyester and nylon material over virgin material are fairly Opposite: Reverse
similar: both fibres demand around 80 per cent less energy to recycle than appliqué jacket and
skirt made from
to make virgin intermediate chemicals from oil and convert them to factory waste, by
fibre.108 Karina Michel.
Redesign production models based on cycles

As the statistics show, innovating around fibre recycling delivers measurable
resource savings, often in a way that consumers understand.Yet it should be
remembered that recycling is a short-term answer to problems of waste,
not a long-term preventative solution. For this to begin to change, perhaps
the first thing to be implemented should be a new channel of communication
between designers, producers and textile recyclers, the latter of whom have,
until now, operated as an industrial segment separate from and sequential to
textile production. The result of this disconnect means that recyclers have
been slow to ask for changes to be made to upstream design and production
decisions that would make recycling easier and more profitable, and design
and production, by turn, have been slow to develop products that ease
recycling; a general lack of holistic thinking from all players across the
sector is thus reflected. The challenge is not just to use recycled materials in
a wide range of products, but also to understand the potential of production
models based on cycles and joint responsibility for the whole product
system: to use recycling as a catalyst for much deeper behavioural change.
Designer Karina Michel has been working to utilize waste generated
by garment production at Pratibha Syntex, a knitted apparel manufacturer
in India. Assigned to reduce Pratibha’s waste, which currently runs at 30
per cent (including ends of runs and rejects), Michel uses a reverse appliqué
technique, sandwiching several knit fabrics together with machine- and
hand-stitching, and then cutting sections away to reveal the many levels of
colours beneath. The transformation of factory waste into exquisitely
crafted garments exemplifies the power of design to innovate around issues
of sustainability.
TRANSFORMING
FASHION
SYSTEMS
However much we innovate and act to improve the sustainability credentials
of a piece of clothing, the benefits brought by these changes are always
restricted by the production systems and business models that market and sell
the garment and by the behaviour of the person who buys it. Producing a
garment with lower-impact fibre or better labour conditions, while important,
changes the overall system very little, for these ‘better’ fibres and pieces are
made into the same sorts of garments, sold by the same retailers and then
worn and washed in the same way as before. Part Two of this book explores
2
new ways of engaging with the process of sustainability in fashion, starting
at a point that acknowledges the profound and multiple challenges inherent
in bringing together sustainability, the fashion industry and our economic
system based on growth.
75
As we work to foster and cultivate sustainability benefits in fashion, it

makes sense to broaden our scrutiny from a close focus on products to a
focus also on the business models and the economic goals and rules that
shape the sector today – otherwise we will always be limiting our possible
actions and their potential effects. Many of these goals and rules and the
mindsets that give rise to them remain unacknowledged and unquestioned
in the principal industry circles, quietly validating the current way of doing
things.Yet, to many sustainability advocates, it is these modes of doing that
are the root problem of unsustainability. For without a process of scrutiny
of the established structures, motivations and business practices, the pursuit
of environmental and social quality will remain at a superficial level and
will never transition to a point of flourishing (that is, of sustainability) for
human and non-human systems alike.
World Bank economist Herman Daly puts it like this: ‘To do more
efficiently something that shouldn’t be done in the first place is no cause
for rejoicing.’1 This is not to suggest that the many important developments
that have taken place thus far in the name of sustainability innovation are
of no value – far from it – only that they are not all that needs to be done.
We have to recognize that, although it goes against the grain of much
modern thinking, many environmental and social problems in the fashion
sector have no purely technical or market-based solution: rather, their
solutions are moral and ethical (values that are not captured by business
and the market) and require us to take a step back from business-as-usual
and look at what shapes, directs and motivates the bigger systems.
Environmental philosopher Kate Rawles has acknowledged the
immense difficulties in offering a serious challenge to dominant thinking
from within the mainstream, since ‘people cling to the status quo’.2 Yet if
we are to begin to resolve some of the environmental and social problems
of the fashion sector, we need to realize where the roots of these problems
lie. On this point, eminent industrial ecologist John Ehrenfeld counsels:
‘Discipline yourself to live inside the questions…, then you will slowly be
able to discard the old tried, but no longer true, answers and replace them
with new, effective ways of building a sustainable future.’3
To this end, Part Two comprises a set of innovation opportunities that
lay the foundations of a different set of practices for the sector at large and
designers in particular, in the light of revised economic relationships,
different values and an ecological (i.e. nature-inspired) world view. Some of
these ideas are familiar, while others require us to stretch our minds to
imagine their full potential, and still others seem out of time or place.Yet
they are all built upon sound sustainability principles from people we all
consider to be cultural leaders or are from reasoned logic based on
empirical data from well-respected sources. The innovation opportunities
detailed in the pages that follow often involve slower, more complex and
more strategic work than that which fashion designers and the fashion
industry are used to.Yet it is by engaging with this process that we can
improve current practices and also build a vision of an alternative future.
76 Pa r t 2 : t r a n s f o r m i n g fa s h i o n S Y ST E M s
Chapter 6: Adaptability
‌ DAPT:
A
1. To make fit or suitable by changing or adjusting.
2. To adjust (oneself) to new or changed circumstances; vi to adjust oneself 4
In design for sustainability, adaptability in product, process or system is

most often a response to inefficient use of resources in the commercial
fashion industry. Strategies of adaptability seek to intensify use so as to
increase the efficiency with which each garment is worn – to get more
output from the same input. Taken individually, this can allow us to do
more with a single garment, though it is also part of a bigger body of work
that begins to interrupt the larger cycles of purchase and discard, ultimately
to slow consumption overall, and to challenge prevailing business models
that depend on producing and selling large volumes of garments in order
to benefit from large economies of scale that maximize profits.
In nature, the adaptability of life to its environment is the primary driver
for the evolutionary process by which new biological species arise, and is
the foundation from which all life flows. Adaptability allows certain species
to occupy specific niches within the habitat, each with a unique opportunity
for interaction with other species, resources and processes.5 The openness
and readiness of a species to adapt enables it to flex and shift continually in
response to changing conditions and to survive in hostile environments. This
continual change on a micro scale is underpinned by the stability and resilience
of an ecosystem on a macro scale, enabling it to respond and remodel itself
in the face of crisis in one area while remaining steady in others.
Adaptability in a business context

For industries, corporations and large businesses, adapting is a cumbersome
and slow process – sheer inertia inhibits their ability to flex and change.
People working to implement sustainability-focused practices in the
current fashion industry often feel the weight of this immobility on a daily
basis, and the inability of the fashion industry to adapt is one of the key
reasons that sustainability in fashion has remained in roughly the same
territory (of product and process improvement) for the past 20 years. As
sustainable-design thinker Jonathan Chapman states: ‘The system itself
tends to edit out innovation in favour of ideas that are useful and
convenient to the established mode of operation.’6 What innovative
thinking is edited out in industry and in product development is also
edited out in the designer, the wearer and the market. For all have
themselves adapted to the prevailing pattern of operation: large volumes
and homogenous products rolled out and available across global markets.
It follows then that variety and pluralism in the form of adaptable fashion
products are not only challenging for industry, but also for designers and
consumers, transforming the way all stakeholders create and experience fashion.
For industry, and particularly that segment used to designing large volumes
of similar products for mass-manufacture, the challenge of adaptability is to
foster heterogeneity in thinking and garment design that accommodates varying
c h a p t e r 6 : A d a p ta b i l i t y 77
circumstances. For wearers, adaptability often necessitates a more hands-on

role in morphing a piece from one form to another. And for designers,
adaptability brings a change of focus from designing a finished garment to
creating a work in progress, a changing, growing, transforming piece.
Just as niches in nature have a symbiotic relationship with the larger
ecosystem, so this incubation of alternative industrial, consumer and design
behaviours influences the metabolism of our industry as a whole.
Adaptability can be seen to provide a means to fulfil the end user’s desire
for variety and to optimize material productivity. But through its focus on
transformation and flexibility, adaptability also has the potential to increase
the industry’s resilience over the long term and to better prepare us for a
time when change and heightened risk – physical, economic, ecological
and social – is the order of the day.
Trans- and multiple functions

Adaptability can manifest itself in many forms, for there are multiple
attributes that comprise a product. Colour, silhouette, texture, pattern,
function and detail all offer opportunities for manipulation and
transformation. And each challenges the status quo of industrial fashion to
a greater or lesser degree. Transfunctional adaptability is fully embedded
within the materiality of the product and is often inspired by ideas of
biomimicry (see Chapter 11), where nature’s efficiencies provide complex
yet elegant solutions or accommodate the stacking of one function within
another. Because transfunctional attributes are usually invisible, the
garments suit our modern lifestyle well, for when speed and convenience
are paramount, invisible qualities easily accommodate swift movement
from one social setting or environmental condition to another, and make
few demands on the wearer to slow down or stop to adjust a garment
physically. What transfunctional items provide in convenience, then, they
lack in engagement, for the invisible attributes remain unexperienced in
any overt or even covert form; transfunctional garments do not ask us to
question or change our behaviour. And it is precisely because they are not
challenging on this level that transfunctional items are the most
commercially accepted form of adaptability.
Transfunctional garments
When one transfunctional garment replaces several other garments, as is
the intention, with items made from, say, waterproof, insulating yet
breathable fabrics, the concept offers high potential to dematerialize our
wardrobes and increase the number of wearing hours per item of clothing.
However, if the end user’s behaviour remains unstudied, there is no
guarantee that the sustainability savings made on a single transfunctional
product will not be lost on an additional purchase. So, though
transfunctional items bring promise for reduction in resource and energy
use, still, influencing consumer behaviour and the growth model of
commerce remain the key challenges. US outdoor sportswear company
78
REI’s jacket
combines the
functions of insulation,
windproofing and
waterproofing in one.
REI has developed a jacket that provides warmth, water protection and
breathability. The high-tech fabric attributes mean that it can replace three
layers of clothing (insulating layer, wind barrier and waterproof layer) with
one and still meet the needs of the wearer in all three function categories.
The garment illustrates how a strategy of transfunction expressed in fabric
or garment form can potentially influence larger scales, affecting the
choices in a whole outfit and even a complete wardrobe.
Multifunctional garments
Humans are moody and emotional, fickle and erratic, and live in a society
that has shifting values and evolving beliefs. Though fashion itself evolves
over the long term to reflect society and culture, industrially produced
products, even when they are transfunctional, are physically static.
Multifunction garments go some way towards addressing this inertia by
building a more robust and resilient relationship between product and
wearer courtesy of multiple levels of engagement. This holds the promise
of increasing the number of wearing hours per garment. However,
designers are notoriously delighted with their own inventions and the
c h a p t e r 6 : A d a p ta b i l i t y 79
ability to create functions can frequently override the need for them in the
first place! Moreover, an arbitrary excess of features can create confusion in
the end user and intimidate to the point where functions beyond basic
utility are seldom used. ‘Rigors of restraint’7 in design are therefore
essential and are particularly important when multifunction is employed as
a strategy to reduce environmental impact, for when each additional
feature requires more natural resources, or when wearer consternation
results in a discarded garment, the actual outcome is the antithesis of
sustainability.
Multifunction as an end in itself, then, can completely miss the point
of sustainability – especially when features can and often do become
novelties or lures to purchase more. But when multifunction is handled
well, when the intended use of each feature is clear and the desired
behavioural outcome is effectively afforded through well-designed
mapping and clues, it has the potential to transform a static product into
one that engages the wearer through a number of moods and physical
needs. Well-designed mechanisms for multifunctional use can intercept the
familiar, repetitive act of getting dressed and start to shape the mind to new
ideas, laying the groundwork from which greater changes can be generated.
The reversible Cambia T-shirt made by Páramo, for example, is designed to
wick away moisture and has two fabric faces, each of which can be worn
inside or out depending on external factors and the needs of the wearer.
When worn next to the skin, the smooth fabric face keeps moisture close
to the body, helping to keep it cool in warm conditions. When reversed,
the honeycomb face directs water away from the skin, keeping the body
drier and warmer. While each function is continuously present in the
fabric, the fact that wearers have to stop, consider the conditions, weigh
their own needs, and turn the T-shirt one way or the other, subtly engages
them beyond surface styling and starts to cut new grooves of behavioural
change towards sustainability.
Trans-seasonal
Fashion thrives on change and speed and the cycling of garments through
an individual’s wardrobe. To ensure product turnover and additional
purchases, the fashion industry has manufactured artificial retail ‘seasons’
that require new looks and styles. Participation in these man-made seasons
carries a social coding, a sense of doing well, being able to stay up on the
latest trends and afford frequent purchases: Back to School, Transition,
Cruise and Holiday are just a few of the calls to lure consumers to
shopping malls. All are designed to tempt a change in wardrobe
components and to ensure the continuous flow of goods through the
industrial fashion system.
Trans-seasonal garments
Trans-seasonal garments have the potential to intercept this dominant
industry logic. Rather than developing new colour palettes and silhouettes
every few weeks, designers identify colours that will work across different Emily Melville’s coat
seasons and wardrobe combinations. Trans-seasonal concepts start to engage combines an

under-jacket and a
designers and wearers too on levels extending beyond the material aspects waistcoat that can be
of fashion and into the immaterial – connecting both to the rhythms of worn together or
natural seasons, and demanding that each consider what degree of change separately to serve in
different seasons.
is necessary and for what reasons. This will include, from the perspective of
the wearer, which parts of the body need protection and warmth and
when; and from a designer’s standpoint, what degree of adaptation will
engage the consumer to slow or intercept additional purchases.
The organic shapes in Emily Melville’s coat were inspired by researching
which areas of the body most needed warmth.The under-jacket wraps around
the core of the body, where functional warmth is most critical, yet it is also
integrated with the sleeves to form an interestingly shaped design in itself.The
long, sleeveless waistcoat is designed to be worn alone or layered over the
jacket. Equally strong together or apart, the items can be worn in combination
in cooler weather conditions and separately in warmer seasons.
Modular
Modular garments allow for the playful and creative engagement of the
wearer and have the potential to bring a long-lasting sense of delight by
being adaptable to personal preference and needs. Designing modular
garments for adaptable assembly and use demands more of the designer, for
he or she has to accommodate and facilitate the individual expression of
the wearer. The designer’s intent shifts from developing a resolved product
to developing a resolved concept, and the design genius becomes the
system or mechanism of assembly and disassembly as much as the product DePLOY’s approach
itself. Modular garments therefore broaden the design lens beyond a to modularity is based
on traditional tailoring
garment to include consumer behaviour, purchasing habits, social coding and convertible
and signals and help us to treat complex sustainability problems with outfits.
complex solutions. Modular garments not only offer alternative ways to

consume, but also demand new business models, where pieces of garments
are made as readily available as full garments or collections; these models
are built less upon volume of material throughput and more on services,
cycles and underlying human needs (see Chapter 13).
DePLOY’s approach to modularity considers the whole outfit.
Aiming to ‘fit the largest wardrobe into the smallest suitcase’, each piece in
DePLOY’s collection is adaptable and open to personalization – a dress
becomes a skirt, or a coat becomes a dress – through old-school clever
tailoring and the snap of an imperceptible fastening. A single outfit thereby
offers numerous possibilities, enabling customers to make more out of less
by replacing new fashion garment ‘parts’ each season. Designing to
dematerialize a wardrobe while at the same time fulfilling the social needs
of busy, active, modern women means that the function of the outfit across
a variety of social contexts has to be considered from the outset. The style
of DePLOY’s garments spans from the office to dinner and onwards, with
the innovation being in the transformational properties of the outfits
achieved with as few parts as possible. DePLOY’s business model is
reflected in its philosophy – ‘a place to create, not just to consume’ – and in
its description of its modular line as ‘demi-couture’.
Besides requiring us as designers to re-examine modes of practice
and business, modularity in clothing also offers us a means to reflect on

how we as wearers refresh our wardrobes and, in a way, refresh ourselves. It
asks if we can fulfil our desire for something new by adapting an existing
garment and how radical such changes need to be to satisfy the basic
human need for cyclical variety. Responding to this line of enquiry, Crystal
Titus designed a modular dress around a system of snaps, which enables
panels to be easily disconnected and reconnected. This flexible
construction allows sections to be replaced with other colours, fabrics and
prints and also to be moved vertically against each other to vary the
neckline shape. Manon Flener’s jacket follows a similar train of thought, yet
results in a different look. With metal studs as the means of attachment, the
removable garment pieces are comprised of durable fabric squares, resulting
in a much more ornamented final product.
Above: Modular Dress
Each of these modular concepts could be developed further. by Crystal Titus allows
Research tracking the patterns of use and degrees of boredom within panels to be removed
various product categories and types could yield a collection of items and replaced using
a snapping system.
exhibiting various levels of modularity, reflecting the appropriate need for
and speed of cyclical variety in each item. These ruminations illustrate the Opposite: Modular
way in which, once the design mind has adapted to a way of thinking that jacket by Manon
flows from a starting point based on sustainability principles, ideas will Flener created from
square sections
self-generate and build upon each other, forming various paths for fashion attached by studs.
and clothing development.
Changing shapes
Of all the adaptability concepts presented in these pages, changing the
silhouette or shape of a garment is perhaps the most challenging on all
levels, for shape literally forms the physical parameters and boundaries
within which fashion designers work and defines the space in which the
wearer moves.Yet designing to accommodate changes in product shape is a
concept that has been successfully applied to children’s toys such as Lego,
Meccano and Tinker Toys for many years. What these games have in
common is a simple and specific system for fastening components together
that, once learned, can be manipulated into various levels of complexity.
They allow for individual interpretation, and leave space for intuition and
for the continuous integration of skill-building, aesthetic enchantment and
playfulness. What’s more, they provide the means for players to explore and
to build for themselves.
Garments that change shape

Designing for changing shapes demands a completely different logic across
all sectors of the fashion industry. The designer has to acquire knowledge
of radically different construction and pattern-making techniques and
recognize the creative abilities and limits of the end wearer. The wearer in
turn has to be confident enough to involve herself in the continuing
evolution of the product and be prepared to embrace a completely new
approach to clothing the body. Changing shapes also reshapes the
83
relationship between the designer and the wearer: both become actively
responsive to the other, in a markedly different way than when focused
solely on the sale and the purchase of a static piece of clothing. Ironically,
as both designer and wearer become more engaged with each other, they
also become less attached – the designer less attached to his or her own
ideas, allowing the final form of the garment to emerge in the hands of the
wearer, and the wearer less attached to things, for as a new shape is built
the previous one disappears. In this way, designing for evolving shapes
provides another means by which to bring products from flows into cycles.
It helps us appreciate a wider set of values beyond the physical artefact and
to style and clothe ourselves in ways that most closely mimic natural
systems such as growth and decay, and expansion and contraction.
Left and above: The

Conceptual fashion designer Galya Rosenfeld develops and builds interlocking die-cut
shape-shifting garments and bags as a series of ‘pixels’ or squares that felt squares in Galya
interlock on all four sides. Die-cut from felt, these self-finished sections allow Rosenfeld’s pieces
provide many
for easy assembly by hand, with no refined skills, special equipment or energy possibilities to create
sources required. Overall, the concept provides an almost infinite variety of different forms.
construction possibilities and a means for the wearer to fulfil the emotional
desire for variety and change, and even accommodates complete disassembly
and reassembly into entirely new products. Changing shapes is the ultimate
challenge for industrial fashion, for how might it adapt to accommodate
garments that disappear and reappear in the hands of the wearer?
c h a p t e r 7 : Op t i m i Z e d l i f e t i m e s 85
Chapter 7: Optimized lifetimes

The speed and volume with which industrially produced products flow
through the fashion system has resulted in their depersonalization. We no
longer know the makers, or the source of the materials; they no longer
speak of our myths, communities or societies. Our garments have become
inanimate objects, mainly providing a means for delivering on commercial
goals. Poetic meaning has been reduced in importance in favour of
efficiencies of production, and a garment’s aesthetic reflects a bare
minimum appeal, developed primarily to secure the initial sale. They are, as
Jonathan Chapman calls them, ‘aesthetically impoverished’.8
The limited presence of meaning and empathy in so many commodity
fashion products, combined with their low cost and ease of purchase, is a
key factor in their being discarded long before they are worn out. To
change this requires work on a number of fronts – critically around what
influences the lifespan of a garment in material, fashion and emotional
terms. Lifespan, or durability, is frequently understood first and foremost as
a physical phenomenon: resilient materials and robust construction. But
physical durability is a flawed solution in sustainability terms. Often in the
fashion sector, a discarded product is not an indicator of poor product
quality, but rather of a failed relationship between the product and the
wearer.9 And though it may be true that the lack of physical durability in a
functional item such as a zip may result in a discarded garment, studies
show that 90 per cent of clothing is thrown away long before the end of its
useful life. Physically durable products still remain subject to the logic of
cyclical consumption directed by ‘Western’ society and culture. And as
Jonathan Chapman also notes, ‘when physical materials grossly outlive our
desire for them, the result is waste’;10 physical durability becomes a liability
rather than an asset when the product is in landfill.
Empathy
True measures of a ‘durable’ product lifetime are best found along
emotional and cultural indices – what meaning the garment carries, how
it is used, and the behaviour, lifestyle, desires and personal values of the
wearer. These empathetic connections are already well explored and
understood by companies, since they form the very basis for marketing
strategies to sell more product. Using this information not only for
financial gain, but also to direct design for emotional attachment to
optimize product life for sustainability gains, is quite unfamiliar and
uncomfortable territory. It challenges the very core of existing
business models.
How we enable products to evoke empathy in an overdeveloped and
overabundant material world is a formidable challenge. The fast-paced and
visually noisy marketplace depletes the psychic attention of the shopper;
elements that might signal emotional attachment to a garment, as quiet as
they often are, can easily be drowned out by the competition for a
shopper’s attention. Indeed, designer Christina Kim of Dosa acknowledges
and circumvents this problem by showing her ‘slow fashion’ line in her
own gallery space in downtown Los Angeles, by appointment only. Here,

viewers can take time to savour the unique qualities of each piece and
absorb the whole philosophy of the designer in her space (see page 177).
Moreover, empathy often evolves through reflection and acquired
narratives, which build slowly and over time, after the initial purchase is
secured – that is, beyond the designer’s direct influence. Enabling these
narratives to be captured is therefore a delicate dance, for intent and
meaning are subject to countless personal interpretations based on both
past associations and the experiences of the wearer – a memory, a
significant event or a rite of passage – and as such, responses can be quite
unpredictable from person to person.
Durability’s physical and emotional attributes

Yet there are some well-accepted physical product attributes that
consistently delight our sensibilities. The ‘faded bloom’ of denim, for
example, acquires an increasingly desirable character over time, capturing
the user’s particular patterns of wear and tear and continuously building on
its emotional content. And the feel of cashmere never fails to deliver and
redeliver a comforting and warm sense of well-being to any wearer.
Besides these tactile routes, emotional content can also be achieved
through the skilful treatment of something as simple as a label. The
Californian company ZoZa, for example, sewed thoughtful messages such
as ‘Don’t be tense. Be present’ in unusual places inside their garments,
which created immediate delight upon discovery, and a lasting appreciation
that the designer was emotionally engaged when creating.
Additional examples, where the emotional engagement of the
designer is apparent and the same is enabled in the user, could be explored
by exploiting the varying light- and wash-fastness properties of natural
dyes and layering the fabrics accordingly in a garment so that patterns are
revealed and evolve over years of use; conversely, over-printing the same
garment while integrating resist areas to provide a ‘window’ on its previous
state would capture the past while creating a new pattern and allowing
more complex patterning to evolve into the future. These poetic touches
create space for moments of clarity and shed a slanted light on different
ways to create and experience fashion.
Understanding the various aspects of durability – emotional, trend-
based and physical – in the context of an individual wearer of clothes
generates a place at which resources and meaning can be optimally
satisfied.Yet, if the ultimate goal of optimized lifetimes is to slow the flow
of natural resources through the fashion system, then designing more
emotionally durable products may be as limited a strategy as physical
durability. For the fastest-growing real-estate sector in the US is self-
storage, now a $50 billion industry, and the majority of items contained in
these units is middle-class ‘stuff ’. This state of affairs exists even though
families in the US are half the size they were in the 1950s, and houses
twice as large. Just as reducing the embodied energy in one garment does
c h a p t e r 7 : Op t i m i Z e d l i f e t i m e s 87
not guarantee absolute energy reductions as the overall business grows in

size, so optimizing the lifetime of one item alone does not necessarily
guarantee net reductions in resource consumption. Achieving ‘absolute
optimized lifetimes’ through fundamental shifts in culture, social behaviour
and business practice remains the imperative.
But despite their limitations, what all of the above concepts do
provide is an emotional feedback loop for the wearer, where we can
reassess our relationship to each piece, contemplate notions of use,
ownership and need, and take account of the stocks and flows of things
passing through our lives and recalibrate the metabolism of our wardrobes.
Optimized lifetimes
The notion of optimized lifetimes as a category of sustainability in fashion
has invited a number of approaches and explorations, each iteration
reflecting deeper knowledge and more integrated responses to
sustainability. We have seen optimized lifetimes evolve from simple
beginnings expressed in the materiality of the product (as physically robust
fabric and construction; and in Cradle-to-Cradle-inspired recycled and
biodegradable fabrics). We have seen concepts outperform industry’s ability
to change (as with Patagonia’s ‘Sugar and Spice’ shoe, designed to be
disassembled and recycled, which fell short of its goal because of a lack of
industry infrastructure), and conversely we have seen concepts hit the mark
(as in Avelle’s bag-leasing service, see page 103), where product characteristics
imbue both a short-term emotional quality to one consumer, and a long-
lasting physical quality to support continuous recirculation and extended use
by many.
A growing number of research projects are contributing to our
understanding of how to make garments appropriately durable. The
ToTEM (Tales of Things and Electronic Memory) project investigates the
potential to associate people’s personal stories with specific objects through
the use of Quick Response (QR) codes and RFID tags, thereby enabling
others to read them and gain an insight into an item’s significance. And the
clothing-specific project WORN_RELICS© provides a unique space
where the lifetime history and future of clothing can be collected and
archived. Participants apply for a password provided by a coded label that
allows them to register an item and create a profile of it on the Worn
Relics web site. Entries may be updated and many of them follow the
continuing life or journey of the garment. The archives not only reveal the
attachment between the product and the wearer, but a whole web of
associated relationships, uses, feelings and memories that inevitably become
linked with an often-worn garment.
Pa r t 2 : t r a n s f o r m i n g fa s h i o n S Y ST E M s
Multiple approaches to durability

One means of imagining beyond existing frameworks is through ‘future
scenarios’, where explorations are carried out along a given set of criteria
based on well-researched socio-cultural and ethnographic tendencies, and
pushed as far as possible to gain insights into what might happen decades
in the future. The 2004 Lifetimes project by Kate Fletcher and Mathilda
Tham presents a nuanced exploration of clothing and the potential for
designing more resourceful garments by considering speed and time. This
involved researching products across a number of indices including
extended life, durability, materials, use and services. The goal of the project
was to create scenarios for more resourceful consumption for specific
garments, as summarized in the table on pages 90–91.
Metabolism of a wardrobe
Scenarios such as those developed in the Lifetimes project help us imagine
future possibilities that involve minimal financial investment in
infrastructure or prototype development, and enable us to reason through a
host of influences to create a platform from which we can imagine logical
next steps. Given the scenarios developed in Lifetimes, it is not too far a
stretch to imagine, for example, a time when everyone knows the
‘metabolism’ of their wardrobe and has the ability to adjust it. Rather than
being mere receptacles periodically purged to create more space, wardrobes
become places of ‘dynamic equilibrium’; clothes are reworked, shared and
reused without constantly requiring a flow of new goods and resources.
Here shopping is no longer at the centre of the fashion experience but is
simply one among many aspects incorporating also the creative energies of
individuals as they consider the optimum lifetime of each piece and refresh
their wardrobes and themselves in new ways.
Opposite: Current (top)

and future (below)
wardrobe metabolisms
indicating many
options for slowing
personal material
flows.11
89
ENV
IRO
NM
EN
CO T
ENERGY
WAT E R
M
NAT SO
M
AIR
RE
UN
U RAL
RA E
IT
MAT
U RC
Y
W RIALS
ES
CLOTH
R
YE
ES
IN
P LO
L
I TA
CAP
EM
W ARDROB E
FILL
LAND
I N E R AT I O N
I N C VERSEAS
O
C
LO
TH
ES
O
UT
CURRENT WARDROBE METABOLISM
ENV
IRO
NM
EN
& RE CO T
WAT E R
ENERGY
U SE M
M
RE
AIR
U
RE
OR
SO
N
IT
UR
OWN
Y
C
E
CL
THRIFT & V
O
R
YE
TH
IN T
ES
P LO
L
I TA
A GE
CAP
EM
W ARDROB E
SHAR
NG
I
INCI
NERA
TION O
LE
REC
ASI G
N
C
Y
LING
VERSEAS
FUTURE WARDROBE METABOLISM

90 Pa r t 2 : t r a n s f o r m i n g fa s h i o n s Y s t E m s
thE lifEtimEs ProJEct:

EXPloring oPtimiZEd lifEtimEs for foUr garmEnts
dancing PriVatE girls’ imPortant datE

ViEW night mEEting
oUt
Item Party top: impulse buy, fast fashion, bought for a special occasion.
Use Worn once or twice in its lifetime.
Material Polyester.
Washing never washed, since worn only a few times.
Life-cycle impact fibre and fabric production phase.
Design strategy 1 designed for short life. avoids virgin material and keeps materials
light. garment is completely biodegradable or highly recyclable
and goes into a take-back system after use, with a deposit paid
back to the consumer.
Design strategy 2 rentable vintage piece available for a single occasion. rental
shop is trendy and specializes in one-offs.
Item basic underwear: screens smells and bodily dirt from other
garments.
Use Worn daily.
Material cotton/rayon blend.
Washing frequent washing after every use.
Life-cycle impact consumer washing/care stage.
Design strategy 1 Underwear is disposable to avoid washing. design is soft,
delicate and laser-cut, made from non-woven cellulose
coloured with biodegradable pigments. supplied in bulk with
composting instructions.
Design strategy 2 non-disposables are designed for low-impact laundering and
come with advice on cleaning strategies that is provided on
product ribbons and labels.
mon tUE WEd thUr fri sat sUn

chaPtEr 7: oPtimiZEd lifEtimEs 91
Item Utility trousers: with styling as combat trousers or as denim jeans.

bought new or second-hand.
Use Worn frequently.
Material 100% cotton.
Washing Washed regularly but not after every use.
Life-cycle impact Washing/use phase and production of fibre.
Design strategy 1 Who wears the trousers? made from new materials that age well
from fabric, which grows in character through increased use.
Design strategy 2 ready-worn trousers are bought second-hand from mainstream
stores, where they are intermingled with new items. stores also
offer repair and patching services.
Item Plain coat: investment piece, bought after long consideration.

functional and stylish to last several seasons.
Use Worn intensively in the winter, stored carefully in warm seasons.
Material 100% wool.
Washing rarely cleaned.
Life-cycle impact fibre and fabric production phase.
Design strategy 1 great coat. fits perfectly and is made of durable fabric that resists
wear and tear. comes with spare buttons and thread for repair,
with seasonal co-ordinating accessories offered by the store.
Design strategy 2 meticulous maintenance instructions attached, and
well-designed labels and history of the design inspiration help
foster an emotional attachment for the wearer. storage bag and
cedar block to deter moths are also provided.
Chapter 8: Low-impact use

Changing the way in which people wash, dry and care for their garments
can significantly influence the environmental impact of any item of
clothing. Studies conducted almost 20 years ago revealed the relative
importance of laundry behaviour on a garment’s overall sustainability
profile. They showed that for frequently washed garments the impact of the
so-called ‘use phase’ of a garment’s life is between two and four times that
of production, even when measured across a wide range of criteria
including carbon dioxide emissions, water pollution and production of
solid waste.12 Put simply, the way in which we care for our clothes has a
big effect on their potential sustainability, and focusing design attention
here brings the promise of change.
Yet while the cumulative impact of our clothes-care behaviours has
been known for several decades, it is only much more recently, with the
widespread acceptance of life-cycle thinking, that responsibility for what
happens in the laundry has begun to be shouldered by designers and
fashion brands and not just those of us who actually do the clothes
cleaning. In life-cycle thinking, the aim is to improve the sustainability
credentials of the entire product, as it is made, used and then discarded. This
holistic approach has spawned a number of initiatives aimed at reducing
resource-intensive laundry behaviours as a way to improve the
sustainability of the overall garment. One such programme, the British
government’s ‘Sustainable Clothing Roadmap’,13 has funded specific
research into laundry technologies and associated policy strategies as a way
explicitly to promote enhanced sustainability of clothing.
Consumer behaviour and low-impact use

Like almost all sustainability issues in fashion, those relating to laundering are
nuanced and complex; there are few one-size-fits-all solutions to the
challenges faced. Perhaps the most obvious caveat is that not all garments
– and not all consumers – are the same. Some garment types (underwear
and T-shirts, say) are washed intensively, while others (jackets and sweaters)
are rarely cleaned. For infrequently laundered items, making changes to
how they are cared for is a red herring, as it will have almost no effect on
their overall sustainability. Similarly, there are wide-ranging differences in
the way individuals conduct their laundry practices: some carefully sort and
separate their laundry, doing a part-load as they need an item; others wash
everything at the same temperature in full loads; others still use public
launderettes, which wash and tumble-dry clothes in large commercial
machines. Thus any approach to addressing impacts in laundering needs to
be both specific and personal while at the same time able to bridge the
subtleties of socio-cultural attitudes and consumer behaviour, in addition
to addressing the more straightforward resource-efficiency considerations.
Ultimately, the objective is to encourage more sustainable attitudes towards
cleanliness and hygiene and help to modify current norms.
c h a p t e r 8 : L o w - i m pa c t u s e 93
Design for low launder

Perhaps the most obvious place to begin to make changes to reduce the
impact associated with laundering clothes is to work with fibres’ innate
washing and drying characteristics and, for example, to specify those
materials that wash well in cool temperatures and dry quickly, leading to
benefits including lower energy consumption in the laundry (discussed on
page 61).Yet it is not just fibre type that influences laundry behaviour;
fabric construction and finishing can also lead to lower-impact washing.
Novel self-cleaning coatings based on nanotechnology are currently in
development. Perhaps the most well-known finishes applied to fabric to
influence laundering habits are stain-repellent coatings, such as
Scotchgard™ and Teflon®, that resist dirt; or antimicrobial finishes, from
triclosan to quaternized silicones and silver, that help keep fabrics ‘fresher’
for longer. Both these groups of finishes bring the promise of lower
impacts in laundering – that is, if their application actually translates into
different laundering behaviour, which is far from guaranteed. What is
certain, however, is that every additional finishing treatment necessitates a
supplementary industrial process and brings an added environmental cost
that has to be traded off against speculative laundry benefits over the
long term.
Implications of coatings
A growing body of evidence now demonstrates wide-ranging human
health impacts associated with perfluorinated chemicals – the base products
of stain-repellent coatings. A recent study found evidence linking exposure
to perfluorinates with low birth weights in children,14 and they are now
included on the ‘SIN’ (Substitute It Now) list developed by European
NGOs. This list identifies 267 substances as being of very high concern,
and NGOs are calling for authorities to regulate and eliminate these from
products.15 For antimicrobial coatings, concerns are on-going about
bacteria becoming drug-resistant (sometimes called ‘super-bugs’) on
account of their continual exposure to bacteria-killing substances including
coatings. There are also worries about the wash-fastness of these chemicals
and their presence in downstream watercourses.
When immersed in the detail of the effects of a coating’s chemistry, it
is easy to lose sight of whether such additional finishing treatments deliver
actual benefits. Currently evidence proving that their application results in
less frequent laundering is lacking, for ‘coatings only directly influence
physical factors of laundering, not cultural or behavioural ones… (and) it is
cultural or behavioural reasons that account for most of our laundry’.16
Furthermore, a serious debate about the necessity (or not) of making our
clothes free of bacteria in the first place is long overdue. While it makes
sense for medical textiles such as dressings or swabs to be sterile to reduce
the risk of infection, sterile garments are, for the majority of us with
healthy immune systems, far from essential to our well-being.
New solutions for low launder

Japanese brand Konaka, together with designer Kansai Yamamoto and
Savile Row tailor John Pearse, has developed a ‘Shower Clean Suit’ that can
be washed in a warm shower stream and dries wrinkle-free. The suit is
made from a novel blend of wool and water-soluble fibres and soaked in
water after construction, so that the water-soluble fibres dissolve, creating a
fabric that is made of wool and an array of hollow cavities. This allows
water to pass easily between the fibres, taking dirt along with it. The
benefits of an easy-care suit washed in the shower are obvious: no dry-
cleaning and associated solvent use; no use of white goods and detergents;
and perhaps, in the case of Konaka’s suit, the need to own fewer suits
because the cleaning process is so quick. According to Konaka, it takes
around ten minutes to rinse the suit to remove normal stains and it
drip-dries wrinkle-free in eight hours. Konaka’s innovation is marketed as
part of the convenience culture and raises additional questions – such as,
when a suit is easier to clean, will we simply wash it more often? And by
freshening up a garment in a shower cubicle – in the same way we would
our bodies – do our more general expectations of cleanliness around
clothing rise even further, leading to more laundering overall?
No Wash
Perhaps the logical conclusion of any attempt to innovate to reduce the
high impact of clothes washing is to design clothes never to be washed at
all. By a single stroke, around two-thirds of the total energy consumed in
the life of a standard, frequently washed garment could be saved.
Persuading people to defy social pressure and adopt non-laundering
behaviour with their clothes may not be as challenging as we think: for a
small number of people, this is already established behaviour. Recent
research gathered stories and images about, among other things, clothes
that are still in use and have never been washed.17 These collated tales
reveal that a key influence in determining whether a piece might never be
laundered is fear that the washing process itself causes something precious
to be lost: a scent, a memory, the particular way a garment fits, the quality
of hand-work, and so on. This evocation of emotion as a major influence
in home laundering practices stands at odds with leading industry
approaches, which treat laundering as a technical and behavioural function
of wash-cycle efficiency but not an emotional one.
Social norms and hygiene

As fashion historian Melissa Leventon notes: ‘We are currently in a period
where we are clean and perfumed. But there have been periods where we
have been clean and unperfumed, unclean and perfumed, and unclean and
unperfumed. Each period reflected the social and cultural mores of the
time.’18 The scope and potential of design to use historical knowledge as a
cue to influence social and cultural behaviours is well known; but perhaps Shower Clean Suit
its key starting point today, in a time of peak oil and scarce water, is to by Konaka.
design pieces that encourage individuals to reflect on their current Opposite: Three pieces
behaviour and offer visions of a future very different from the present, with from the Energy Water
Fashion range of
the aim of fostering change towards sustainability. To a certain extent, the garments designed to
way in which denim is often worn in so as to allow authentic wear-marks reduce the impact of
to accumulate in a pair of jeans offers a small insight into a set of already laundering through
deliberate labelling
existing alternative behaviours that consume few resources; it takes (the dress); garment fit
between four and nine months to wear in a pair of jeans in this way and (trousers); and
requires that laundering is delayed a minimum of six months. specifying fibre type
with a low-laundering
The No Wash top, designed in 2002–3 by Becky Earley and Kate profile (knitted top).
Fletcher as part of the 5 Ways project, was developed in response to a
laundry diary documenting six months of laundry behaviour and life-cycle Opposite below:
data that indicated the high relative impact of the consumer-care phase of No Wash top
produced as part of
the life cycle. The garment features wipe-clean surfaces in areas where the 5 Ways project.
stains are most likely to accumulate and extra underarm ventilation; it has
been worn regularly for several years without washing.
Also based on research rooted in user behaviour and cultural rituals,
Energy Water Fashion has explored how design can influence the way
garments are worn and used. Exhibited as part of London College of
Fashion’s MA Fashion and the Environment showcase in early 2010, each
item in its eight-piece collection EW8 incorporates a unique design
feature, identified through empirical work, to encourage the wearer to
wash the garment less often. The features, which include colour, fibre type,
fit, design, openings, use of protective layers, and function, offer creative
starting points to influence both design practice and the way users care for
their clothes, bringing knowledge of the practices of use to bear on the
design and development of garments.
Design to stain
A variant on the no-wash theme is to use the inevitable accumulation of
stains on a garment over time as a key part of its design, in effect as a sign
of its loving use. Here space is left in a garment’s print or cut to record and
celebrate marks of use: something that goes against our usual tactic of
erasing all evidence of wear, washing out past stains and spills. Leaving such
a space for the user and his or her touch links garment aesthetics to social
norms and changes the role that the designer plays, away from producing
complete inviolable pieces towards producing items that are finished only
in collaboration with the wearer over time. The intention here is that the
wearer instantly recognizes that this garment is to be treated differently.
Lauren Devenney’s No Stain dress (over the page), for example, presents a
new perspective on the faux pas of dirty clothing, with pieces designed to
resist smell and encourage stain. Using linen and cotton jersey to allow the
body and garments to breathe, and billowy silhouettes with deeply cut
arms and neckline for additional circulation, the potential for perspiration
and body odour is significantly reduced. Pre-stained in a semi-random
splatter pattern, the items are refreshed, rather than degraded, by each
further accidental spill.
Low iron
Statistics show that when we steam-iron a garment on a hot setting, we Lauren Devenney’s
use the same amount of energy as is consumed during washing (though it dress,designed to
embrace stains.
is much lower when we iron without steam).19 Though it is easy to
imagine eliminating the ironing process altogether, especially for those
among us who are already iron-shy, this strategy has multifaceted
implications, not least for social norms and the cultural acceptability of
wearing wrinkled garments.
Ironing smoothes crumpled or creased fabric and, like washing, gives
an appearance of smartness, care and freshness, all of which are triggers for
social messages such as success and respect. For centuries, ironing has been
a key part of the laundering cycle, particularly for natural fibres such as
linen, cotton and silk that crease readily. However, with the introduction of
more crease-resistant synthetic fibres after World War II and growing
consumer demand for convenient, easy-care fabrics, finishing treatments to
increase crease-resistance for natural fibres were developed – effectively
doing away with, or at least minimizing, the need for ironing. The trade-off
here is whether energy-intensive ironing at home and taking time and care
over a garment (which arguably connect you more with a piece) are better
than increased chemical use in the industrial finishing process. Or whether
both approaches can be eclipsed by other, more resource-efficient solutions
– perhaps by working with ideas of social and cultural change or quite
simply by designing to be creased.
Design for wrinkles

Designing for creasing and wrinkles presents an opportunity both to meet
a sustainability goal and to benefit the wearer, for in our modern and
fast-paced lives, acceptable creases have the appeal of convenience. Muji’s
creased and wrinkled T-shirt, for example, completely eliminates the need
to iron. Packaged as a shrink-wrapped cube, the product clearly
communicates the design intent at point of sale, while the blended
cotton–polyester fabric retains creases through use. Printing on deliberately
wrinkled cloth to create breaks in the transferred image and trompe-l’oeil
effects of wrinkle stripes printed on flat fabric are treatments that have
already been explored and marketed successfully on conventional garments.
Such effects distract the eye away from unintentional creases, much in the
way that a space-dyed yarn, once knitted, distracts the eye from irregular
colour fading. These visual manipulations lend themselves well to the
designer’s mind- and skill-set and when applied to sustainability issues
provide an infinite number of possible solutions. A more sculptural
approach to design to be creased could entail structural details such as
drawstrings and gathers specifically placed to create volume and wrinkles
in creatively acceptable ways, while the wrinkled version of Issey Miyake’s
Pleats Please concept provides the opposite effect – constricting rather than
building volume – for the same purpose. What all of these ideas have in
common is that they make creases and wrinkles acceptable, even chic and
desirable, and therefore hold promise for being accepted by the mainstream.
Muji’s wrinkled T-shirt,

which comes
packaged as a
small cube.
Chapter 9: Services and sharing

The starting point for a good deal of innovation around sustainability is to
try to dissociate business success from relentless expansion of material
consumption, in an attempt to temper resource depletion, pollution
generation and associated effects such as climate change. This of course
seems a particularly Herculean task for the fashion sector, whose structure
is shaped so profoundly by the expansionist model of economic growth
where increasing sales of new items is the most important route to
increasing profits and expanding market share.
For some years now, business concepts focused on services rather
than products have been put forward as offering optimal potential for
sustainability improvements. Their secret is to use the pursuit of efficiency
to drive resource use down and profits up. Service-oriented businesses can
be formulated in many different ways, from repair and hire services to
‘open source’ design services, where garment patterns are freely shared and
open for users to make at home. The challenge here is to design the
business model as much as to design the garments that are traded in it; and
for the requirements of each to shape the other.
Repair services
A key element of many sustainability-focused business models is the
possibility of earning income by working in ways other than just selling
more material units. Repair services contribute to this goal by helping
people return their garments back to good condition and charging for that
service. Alteration and mending services are, of course, nothing new and
have been an established part of many laundering and tailoring enterprises
for many years. However, in formally acknowledging the contribution and
relevance of repair work to the overall sustainability profile of the fashion
sector, repair is shifted from a stand-alone, ad hoc set of activities to an
element that is intrinsic to the overall effectiveness of the fashion ‘system’.
Impromptu organizations are already becoming established with or
without official fashion industry sanction. Social Fabric Collaborative in
San Francisco, for example, provides workshops where professional
designers help non-professionals repair and make garments for themselves,
starting with simply sewing on a button. Classes are run in collaboration
with the Bike Kitchen, a DIY bicycle repair training organization. By
associating with an already accepted product maintenance community,
Social Fabric asks us to question why we do not also treat our clothing the
way we treat our bicycles.
Historical precedents are rich with insight into the possibility of
repair, alteration and maintenance of clothes. Textiles – and the clothes they
are made into – only became plentiful in the twentieth century. Before
that, they were highly valued items that were carefully maintained because
of both their cost and their scarcity. Many of the techniques that were used
to keep clothes wearable for the longest possible time combined details to
prevent damage with after-the-fact repair, including: patching or edging
worn sections; adding tape or braid to hems, cuffs and necklines to prevent
c h a p t e r 9 : Se rv i c e s a n d S h a r i n g 101
fraying; and building large seams or hems into garments so they could be
easily altered. For most people, there are few economic savings brought by
repairing garments today, mainly due to the low price of new garments
relative to the high price of labour for repair.Yet the increasing scarcity and
cost of natural resources such as oil and fresh water may act to shift the
balance back in favour of repair, and a changing economic and natural
climate may usher in a different set of social and material norms.
The limitations of and possibilities for repair rarely, if ever, influence
the design of a new garment.
Braided hems and

patched and repaired
lining in a jacket from
the Victorian era.
Design for repair

Repair has traditionally been seen as an activity separate from and
consecutive to design and production; those specialists altering or repairing
clothes tend to do so regardless of the garment’s design, not because of it.
Yet opportunities do exist for building future repair and resilience into
articles of clothing. Certain sorts of garments naturally seem most suited to
this approach – expensive ‘classic’ pieces, for example – yet when these
innovative approaches are fused with emotional durability, design for
disassembly and adaptability, their application has potential to reach far
beyond this niche to many more markets and people.
From his mobile ‘ice-cream cart’ equipped with an old treadle sewing
machine, Michael Swaine mends people’s clothes for free on street corners
in San Francisco. He hems trousers, patches jackets and sews on buttons –
originally as part of an art project on generosity, but nine years later, more
because of the relationships and trust he has built up with local people.
Swaine claims his cart – and the act of repair – has created a community space
for talking and has reconnected garments once again to the ‘thread of life’.
Leasing systems
Changing the ways in which products are organized, distributed and used Michael Swaine
offers the prospect of reducing the amount of materials we consume while repairing clothes from
his cart on the streets
still meeting people’s needs. One of the key ways in which we can do this of San Francisco.
is to move from the traditional model of ‘owning’ garments to one based
on ‘leasing’. When a garment is leased, a consumer buys its utility or the
results it offers (its fashionability, warmth, protection and so on), rather than
the material object itself. Perhaps one of the most common examples of
garment leasing is formalwear; the morning tailcoat hired, say, for a
wedding. Here the wearer requires the elegance and sense of tradition
signified by the coat, and not the permanent ownership of it. This small but
not insignificant shift away from exclusive ownership to shared access has
the potential to reduce the number of garments that are produced. Clothes
hire, library or leasing systems thus work to break the predominant ‘one
garment to one wearer’ relationship that typifies most of our experience of
using clothes. The challenge is to increase the number of wearers so that
the resources that make up each garment are used as intensively as possible.
Informally, many of us may have already acted in ways that change
the one-to-one garment-to-wearer ratio by, for example, buying and then
trading back vintage garments (a kind of covert long-term leasing) or by
sharing clothes with close friends, with the main limitation being that for a
garment to be easily shared, the people doing the sharing have to be a
similar size to ensure the garment fits properly. UK-based knitwear
company Keep and Share uses this constraint as a point of innovation,
designing loose shapes with minimal fit points at particular places where
body dimensions vary the least. The result is a design concept built with
pieces that make sharing both more likely and more practical.
The logic of leasing

The logic behind leasing systems borrows heavily from a set of ideas
perfected in consumer economies, and particularly from the notion of
efficiency. In leasing, a producer maintains ownership over a garment,
rather than selling it. And because garments represent an investment, the
producer continually searches for ways in which to make a profit on that
investment by increasing the efficiency with which the garments are used.
The incentive is to work the garments harder; to make more money, which
in the case of a clothing service, is to own few, durable garments and to
hire them out to as many individuals as possible for as long as possible.
Online accessories company Avelle (formally Bag, Borrow or Steal)
offers a rental service for high-end handbags, jewellery and sunglasses.
Once a member of the leasing service (around US$5 monthly fee), a
customer can rent an item for a week, a month or as long as they want,
with rates varying from $15 per week for everyday bags to $150 per week
for vintage. All products have been used before and customers are
encouraged to take care of the pieces: ‘Think of what you borrow as being
on loan from a good friend.’ Avelle actively promotes its service as a
high-status, consumer ‘nirvana’, ‘for handbag addicts it is the ultimate
fantasy: an endless stream of pristine designer bags delivered straight to
one’s doorstep’.20 Yet behind this consumer-friendly front, there is a
business model in place that makes money from leasing each bag as many
times as possible. To encourage this to happen, Avelle uses, for example, a
queuing system on its web site so that consumers can see how long they
will have to wait to hire a particular piece.
Design services
Another variation on the leasing systems theme is the development of
service opportunities around the design of garments. Instead of setting up
services to repair or alter existing garments, or to hire garments or other
textile products to users, design services themselves can be sold. By tracking
back up the supply chain and isolating key functions and potential markets,
a service can be developed that has the promise of sustainability benefits.
Bag from online

accessories rental
company Avelle.
Short jacket by
SANS, for which a
downloadable pattern
is available online.
The influence of the Internet

The Internet offers new opportunities for direct contact
between a pattern-cutter and a home-sewer, allowing
for bespoke designs to be produced. Design services
can thus work with new technology and the flows of
fashion expression while at the same time nudging
dominant models of clothing production in new
directions. Garments can for example be designed, cut
and sewn independent of commercial fashion opportunity
or wholly inside it: self-assembly inspired by an image
from the fashion press and facilitated by a commercially
available garment kit. Other features of Web-based activity,
such as open-source co-operative design initiatives, also
offer opportunities for sustainability-inspired design services
in fashion. Publishing designs and garment patterns under
‘copyleft’ licensing – that is, to be duplicated freely,
adapted and shared again rather than protected with
‘copyright’ as is the norm – begins to subvert the
hierarchical, power and commercial dynamics of fashion.
The outcomes are fashion pieces with a design concept
of an entire (global) community, made with the prowess
of an individual, most likely from the materials they have
to hand, with additional options inevitably opening up
through the use of whole-garment knitting machines
and the increased availability of rapid prototyping.
In addition to its ready-to-wear lines, US fashion
brand SANS offers downloadable patterns over the
Internet. The patterns are designed to be home-printer-friendly and sections Trench coat reworked
of the pattern, printed on a series of A4 sheets of paper, first have to be in Junky Styling’s
wardrobe surgery.
assembled before a garment can be cut. Its Home Made initiative started
with three basic T-shirt designs, but has now grown to include pieces from
the current collection, so blurring the boundaries between fashion labels as
producers of finished garments and as fashion service providers and finding
new ways for people to relate to their clothes. As the Home Made collection
strapline states: ‘Pattern made in New York. Garment made wherever you are.’
Other models of design services

Junky Styling has been creating new garments from waste ones – most
notably from men’s suits – for well over a decade. But more recently it has
set up a ‘wardrobe surgery’ at the back of its London store to overhaul,
customize or simply alter old, ill-fitting or worn-out clothes. Customers
are invited to be part of the design process, to discuss garment preferences
and recurring problems encountered with the cut and fit of the piece as
was. The garment is then redesigned and reworked and the customer
invited in for fitting adjustments: thus the core business of the brand is
expanded and raises revenue from remodelling existing garments.
Chapter 10: Local

‌‘A good local economy is one that is shaped from the inside’
‌Wendell Berry
Most modern commercial artefacts are sourced internationally, based on

what is the most economical production route for each processing step and
material component. Though direct costs are certainly balanced with
service, reliability, quality and retail timelines, economics is the logic of
production and distribution. This logic makes the bottom line the most
powerful factor motivating choices about where to produce garments –
a factor that takes no account of the knock-on effects on environments,
communities and culture; conventional economics simply counts these
effects as costs ‘external’ to a corporation’s activity.
For many commentators, the logic of economics-driven globalized
production and distribution is at the core of unsustainability, for the large
scale and innate anonymity of a globalized fashion system perpetuates our
inability to understand its social and ecological impacts. Shifting to a
smaller scale of activity changes the relationships between material, people,
place, community and environment. When a factory opens up nearby, we
know the people employed there – our neighbours – and we can detect
the change in mood in a community when local businesses begin to spring
up. We can also detect effects on water or air quality more readily and use
community monitoring to drive up standards. And when we work directly
with artisans and producer communities in developing countries in a
long-term alliance, we can witness at first hand the effects (positive and
negative) that our trade has on them and adjust our work appropriately.
Revising the scale and location of fashion production

Yet revising the scale of activity in the fashion industry and bringing
production closer to markets (mainly in the rich North) is not without
complex implications. While a move towards sourcing clothing locally
would cut transportation of goods, create jobs near markets and enable
closer control of environmental standards, it inevitably undermines job
opportunities elsewhere. Indeed, studies indicate that moving textile
production to the UK from Asia would put many people in that region
out of work, with sustenance farming often the only remaining option.21
Yet a paying job in itself is not the sole indicator of improved quality of life
for overseas workers. Rather, the opportunities provided by employment
promote change in other ways. Lobby groups see production in low-cost
countries as a way to promote improved working and social conditions.
When workers better understand their rights in an industrial system, they
are more able to participate in political processes and over time build
autonomy, which fundamentally changes the values in supply-chain culture
and society as a whole.
Besides activists working within the existing industrial supply chain
to ensure protection of workers, they have also influenced alternative ways
of engaging with makers. The worker-owned co-operative arrangement set
chapter 10: local 107
up by eco-brand Maggie’s Organics in Honduras, for example, was built

more than a decade ago with the collaboration and participation of the
producer group; and the partnerships led by Alabama Chanin in Florence,
Alabama, evolved from both the needs and the resources available locally.
Such models emerge in collaboration with the local communities, rather
than being imposed from the outside, and as such they are diverse in type
and structure and offer many alternatives for manufacturing and distribution.
Local materials
Materials play a vital role in the local agenda. They tangibly link a product
with a region, plant species or animal breed and begin in a small way to
counteract the abstract ‘flow of goods’ that dominates globalized production
systems. As in the food sector, family farmers growing fibre struggle to compete
on price with large-scale agriculture. In the US, the number of cotton
farms decreased from 43,000 in 1987 to 25,000 in 2002, while the average
cotton farm doubled in size during the same period.22 To counter this
general tendency, some farmers have developed crop niches that command
higher value in local markets: heritage, regional, organic and ‘predator-
friendly’ fibres encourage diversification in farming or ranching and respect
for natural ecosystems, while Fairtrade and supply-chain collaborations aid
in bringing fibre to market and aim to ensure a fair price to the producer.
The challenges of working locally

In order to make available a variety of local fibres for fashion, a set of
practical and philosophical issues has first to be overcome. So as to process
fibre into garments, a suitable (and preferably local) industry has to be in
place, including processors able to work with small volumes (for local fibre
is rarely large-scale), tracking and warehousing companies that can ensure
material provenance, and facilities able to convert fibre to yarn, fabric and
final garments. These present substantial challenges, since local textile
infrastructure in industrialized nations has become eroded as economics
have driven production away from high-cost countries; and even specialist
processors now struggle to stay in business. Moreover, a supply of local
fibre requires consumers who will create the demand to support its
production and who are willing to tailor their fashion consumption to
locally available products. In Northern Europe this would mean garments
made from wool, bast fibres and recycled material processed by an
increasingly small network of specialist companies with production
facilities flexible enough to deal with small volumes. And in northern
California it would mean a combination of wool, alpaca and some cotton,
spun by hand, since there are no longer any industrial cotton spinners in
the state. Garment construction in both regions would, by necessity, be
simple, since labour costs are high relative to the global average. Designing
locally demands creative thinking on many levels for it to work in practice.
In the south-west of England, where hemp-growing and small-scale
fibre-processing both exist, design duo Maca have captured the local
energy and have created a bag from UK hemp, dyed with British turmeric Maca’s hemp bag is
and waterproofed with locally grown linseed oil.23 The product supports dyed with local
turmeric and
local growers and attests to the future of fibre grown in the immediate area. waterproofed with
British linseed oil.
Designing for local culture

Bringing a local agenda to bear on the fashion sector in order to promote
sustainability is a potentially transformatory process aimed at fostering
economic resilience and also promoting cultural and aesthetic diversity.Yet
the pull of globalization erodes, rather than builds, fashion’s cultural variety
and the styling of garments generally reflects the same Western aesthetic,
irrespective of those in the place where they are made or sold. Fashion
designers are complicit in this, for we often take inspiration from one
region and have it copied in another where it can be most cheaply
produced. This reduces the cultural element to mere surface ornament,
diminishes the viability and traditions of locality and accelerates the
standardization of both markets and products.
Rather than sourcing the ‘lowest possible price at all costs’ and
applying exotic ornament on to the garment as a print or embellishment,
designing with sensitivity to the place where products are produced or
consumed demands that designers navigate a middle zone between
commerce and culture. It requires developing a knowledge of local
traditions, mythologies and symbolism, and understanding the meaning of
colour and ornament from the local and historical perspective. This
approach draws on regionally available materials and the skills of local
people who contribute an innate cultural knowledge to the product itself.
Cheryl Andrews has explored the possibilities of designing for the Garments designed
culture local to where garments are produced. Selecting Levi Strauss as the for a global brand
(Levi’s Red label) for a
global company and the Philippines as the region, Andrews worked within local market (the
the limits of regionally available fibres, taking advantage of traditional craft Philippines) using
skills and researching the significance of colour, pattern and silhouette regional materials and
styled by Cheryl
particular to the region. The resulting line of designs reflects both the place Andrews.
of manufacture and the style of the company. Even local weather patterns
inspired a rubber hem detail that resists splashing in monsoon rains.
Andrews’s work starts to give visual form to how a global company could
maintain a consistent image while producing regionally and culturally
relevant styles. When scaled to include other regions, the concept has the
potential to celebrate diversity and difference and to value people and
place as well as commerce.
‌Designing with local artisans
‘A simplistic mind is full of answers. It is also a mind that seldom realizes the
simple fact that answers must be preceded by pertinent questions.’
‌Manfred Max-Neef
‘‌Tread carefully and break no sticks.’

‌Wallace Stegner
Revising the scale of fashion activity based on locality is a decidedly

different direction from the industrial norm. It rejects the impersonal and
anonymous transactions associated with large-scale commercial trade in
favour of the human touch, where knowing the effect of trade on
producer, region and community is integral to decisions made in
development of the products. By its nature, local design is rich and diverse,
for it emerges through the skills and resources of a particular region, its
histories, and the attitudes of its people, their traditions, social structures
and markets that may or may not be available.
Working with artisans in less industrialized countries brings all these
elements to bear on the design process in an immediate and vital way. On
the surface level, since many such artisans are separated from the taste of
consumers in cities and industrialized nations, the trained eye of the designer
can bridge cultural styles to develop products that both express the traditions
of the craftsperson and fit the lifestyles of the target market. But this
involves careful negotiation between the traditions and aesthetics of craft
and the usual measures of commerce. For example, a knitter may reject a
suggestion to knit traditional socks in different (more commercial) colours
because those socks have cultural significance as they are.24 To an artisan, art
and economics often occupy different worlds and as such have different
goals – one spiritual and the other mundane.25 And it takes a particular
humility in the designer to be as attuned to these sensibilities as they are to
the market appeal of visual ornament and the desired project outcomes.
Aesthetics and modes of employment appropriate to place

Moreover, though co-operatives are perceived by richer nations as the
surest guarantee of fair wages, local groups may naturally take a variety of
forms that do not follow conventional modes of employment, from
family-run workshops to micro-enterprises and private companies; the
most successful ventures tend always to grow organically out of the social
patterns, behaviours and structures already established in the region.26
Designers working directly with artisans in the field therefore become
‘bi-cultural’, adept at balancing considerations of ornament with the
expectations, realities and potentials of the project people and
organizations involved.
Local artefacts developed with this bi-cultural sensibility inevitably
chapter 10: local 111
display an aesthetic that itself reflects the social autonomy of the artisan
group, where the local ornament, materials, techniques and skills are
integral to the design. In contrast, products where the region is used
primarily for labour often look like they might have been made anywhere.
A product aesthetic that is introduced into a community from the outside
rather than one that evolves from within creates a dependency on the
designer as the ‘oracle’ of Western ideas and market needs, whereas a
bi-cultural designer’s concern is always: what happens when the designer
leaves and the product loses favour amid the changing whims of a
marketplace with which the artisans have no familiarity and to which they
have no access?27
Yet, with all this said, an artisan’s own reasoned sentiment might be:
‘God bless America, for this order means the difference between barely
surviving and earning a respectable living.’28 Such was the sentiment
expressed in Armenia at a time when the economy had imploded, as had
the economies of several other former Soviet republics; for without an
export market at that time, there were no markets at all.
Challenging preconceived views

Taking these points to heart challenges some of the most well-established
mantras in the fashion and sustainability movement, such as ‘consumption
is bad’, ‘overseas production is bad’, and ‘working with artisans is good’.
None of these is innately true. Each must be qualified against a backdrop
of circumstances particular to the locale, the moment in time, the
economic, political and cultural circumstances, and the local and regional
potential and capabilities. Asking questions, listening and observing
carefully, and finding ways to respond and take action appropriately in a
local, regional and global context is key. Artisan projects, which respond to
economic needs in marginal communities, comprise an elementally
different way of creating. When executed at its best, this work shifts the
powers and relationships of the supply chain and enriches the lives of the
artisans and the designer as well as those who buy their wares;29 it is truly a
catalyst for economic and social change.
The Cojolya Association is a non-profit organization established in
1983 to help preserve the tradition of Mayan backstrap loom weaving in
Guatemala. In recent years, the survival of backstrap weaving has become
threatened owing to Mayan youth migrating to urban centres for work.
Providing income through weaving will, it is hoped, help create viable
economic alternatives to migration and help preserve this traditional craft.
One of the functions of the association is to steer the development of
products to ensure their market appeal, while working within the capacities
of the local artisans. To maintain a high standard, the centre provides the
women with already warped pieces, which they then take home to
complete. Working from home minimizes disruption to the women’s daily
routines and allows them to maintain their family obligations. And since
this region of Guatemala is still in recovery from decades of turmoil and
trauma caused by civil war, the

Cojolya Association does not
require the artisans to disclose their
names or to sign any documents.
Women may come and go as they
please, working when they choose
without committing themselves.
Though these arrangements are
alien to the developed world’s
conceptual framework for social
responsibility and ‘fair trade’ in the
supply chain, they function well for
this small community. The project
currently employs 30 women and
has a core of 13 who have made
weaving their career.
Fashion designer Nimish Shah
worked with the NGO Khamir to
develop a range of organic cotton
hand-woven textiles in the Kutch
region of Gujarat, India. This
particular NGO supports young
entrepreneurs, as a means to help
make sure the industry of village
crafts does not disappear. Khamir
recommends the weavers (who
work from home), co-ordinates the
initial sampling, and ensures that production, weaving and shipping run Above: Artisans at
smoothly. Shah’s designs used a traditional motif and made it more suitable Cojolya Association in
Guatemala weave
for a Western or westernized Indian market by colour-blocking to open up contemporary fabrics
some of the dense patterning, thereby fusing the artisans’ skills with on traditional
contemporary sensibilities. backstrap looms.
This hands-on experience changed Shah’s creative process Opposite: Skirt by Nimish
profoundly; having alternative sources at the ready during initial sampling Shah produced in
and establishing buffer lines to ensure production deliveries were as collaboration with
artisan groups in India.
essential to the success of the project as good designs. Bringing the cloth to
market also exposed Shah to the difference between businesses oriented to
supporting an industry of crafts and those who use artisans merely for
labour. Although the recent interest in ecologically and socially sourced
materials and products has increased demand for artisan products, the
dominant logic of speed to market still prevails; Shah noted how many
companies and their buyers looked for documentation and paperwork,
rather than taking the time truly to engage in the realities of making things
happen at the artisan level. Aware of the difference between this type of
work and industrialized production, he notes: ‘You can’t ignore something
because it is difficult.’
Chapter 11: Biomimicry

‘‌The point is not to impose a pattern of our own making and disrupt
natural patterns, but to remain ever mindful that human cleverness is
subordinate to nature’s wisdom.’
‌Wendell Berry
In recent years we have come to understand that safeguarding natural

systems is more than an act of altruism, for these systems ‘cradle and
nourish’30 our societies and economy, providing for us both materially and
spiritually. Janine Benyus, founder of the Biomimicry Institute, presents
additional reasons for protecting the environment, for in a time of
ecological crisis and shrinking resources, nature offers us a wealth of
insights to apply to our own way of living. Biomimicry is the practice of
emulating nature’s patterns and strategies to direct product design, processes
and policies and as such draws its inspiration from the living world.31
Benyus contrasts the rich and diverse natural world with the systematic
taming and simplification of nature through human activity and the
subsequent destruction of species. We understand that ‘the only way to
keep learning from nature… and its wellspring of ideas… is to safeguard its
naturalness’.32 That the study of biomimicry can trigger this level of
understanding in designers is in itself of great value. It draws us far beyond
the limits of the narrow and intellectual habitat of industrialized design and
reminds us of the dual nature of our present circumstances as designers:
how small a part we play in, and yet what enormous responsibility we have
to, the ‘whole’.
Practical application of biomimicry

Being inspired and awed by nature is one thing, but practical application of
its lessons is an altogether greater challenge. Stewart Brand, ecologist and
founder of the Whole Earth Catalog and its descendants, critiques the
practical limitations of biomimicry, noting that nature is extremely difficult
to mimic in detail because natural processes are the ‘irrational product of
timeless evolution, rather than design’.33 Brand favours supplementing
nature’s design with ‘as much human intervention as necessary’, in order to
enable rapid implementation of ideas, and presents the aeroplane as an
example, in which a bird’s flapping wings became stationary and the
human invention of the propeller eventually enabled human flight.
That nature’s processes are irrational and spontaneous and may take
millennia to evolve can be a challenging concept for designers to grasp
since we work to such short deadlines and ‘lock in’ our designs before
production. But an effective visual metaphor is provided by Donella
Meadows’s reference to fractal geometry. Using the example of an
equilateral triangle, Meadows explains that when another such triangle is
added at the centre of each side and the pattern repeated, an elaborate
shape results – called a ‘Koch snowflake’ (see fig. 6). Meadows notes that
chapter 11: Biomimicry 115
out of a few simple rules of self-organization, enormous diversifying

crystals of technology, physical structures, organizations and cultures can
grow – including our own.
More than a tool for copying nature

The Koch snowflake helps us understand why mimicking the complexities
of evolved nature is difficult. But it also illustrates that biomimicry is not
simply a tool for copying. Rather it is understanding and applying nature’s
principles – surprisingly simple at their core – that is more the point. This
distinction of purpose is critical, for in our culture where the market, high
speed and low cost direct design ‘innovation’, it is all too easy for designers
to fall into using biomimicry to serve the status quo of manufacturing and
FIG. 6 A Koch
snowflake illustrates
the delicate and
intricate patterns
that can develop
from a simple set of
organizing principles
or decision rules.34
selling novelty, and degrading the environment in the process. Benyus’s

basic guidelines can provide designers with a tool to assess and evaluate
their own ideas and actions, and maintain focus on ecological gains – to
inspire not just the quality of things but rather to inform the ‘fitness’ of
those ideas for the context in which they are placed and to direct the nature
of whole systems.
Nature as a model – where nature is imitated or used as a source of
inspiration for designs and processes to solve human problems, e.g. a solar
cell inspired by a leaf.
Nature as measure – where nature is used as an ecological standard to
judge the ‘rightness’ of our innovation, e.g. considering how much energy
(and what type) does the solar panel use in its production and whether the
energy it saves during use justifies this investment.
Nature as mentor – where nature is viewed and valued in a new way. It
introduces an era based not on what we can extract from the natural world,
but on what we can learn from it, e.g. developing solar technology that can
be installed close to point of use, rather than developing desert wilderness
areas into solar panel farms.
It is not only through nature as model but through nature as measure
and nature as mentor that the truly transformative potential of biomimicry
can be fully realized, as the above examples illustrate.
How will we make textiles?

Biomimicry-inspired ideas for sustainability in fashion typically start as
most initiatives do – centred on physical materiality: the enhancement of
fabrics, or engineered fibres, surfaces and finishes. But since these
developments often require highly technical physical or molecular
engineering, innovations are frequently housed within the labs of technical
universities or performance fabric suppliers. Fashion designers may
therefore become quite frustrated at the lack of access and the lack of
means they have for implementing and actualizing biomimicry innovations.
These frustrations are indicators of old work habits – where designers
are ensconced in studios, fulfilling industry expectations as stylists and
purveyors of novelty. In this pattern of practice, designers rarely, if ever,
interact with scientists and technologists; the unfamiliar and rich territories
between disciplines remain unexplored, and the synergies of interdisciplinary
collaborations remain unignited. Interrupting these old working patterns is
cumbersome and awkward.We have become so fragmented as an industry and
so isolated in our specialities that pathways between each are simply nonexistent.
Yet biomimicry is as much about opening up these routes as it is about
innovating products. For designers, too, are ‘complex living organisms that
evolved in and function best in a dynamic and diverse environment’.35
Breaking out of siloed patterns of practice

Inventor and entrepreneur Nick Brown succeeded in breaking through the
silos of practice out of sheer necessity. Inspired by the transpiration activity
of trees, he developed and patented a technology, prototyped and tested a
range of technical textiles, and approached a number of companies to
manufacture them. Finding no willing partners, he started his own
company, Páramo, which now specializes in ‘smart fabrics’ (see page 77).
One of the patents, the TX.10i elastomer, involved altering and
strengthening the molecular structure of mineral wax, changing it from its
typical brittle quality and making it elastic and resilient. Termed Nikwax,
the elastomer bonds to anything that is not water-repellent, but leaves
spaces between fibres open and breathable. In addition to providing water
repellency, the technology traps air next to the skin, directs moisture away
from the body and prevents external moisture from coming in, insulating
the body in much the same way as the water-repellent fur of seals, otters
and bears. What is most notable in this case is that the resulting fabrics may
never have come to market were it not for the innovator’s ability to corral
allies, work with people of varying backgrounds, and hone organizational
skills while maintaining a tireless entrepreneurial spirit. All are crucial
qualities that are enhanced by working across sectors, as natural systems do.
Here we witness nature as mentor.
Collaborations across sectors

Cross-sector bridges can also be forged when the market seeks out
researchers for specific development. Such was the case with the
biomimicry innovations housed in the

universities of Bath and Reading in the
UK.36 Prompted by a contract with the
Ministry of Defence and a brief that called
for eliminating the need to carry extra
clothing in desert environments, the design
challenge was to develop single fabrics that
would render the wearer comfortable in a
wide range of desert temperatures from
daytime heat to nighttime chill. Finding
inspiration in the way pinecones open
and close, these researchers created technical
materials that adapt and flex in response
both to the activity of the wearer and to the
level of moisture in the air. A resulting
single textile is constructed from two
bonded layers. The top layer features
tiny spikes of wool, each only one two-
hundredth of a millimetre wide. When the
wearer sweats, the tiny spikes react to the
moisture and automatically open up,
allowing air from the outside to pass
through the material to cool the body.
When the wearer stops sweating, the spikes close down again to prevent Jacket by Páramo
cool air from getting in. The lower, water-resistant layer blocks rain and features Nikwax
treatment and fabric
moisture from entering whether the spikes are open or closed. technology inspired
Besides using nature as a model and drawing innovations for garment by the transpiration
design from particular species engineering, biomimicry asks us to learn activity of trees.
from the larger operating systems of nature itself and to explore

opportunities in production systems and business models. A biomimicry-
inspired garment, for example, may effectively deliver multiple functions
(waterproofing, insulation and breathability), fulfilling the needs of military
personnel in a desert environment while also reducing the number of
layers in an outfit. But a mainstream wearer who seldom encounters such
extreme temperature ranges may well layer the garment to create a trendy
look, rendering the technical features as mere novelty and the garment
overbuilt for its end use. Nature’s logic would never allow this, for it is a
waste of resources and energy. Moreover, when the likely business model of
the company selling the product is dependent upon more sales, there is no
incentive for the company to communicate anything but the novel aspects
of biomimicry to the wearer. Fabric and product development, ecology,
business motivations and consumer behaviour must co-evolve to achieve
optimum sustainability benefits. The true power and potential of
biomimicry may be diminished if the design ideas it inspires (nature as
model) are developed in a cultural vacuum where nature as measure and
nature as mentor are ignored.
How will we manufacture?

Current industry transforms nature’s resources into products with little
regard for social and environmental repercussions, placing emphasis on
getting the product made and shipped to market as quickly and as
inexpensively as possible. The underpinning economic directive of this
business model is to expand and grow: to increase productivity of labour,
to increase speed to market, to influence consumers to buy more to
maintain and increase this flow of goods. As a result, it is estimated that
only six per cent of the flow of materials into the US economy actually
ends up as products.37
Designing business and manufacturing systems to mimic nature

Janine Benyus describes stages of businesses in evolutionary terms as
operating like ecosystems, providing a useful metaphor for understanding
what are usually invisible company operations. In nature, the above
industrial scenario could describe a ‘stage I’ immature ecosystem. Here,
typically, opportunistic and colonizer species predominate. Since sunlight
and soil nutrients are readily available, type I species are linear, avidly
consume resources, leave waste, and move quickly to exploit new areas.
They reproduce quickly and take no time to process efficiently or to cycle
resources. Their waste does, however, fertilize the soil and provide
opportunities for ‘succession’ species in stage II. These are largely perennial
plants and berry bushes, which produce fewer seeds and build roots and
sturdy stems for more rigorous growth. Finally, type III species such as trees
develop. They are masters of efficiency, and take out of the ecosystem no
more than what they put into it. They generate fewer offspring, and live
longer and more complex lives in elaborate synergy with the species
around them; they put energy into creating and optimizing symbiotic
relationships, rather than into rampant growth, and they endlessly juggle
materials, with virtually no waste.38 In a world of declining resources and
limited space for the expanding human population to provide for itself, the
ultimate goal of biomimicry-inspired manufacture is to build economies,
businesses and manufacturing systems that operate in a dynamic
equilibrium like a complex stage III ecosystem.
Cycles, loops and businesses clustered in new ways

In manufacturing, mimicking the structures of a complex ecosystem
imagines a system with no landfill, no smokestacks, and no effluent pipes.
Instead, industries are clustered so that the waste from one (materials, heat,
water, etc.) can easily become the resource for another and where
throughput is continuously cycled, with zero emissions to the surroundings.
Attempts to transition to a stage III company are, however, frequently
awkward, because established ‘stocks’ of information and ways of working
take time to change direction and purpose.39 Alliance-building and
partnering with other companies is critical, yet it runs counter to usual
fashion industry culture, and it naturally takes time to build trust and
redefine new boundaries of business. To enable this change, a logical first

step may be to set up loops and cycling systems internally, so that the
benefits and challenges can be easily tested and observed and working
mechanisms recalibrated as needed. Establishing an external partnership or
network and working with other companies and industries then become
mid- to long-range goals respectively, forming a continuum of change.
Once new infrastructure and working patterns are established, benefits can
be significant; the systems of product development become optimized, with
increased efficiencies and innovation integral to the new mode of business.
Manufacturer Pratibha Syntex, for example, is in the process of
adapting its business around a number of textile-recycling initiatives at its
facility in Madhya Pradesh, India. This has included designing new
products and building a spinning facility to process its textile waste into
recycled yarns and garments. The new product initiatives have been so
successful that the company no longer generates enough of its own waste
to run its recycled yarn-spinning operation at full capacity. Responding to
this ‘hiccup’ in the flow of recycled materials, Pratibha has recently linked
to an external source for industry-wide production waste, to supplement
its own material flow and keep up with its recycled yarn sales.
Shifting mindsets to catalyse innovation

What is even more remarkable is that the success of Pratibha’s recycling
programme has helped to catalyse a shift in mindset within the company;
from one of maximizing product throughput, to minimizing material input
and optimizing the productivity of incoming resources. Creativity is now
focused on how many different ways to reduce waste and on opening up ‘Net shape’ knitted shirt
new markets to accommodate any that remains. This is spurring by Pratibha Syntex, made
from a single tube of
unexpected innovations such as designing away waste from the outset. fabric with no waste.
As operations shift to accommodate recycling as well as new product Stage I company.
development, the company will become conditioned and more
adaptable to the fluctuating proportion of recycled-to-new product
demand from season to season. In the meantime, testing an increased
menu of products and markets benefits the company as a whole,
affording increased flexibility across industry sectors and improving the
long-term resilience of the business. Recycled products represent two
per cent of the company’s current production, but this is expected to
reach 20 per cent in the next three to five years.40
One innovation to emerge from Pratibha Syntex’s new approach
to manufacturing is a low-waste-in-pattern-cutting garment. The ‘net
shape top’ is made from one tube of knitted jersey.Vertical cuts made
parallel to the sides form the sleeves and body when sewn. Horizontally
repeated parallel lacerations at the top and down the sleeve are then
‘picked up’ and looped through each other by hand to form a chunky-
knit texture. This looping action pulls the jersey fabric inwards, to form
the yoke shape and shoulder line of the garment, and the final cast-off
edge forms the neckline.
LINEAR MATERIAL FLOWS FROM SOURCE TO SALES, WITh 30 pER CENT WASTE (pRATIBhA SyNTEX 2009)
Virgin yarn Yarn
spinning Knitting
Pratibha syntex Wholesale fabric
dyeing cut and sew
Virgin fibre garments
downcycled 30% waste
sold to
rag trade
RECyCLING WASTE SLOWS RAW MATERIAL FLOWS AND OpENS Up NEW MARKETS
30% waste
garments
(soft waste)
self-generated
Wholesale fabric
waste
industry waste Yarn

spinning Knitting
Pratibha syntex
Virgin fibre dyeing cut and sew
recycling adult line
Virgin yarn
design r+d Kids’ line
future line
showcasing
recycling
How will we conduct business?
‘‌Design mentality can reshape production processes – and even the entire
structure and logic of business.’
‌Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins, Hunter Lovins
As stated earlier in these pages, the fundamental principle of a company in

the growth economy is to maximize earnings. This prime motivation
directs the behaviour of the organization and everyone working in it,
including design. From sourcing and supply-chain operations to employee
payroll and general practices, emphasis is placed on driving costs down
while driving sales up. Wherever possible, the expense of conducting
business is externalized and effectively passed on to the rest of society.
While financial returns accumulate with the shareholders of the company,
costs for restoring degraded environments and supplying unemployment
benefits are borne by the government, supported by rates and taxes, the
effect being that the public subsidizes the true cost of business activities.41
The attention that the private sector pays to monetary values over all
else makes capturing a range of social and environmental values in the
design process difficult. For if there is no distinction between money
acquired through means that enrich the environment and society and that
created by means that impoverish society,42 then the cheapest route is
always the immediate choice. What seem to be the more expensive
‘sustainability’ initiatives in product development are then rejected, even if
over the long term they result in savings. As difficult as it is for designers,
the challenges are many times greater for any ‘responsible’ company to
internalize costs when it competes in a marketplace with other companies
that do not. For it is competitors who set the market price.
A broader set of values

Nevertheless, as the economy transitions towards sustainability, a broader
set of values not typically captured by the private sector is being
demonstrated in a growing number of ways. Collaborations among
traditionally competitive companies have been formed to set industry-wide
standards for a range of issues, from supply-chain terms of engagement to
management of resources in textile processing. Several companies now
pledge a portion of their sales revenue to NGOs, thereby redirecting
wealth to support activities for the common good. In more progressive
companies, social and ecological goals have been integrated into employee
job descriptions and performance criteria, driving fundamental changes in
corporate culture. Socially responsible shareholders and organizations such
as As You Sow are influencing investors to direct company actions beyond
the single goal of profit. ‘Sustainable’ product lines start to internalize some
of the environmental costs of business practice and, when identified at
retail, express values to the consumer beyond a monetary transaction and
thereby start to influence the mainstream cultural mindset.
Influencing the fashion mainstream is one of the greatest challenges

for sustainability and also one of its greatest potentials. Fashion touches the
lives of almost everyone, every day, and can be an effective vehicle for
changing minds, attitudes and behaviour. To this end, outdoor company
Patagonia is working with retailer Walmart to provide mentorship on
sustainability actions and strategies. This unlikely partnership has benefits
for both. Clearly Patagonia’s experience and expertise in implementing
sustainability programmes over the last 20 years speeds Walmart’s learning.
And Walmart’s scale and purchasing leverage can move the industry more
quickly and broadly than a smaller company ever could. Effectively,
Patagonia sees its sustainability actions amplified through Walmart, and
perhaps realizes indirect benefits such as greater availability of low-impact
fabrics and processes industry-wide.
Different business logic

While these examples start to move existing businesses and the economy
towards sustainability, altogether new models based on fundamentally
different logic drive distinctly different behaviours for business. Rather
than emphasizing growth for growth’s sake, and accumulating monetary
wealth for a few shareholders, profits are reinvested to generate revenue
with the explicit purpose of growing the benefits to an increasing number
of beneficiaries. There are already several examples of businesses that build
wealth or ‘increase beneficial output in the local communities they serve’,43
evidenced in community banks, farmer–broker co-operatives, employee-
owned businesses, community-supported agriculture initiatives, and so on.
These provide models for application in all industries, including fashion.
Just as social and environmental values are permeating the private
sector, so the culture of efficiency and entrepreneurship typically attributed
to business is influencing the non-profit sector. Goodwill Industries, for
example, balances its core goals of social good with an opportunistic
approach to new market niches. Having started as a clothing thrift-store,
the organization now recycles a broad range of items, from used books to
shoes and jewellery, discarded computers and electronics. Analysis of what
sells best in their A, B and C stores is remarkably similar to the tracking
systems of any conventional fashion business. But in addition to providing
an effective resource and recovery service to the community, Goodwill’s
dual competency is in providing job training and vocational employment
support to individuals in the San Francisco Bay Area who would otherwise
face a range of difficulties from physical disabilities and homelessness to
histories of incarceration and long-term dependency upon welfare. More
than 85 per cent of Goodwill’s revenue is channelled into training
programmes and services, covering a variety of client needs, from
transitional employment and computer literacy to truck-driving lessons
and English language skills. The organization also works with first-time
non-violent drug offenders, offering literacy skills training, apprenticeships,
and legal, health and family counselling.
A worker on Goodwill
San Francisco’s
training programme.
Real wealth
In this business model there is no love–hate relationship or conflict of
values between financial and business goals and social and environmental
goals; the more the business grows, the more people and the environment
are served. Moreover, as the organization grows it also expands its ability to
mitigate public costs for unemployment and environmental clean-up (i.e.
landfill costs). This dynamic creates what David Korten calls ‘a real wealth
economy,’44 and illustrates nature as mentor at its best. The synthesis of
business with social and environmental good is perhaps best evidenced by
Goodwill’s measurements of success. In addition to the line items indicated
on balance sheets and profit and loss statements, they track and measure the
number of people served, the number of people placed in gainful employment,
the average wage received, and the tons of goods diverted from landfill.45
Chapter 12: Speed

All activities have a tempo or speed to them. Some are fast and some are
slow. Today’s dominant mass-market fashion business model of producing
and selling cheap, homogenized clothing items in ever-increasing quantities
is based on fast speed. But doing everything fast – increasing the number of
stock drops into store each season, cutting lead times to supplier factories,
decreasing the time to market of a design, transporting stock by road or air
rather than sea – is not an inevitable feature of fashion production and
consumption. Rather, it is the prevailing market and economic system, the
goal of which is to grow in scale continually. Increasing the speed of
operations is just one mechanism by which growth is achieved. This
driving force exerts pressure on every part of the textile supply chain,
drawing each into a tightening spiral of increasingly low prices and
creating a negative dynamic, pitching one against another to compete for
business: farmer against farmer, mill against mill, retailer against retailer.
This ‘competitive economics’, as Wendell Berry names it,46 also fuels
adoption of technologies and practices that push both people and natural
resources beyond tolerable thresholds.
Increasing the tempo of fashion activity grows the volume of garments
produced and consumed, for converting a design to market faster enables a
company to steal a march on its competitors and provides more opportunities
to sell. Similarly, increasing the frequency with which sales stock is
refreshed in store (for example, by introducing several mini-collections in
each season) exploits the consumer desire for novelty and triggers a rise in
sales. While the desired economic effect of increasing speed is to grow the
fashion business, the inescapable resource effect is an increase in the
demand for natural materials and labour, dictated by an ever-greater
throughput of physical products. The impact of this dynamic on ecosystems
and workers is at the crux of the sustainability challenge for fashion.
To date, those fashion companies that have chosen to deal with the
sustainability impacts of production have mostly focused on increasing
resource efficiency (doing more with less) and rolling out good labour
practices across an ever-larger workforce as a way to mitigate the ill effects
of increasingly faster business practices. Positive as these strategies may be,
they are limited by the scale of efficiency gains that are actually possible
and the effectiveness with which good labour practices can be introduced
en masse. Against a backdrop of continual economic growth, the mechanisms
that ensure sustainability gains must also increase in potency indefinitely.
Raising questions about speed means raising questions

about economics
However, the tempo of the fashion sector is not fixed. There are many speeds
of fashion activity with ‘better’ resource profiles that are also possible.Yet to
invoke them means that the underlying models of the fashion industry
need to change; in raising questions about speed we must also raise
questions about economics, for they are two sides of the same coin. There
is, of course, great resistance to changing existing ways of doing things, not
c h a p t e r 1 2 : Spee d 125
least because today’s practices often limit what we imagine might be

possible tomorrow. Just as the gauge of train tracks limits ideas about the
sorts of train that can run on them, existing economic models lock us in to
particular ideas about the way the fashion business can operate. It is the
infrastructure itself that has to be rethought.
Steady-state economics
More than 30 years ago, economist and author Herman Daly proposed a
non-material-growth-based economic model, which he termed ‘steady-
state economics’.47 Here the economic priority is to maintain stocks of
resources at a steady level (determined by the ability of the ecosystem to
regenerate materials and process wastes) rather than to expand continually
regardless of ecosystem capabilities (see figs. 7 and 8). Inevitably this model
connotes activity that approaches speed in a profoundly different manner
than that seen in today’s fashion sector, but what is critical to note is that
this shift is not at the cost of development, for the economy will still be
free to grow – not in physical, quantitative terms, but in qualitative terms.
This shift in goals has the potential to transform the sustainability profile of
the fashion sector at root and opens up a plethora of possibilities. In this
new economic model, tempo or speed is not locked into the maximal
resource-use ‘fast’ position (nor slow, for that matter), but is flexible to
adapt to a variety of speeds called upon as necessary by different needs and
contexts. This presents a fundamentally different starting point for change.
Production
Ecosystem
Production Raw
materials
Consumption Waste
FIG. 7
FIG. 8
Fig. 7 - Ever-growing cycles of production and consumption (Daly, 1992). Such a view can encourage
an economy that can ultimately strain the environment.
Fig. 8 – Steady-state economics considers cycles of production and consumption that take the
surrounding ecosystem into account and try to achieve equilibrium with it (Daly, 1992).
Fast
Fast speed in fashion has become synonymous with a particular type of
fashion product and retail environment. This has been made possible by
consumers’ seemingly insatiable appetite for material consumption and by
technological advances that eat into some of the time delays that were
once seen as an inevitable part of the clothing supply chain. Tracking sales
with electronic tills and linking this data to supplier factories with flexible
production schedules has now made it possible to restock a rail with a
popular item as demand requires; and computer-aided design interfaced
with just-in-time manufacturing methods has enabled a design sketch to
be turned into a finished product in as little as three weeks. Doing things
quickly implies that we can do more things. It also generates more impact.
In fashion, as in other sectors, the cost implications of the growth model
are mainly felt outside the corporation enjoying the benefits: by society at
large, by workers and by the environment. Costs are experienced as
increased pollution, resource depletion and climate change. They are
reflected in clothing workers’ ‘poverty’ wages, temporary employment
contracts and unpaid overtime, as their employers are squeezed on price
and order times (cut by 30 per cent in the past five years)48 by large
retailers and global brands wielding their economic power and economies
of scale. They are felt as lack of choice and variety of garments on the high
street as low-cost ‘big-box’ retailers create a dynamic that prioritizes
cheapness, mass availability and volume purchasing above all else, forcing
smaller producers, who cannot compete on price alone, out of business.
And they are felt in the fields and ranches where fibre is produced, where
land becomes degraded – salinated from the overuse of synthetic fertilizers
or compacted from overgrazing – and where family farmers who cannot
compete on price alone are forced off the land.
Fast speed in fashion framed more deeply

A great number of newspaper column inches has been devoted to fast
fashion in recent years. But rarely do these columns frame impacts within a
broad and deep picture. Certainly, they portray the effects of fast fashion as
undesirable, but they also tend to couch solutions as extensions and/or
modifications to the status quo, and suggest, for example, that provided one
fibre is replaced by a lower-impact alternative, volumes can keep increasing
and current economic preferences can remain in place. While switching
fibres to organic may bring immediate benefits to, say, farmers, thereby
helping to alleviate some of fast fashion’s negative effects in one part of the
supply chain, it fails to deal with the long-term or cumulative
consequences of fast fashion across social and ecological systems as a whole.
For these negative effects are endemic to the sector’s underlying economic
model. The better the fashion sector performs, the worse these effects will
get. They are a symptom not of its failure, but of its success. Thus to talk
about the sustainability effects of fast fashion without also critiquing
business practices is to deal with it superficially or effectively not at all. By
the same token, to discuss fast fashion’s apparent antidote, slow fashion,
without also framing it against a changed (sustainability-supporting) set of
economic priorities and business practices, also fails to understand the
nature of slow at its deeper cultural level.
Fast and slow are complementary

One of the most formative sources of inspiration for this restructuring is
the natural world and its systems and processes. Speed, including fast speed,
is a key feature of natural systems. A human body may end its physical
cycle at 86 years, for example, but breath is cycled every few seconds.
Understanding the context of speed, its mechanisms and appropriateness,
offers an alternative lens through which we can explore alternative
practices in fashion. The emphasis in nature on both balance and fast speeds
in initial phases of development contrasts sharply with the reality of the
growth model for fashion, which sees fast speed as a permanent business
model option. Perhaps the most important trait of fast speed in nature is
that it is used to further the goal of the entire system, not as an end or goal
in itself. Here fast is combined with slow to foster short-term vitality and
long-term stability. Slow regulating systems have fast-moving parts within
them. Reflecting the subtleties of designing for a nature-inspired balance
of speeds and rhythms of use, One Night Stands are fully recyclable shoes
intended for a single use. Made from a single piece of recyclable polypro-
pylene secured with a reusable screw and six aluminium rivets, the shoes
can be flat-packed and easily assembled, thus minimizing packaging and
shipping and ensuring a competitive price point. They are designed to be
recycled by existing facilities and, although they are ‘fast’ in terms of their
use, they depend entirely on a ‘slow’ system of reclamation being in place.
Stephanie Sandstrom’s
polypropylene shoes,
One Night Stands, are
designed to be
quickly assembled
and fully recyclable.
Slow
In the food sector, homogenous, ‘quantity’ eating – epitomized by the
fast-food chain McDonald’s – has come to be recognized as an indicator
that certain economic priorities are impoverishing society rather than
making it richer. Likewise in the fashion industry, low-cost, homogenous,
‘quantity’ dressing that has seen the UK’s budget clothing market grow by
45 per cent in five years (twice the rate of the rest of the clothing
market),49 has also raised questions about social and environmental
‘richness’.50 Low price has ushered in a change in purchasing and wearing
habits. Garments are often bought in multiples and discarded quickly since
they have little perceived value. Fabric quality is poor and garment
construction often fails to withstand laundering, thereby encouraging
replacement. Unlimited wants, given succour by rapidly changing trends,
are treated with unlimited production. Against this backdrop of growth-
obsessed activity, a movement promoting slow culture and values in fashion
has emerged, heavily inspired by the Slow Food movement. Slow Food was
founded by Carlo Petrini in Italy in 1986 and links the pleasure of food
with the awareness and responsible nature of its production. It seeks to
preserve cultural and regional culinary traditions and agricultural diversity,
by opposing the standardization of varieties and taste, and championing the
need for consumer information. Though the Slow Food movement started
as a reaction to fast-food culture, it has quickly become something much
more than merely its opposite. Similarly, the slow movement in fashion is
more than just fast fashion minus the bad bits. ‘Slow’ is not a simple
descriptor of speed. Rather it represents a different world view that names
a coherent set of fashion activity to promote the pleasure of variety, the
multiplicity and the cultural significance of fashion within biophysical
limits. Slow fashion requires a changed infrastructure and a reduced
throughput of goods. Categorically, slow fashion is not about business as
usual and simply designing classics and planning long lead times. Slow
culture is not about ‘telling Primark to put its prices up’ nor about
‘stipulating annual collections’. Slow fashion represents a blatant
discontinuity with the practices of today’s sector; a break from the values
and goals of fast (growth-based) fashion. It is a vision of the fashion sector
built from a fundamentally different starting point.
The values and relationships of slow fashion

The slow-fashion vocabulary of small-scale production, traditional craft
techniques, local materials and local markets offers one set of responses to
these questions (see fig. 9). It challenges growth fashion’s obsession with
mass-production and globalized style and becomes a guardian of diversity.
It questions growth fashion’s emphasis on image and ‘the new’ over making
and maintaining actual material garments.51 It changes the power relations
between fashion creators and consumers and forges new relationships and
trust that are only possible at smaller scales. It fosters a heightened state of
awareness of the design process and its impacts on resource flows, workers,
communities and ecosystems. It prices garments to reflect true costs. It

promotes the democratization of fashion, not by offering people ‘more
cheap clothes that mainly look the same’,52 but by offering them more
control over institutions and technologies that impact their lives.
FIG. 9 Summary of different approaches to fast and slow
FAST MINDSET SLOW MINDSET
Mass-production Diversity
Globalization Global-local
Image Sense of self
New Making and maintaining
Dependency Mutual trust
Unaware of impacts Deeply connected with impacts
Cost based on labour and materials True price incorporating ecological and social costs
Large scale Small to medium scale
One company that uses speed in a variety of ways to build a business

model fundamentally different from the growth fashion industry is the
Internet company Betabrand. Epitomizing the ‘Long Tail’ approach to
business53 – that is, a shift from a focus on a relatively small number of
mainstream products and markets towards a huge number of niches –
Betabrand sells only online, thereby limiting its overhead fixed expenses. It
launches a new product every week, a far faster rate than any traditional
‘fast fashion’ company, but – and this is a critical point – only one product
and not a collection. Meeting minimum orders of 100 pieces, the company
breaks even at 25 pieces sold, and when all 100 are purchased, the style is
discontinued. Fast is apparent at the market end, where a new product is
introduced online every Tuesday at noon, and in style development, which
is pinpointed through ‘crowdsourcing’ and rapid response to customer
desires. But the volume and flow of materials into the fashion system is
nonetheless slowed, by the self-imposed limit on production. As a bonus,
the limited runs make the products valued, coveted and emotionally
durable. Betabrand has become a San Francisco counter-culture icon.
Another company that uses speed to shape its business model is UK
company Keep and Share. Its design philosophy is to create quality pieces
that combine the familiar and the unconventional, which gives it a
springboard from which to work with customers to persuade them to buy
fewer, more special pieces and to keep their items in use for longer. This
principle evokes a sense of slowness, with its emphasis on relationships
between friends who share the garments, and an intimate knowledge of
what fits different people and why.
Left: Keep and Share’s

knitted garments are
created to last.
Opposite: A knitted
garment by Marie Ilse
Bourlanges that uses
slowness to inform the
design process.
Marie Ilse Bourlanges’ project Decay provides an example of

slowness as a process of designing. Eight knitted garments capture traces of
past behaviour, their surface pattern conveying the findings of deep
research into the natural motions of the body. An outer carbon-paper suit
works as a registration device, to trace use and body movements (such as
pressing, bending, rubbing, scratching and stretching) on to an inner white
blouse. The transferred imprint on the blouse is then translated into a
pattern, resulting in intricate collections of lines that ebb across the
garment surface. The final pieces, even though they are newly made,
articulate the expressions of a body over time through changes to a
garment’s surface, so revealing some of the most intimate and ephemeral
movements of daily life.
Chapter 13: Needs

Conventional growth-focused economic wisdom promotes human craving
for novelty and things as both natural and desirable.Yet humans’ desire for
cyclical variety is easily manipulated by commerce. The cultural message of
growth pervades our daily lives, clouding our perceptions, so that cutting
through the sheer volume of commercial clutter to distinguish between
real needs and manufactured wants is far from easy. But Manfred Max-
Neef provides a view of human needs and motivations that helps us reflect
deeply on the industry, design practice and ourselves.
Max-Neef ’s taxonomy of human needs (see fig. 10) was developed
from his work with small communities in South America, to help identify
their ‘wealths’ and ‘poverties’ and then to work on how these may be best
maximized and minimized respectively. He identified nine fundamental
human needs and myriad ‘satisfiers’ (which fall into four existential states:
being, having, doing and interacting). Max-Neef notes that one satisfier
may address several needs at once and benefit the whole, while ‘destroyers’
may seem to satisfy a need but in fact inhibit several others and bring
poverty to the whole.
Fundamental Satisfiers
human needs Being (qualities) Having (things) Doing (actions) Interacting (settings)
Living environment,
Subsistence Physical and mental health Food, shelter, work Feed, clothe, rest, work
social setting
Care, adaptability, Social security, health Co-operate, plan, take care

Protection Social environment, dwelling
autonomy systems, work of, help
Respect, sense of humour, Friendships, family, Share, take care of, make Privacy, intimate spaces
Affection
sensuality relationships with nature love, express emotions of togetherness
Critical capacity, curiosity, Literature, teachers, policies, Analyze, study, meditate, Schools, families, universities,
Understanding
intuition education investigate communities
Receptiveness, dedication, Responsibilities, duties, work, Co-operate, dissent, express Associations, parties,
Participation
sense of humour rights opinions churches, neighbourhoods
Imagination, tranquillity, Games, parties, peace of Daydream, remember, relax, Landscapes, intimate
Leisure
spontaneity mind have fun spaces, places to be alone
Imagination, boldness, Abilities, skills, work, Invent, build, design, work, Spaces for expression,
Creation
inventiveness, curiosity techniques compose, interpret workshops, audiences
Sense of belonging, Language, religions, work, Get to know oneself, grow, Places one belongs to,
Identity
self-esteem, consistency customs, values, norms commit oneself everyday settings
Autonomy, passion, self- Dissent, choose, run risks,

Freedom Equal rights Anywhere
esteem, open-mindedness develop awareness
Fig. 10 Manfred Max-Neef’s taxonomy identifies fundamental human

needs and satisfiers to capture real needs specific to place and community.
c h a p t e r 1 3 : n ee d s 133
What is most remarkable about Max-Neef ’s work is its universal

applicability: similar needs are clearly present in both poor and rich nations
and at any stage in their development. What differs from country to
country is not the needs themselves, but how those needs are met by the
society and culture.
Fashion clothing and fundamental human needs

Clothing has the potential to meet a number of needs. It can satisfy basic
physical requirement for warmth and protection and when linked with
fashion it has the potential to satisfy our desires for personal expression and
belonging, as is the case when a teenager reworks a garment in a unique
way or spontaneously layers an under-piece over a T-shirt. But fashion’s
potency as both a personal and a social satisfier makes it a magnet for
manipulation. When participation in fashion is directed by a commercially
imposed trend specifically designed to exploit desires and increase sales,
fashion becomes an external goal to chase that can drive insecurity,
self-doubt and shame. The ultimate goal when designing for needs is to
leave no such poverties anywhere in the system. Using Max-Neef ’s
taxonomy as a lens through which to view the following three fashion
examples helps clarify its relevance in our discipline.
Example 1
A fashion garment made with recycled materials satisfies the basic need for
a healthy environment by reducing the depletion of raw materials and load
on landfills. But delivered to the wearer as a finished and static piece, the
relationship between the garment and wearer is manifest simply in an act
of consumption. An item developed to be co-designed by the wearer, on
the other hand, offers a host of immaterial benefits, including the
opportunity for participation, inventiveness, creative expression and unique
interpretation, as well as the opportunity to develop new skills – all of which
contribute greatly to the deep personal growth of the wearer.
Example 2
Organic cotton satisfies the need for a healthy environment in regions
where chemicals are used in cotton cultivation, and the reduced toxicity
certainly improves physical conditions for the farmer and his family.
Organic farming also develops creative skills in the field, as farmers are
trained to work with biological controls particular and relevant to their
bioregion. But ‘organic’ does not in itself satisfy the need to live above
sustenance levels unless a fair price over the cotton commodity index is
secured; and farmer educational support systems become compromised if
they cannot be maintained due to the lack of funding. Combining fair
trade principles with organic helps ensure a greater ability to provide food
and shelter on a long-term basis.
Example 3
Similarly, genetically modified (GM) cotton is seen to be ‘sustainable’
because it reduces chemical use and raises farmers’ incomes, and therefore
provides physical improvements. But it does this by promoting vertical
relationships: knowledge about GM technology remains sequestered in
private commercial laboratories and copyrights forbid farmers to keep and
propagate the seed. So personal creativity, inventiveness and local knowledge
specific to the ecology of the place the farmer belongs to are inhibited.
Farmers become dependent upon an outside technology and therefore
vulnerable to fluctuations in price or availability. In fact, Max-Neef ’s
taxonomy reveals GM as a ‘destroyer’, for GM companies have also purchased
conventional seed suppliers, further restricting the development of alternative
forms of agricultural knowledge, and marginalizing debate, dissent and autonomy.
Applied this way, Max-Neefs’ taxonomy of needs can be a powerful
tool for designers to identify and clarify the fundamental social ‘logic’ in an
existing product or emergent idea. This is particularly useful in design since
the area of ‘social responsibility’ remains confusing to many, and unlike
processes and materials, which can be measured and analysed through
LCAs (life-cycle assessments), social attributes seem particular to geography
and culture and unwieldy to capture in any meaningful way. Though Terms
of Engagement do exist within the most progressive companies, they are
narrowly shaped by the existing systems of production and therefore lack
the capacity to capture the fundamental, emotional, cultural and human
needs that Max-Neef ’s people-centred methodology provides. This
methodology starts to reshape our minds to an altogether more elemental
and comprehensive set of values, as the earlier examples illustrate.
Designing to satisfy specific needs

Artefacts that are designed specifically to fulfil basic human needs are
under-represented in fashion and sustainability. This is perhaps because the
values are so far removed from what commercial design currently demands
that it is difficult to imagine what form they could take, at least initially.
Nonetheless, a few items have started to emerge. ‘Super satisfiers’, a concept
developed by Fletcher and Earley in the 5 Ways Project54, for example, used
Max-Neef ’s taxonomy on needs to prompt innovative designs for clothing.
The resulting ‘Touch Me’ dress evolved from a participant’s need for
affection and was designed with open slits where friends and family were
invited to touch her in the small of her back and on her shoulders to
demonstrate their affection. More recently, Elisheva Cohen-Fried’s capelet
was developed from a line of enquiry about basic well-being and simple
notions of happiness. Acting on the pattern of responses that emerged from
her interviewees, Fried created a garment imbued with a strong sense of
connection to family; it invites co-creation and shared invention by
providing a means for mother and child to manipulate the design together,
snipping away shapes in the capelet’s top layer to reveal the bright colour
underneath, using the simplest of craft tools – a child’s paper scissors.55
c h a p t e r 1 3 : n ee d s 135
Capelet by Elisheva
Cohen-Fried,
designed to enable
parent and child to
create together.
Artefacts such as these are deeply poignant. They have what Alastair
Fuad-Luke calls a ‘strange beauty’56 and they start to expand our notions of
what sustainability in fashion can be. Max-Neef ’s taxonomy of human
needs helps put language to the poverties that we instinctively feel in a
factory-made T-shirt delivered to a retail mall for US $5. But more to the
point, when designers utilize such rigorous methodologies as a foundation
from which to act with integrity, they create bridges to the social
disciplines that build and hold ‘domains of knowledge and understanding’57
and enable ways to act on these ‘slow knowledge’ principles, thereby
making a serious contribution to deep social change. But perhaps the most
gratifying of all benefits that Max-Neef ’s taxonomy brings to fashion
design is a peaceful ‘place’ where we are able to quieten the cacophony of
noise from the market, loosen its pull on our psyche, and focus our
attention on designing for what truly matters.
‌Having (how much is enough?)
‘You never know what is enough, unless you know what is more than enough.’
‌Wendell Berry58
In our culture, the dominant paradigm suggests that ‘more is better’ and
that anything other than material growth means having ‘less than’ before.
Yet we have no sense of how large our businesses can be, nor how much
people can consume relative to the environment’s ability to support these
activities. Unlimited economic growth in nations where the problems of
basic survival are largely solved is increasingly seen as counterproductive,
not only because it makes natural resources increasingly unavailable to a
growing human population and undermines the overall health of the
ecosystem on which we all depend, but because (and perhaps even more
alarmingly) it also undermines social resilience, which is regarded as critical
for dealing with impending natural disasters.
There is now a growing body of evidence indicating that though
people in ‘developed nations’ may be getting richer, they are generally not
getting happier. For example, people have less and less of their own time as
they are drawn further on to the work treadmill to support consumer
lifestyles. Family and community relationships are becoming strained as a
result, with 53 per cent of Americans now saying that having less stress and
spending more time with family and friends would make them much more
satisfied with their lives.59 Increased economic wealth is also linked to
health issues such as diabetes, obesity and coronary disease; indeed in 2006,
clinically defined obesity in the US climbed to 64 per cent of the
population.60 And the ‘more is better’ mindset is even having a perverse
social effect on middle-class school children. Studies show that students
living in the most affluent communities in the US are under constant
pressure to perform ‘better and better’ and are succumbing to a range of
disorders, including an alarming surge in teen suicides.61 Just as nutrients in
the soil become depleted by industrial agriculture’s sole focus on higher
yields, so human emotional and psychological stocks are depleted by the
dominant cultural pursuit of growth for growth’s sake. There is only so far
that people (and planet) can be pushed. As Herman Daly notes, we are now
‘accumulating illth rather than wealth’.62
The fashion industry is dependent on consumption

Fashion design as it is currently practised is not structured to improve upon
these social deficiencies, since it is itself embedded in the market and
measures its success in terms of growth. The notion of always needing
more assumes a public that always wants more, and requires businesses to
maintain the necessary level of ‘wanting’ or consumption to support
commercial activity. In fashion, women are viewed as the primary engines
for this necessary economic growth; womenswear represents 65 per cent of
the global fashion industry, and a whopping 75 per cent of the fashion
industry’s advertising dollars target women specifically.63
c h a p t e r 1 3 : n ee d s 137
Women push back

While the fashion industry starts to grapple internally with the conundrum
of its dependency on business models based on material consumption,
many on the outside are beginning to question the dominant cultural
demand on women to be consumers above all else. One such example is
the Great American Apparel Diet, which offers a stance against consumption
and is wryly modelled after support programmes like Alcoholics Anonymous.
The project provides a place for women to exchange stories after agreeing
to abstain from buying clothes for a whole year. Their discourse is also
featured on the project web site and offers valuable insight into the
zeitgeist of the general public across a range of traditional demographics.
Separately, artist Alex Martin challenged herself to reject what she calls ‘the
bill of goods that has been sold… about what makes (women) good,
attractive and interesting’. Noting the immense time, effort and financial
resources that are invested in clothing, and troubled by sweatshops and
other hidden impacts of clothing production, Martin developed her
‘one-woman show against fashion’ as a counter-message. Her response was
a ‘Little Brown Dress’ that she wore every day for a year. Besides making a
statement about consumption, by limiting herself to wearing a single article
of clothing for a whole year, Martin was obliged to create visual interest as Alex Martin’s
a means of satisfying her own need for variety. Through photo ‘one-woman show
documentation and a regular blog, she displayed how she personally styled against fashion’: a
Little Brown Dress that
the outfits and notes the self-confidence that this voluntary restraint she wore every day
liberated. ‘I’m even more engaged and interested in this whole line of for a year.
thinking than I was when I started the project… I am not even

considering a return to a normal wardrobe at this point’.64
The Little Brown Dress project has long been concluded, but Alex
Martin continues to explore notions of self-expression, fashion and style by
wearing only garments, shoes, bags, jewellery and accessories she has built
herself, with new pieces made using only recycled materials. She now relishes
being ‘completely outside the stream of consumer goods’ and advertising,
and describes herself as an ‘artist, choreographer, performer, mother,
neighbour, gardener, voter, event planner, and sewing machine operator’.
‌Doing (enabling action)
‘Humans are complex beings with values, attitudes, identities and emotions and
while these are not always internally consistent, we will act when all these facets
are appealed to.’
‌WWF, Scotland
Objects are a physical manifestation of how we humans interpret and shape

our world to reflect who we are as individuals.Though our possessions reflect
the idiosyncrasies of each person, they also reflect the wider values of society
– an accepted pattern or way of living – and thereby nurture our need for
belonging. Objects, and fashion items in particular, also provide us with a
visual language – through a series of signs and codes – that we use to
communicate social status, identity, aspirations, and the way we feel about one
other. All in all, clothes and objects provide a crucial ‘carrier’ service, helping
to bond the relationships between ourselves and others and with society as
a whole. The continued relevance of things to people through change or
novelty is essential in this context, for all of these relationships are in
constant flux as our own perspectives and the values of society co-evolve.
Fashion at its creative best is one of the most powerful and direct
expressions of personal aspirations, individuality and belonging. But the
fashion industry also contributes to environmental and social degradation
through pervasive advertising and short-term trends manipulating and
exploiting people’s innate needs for integration and differentiation, in order
to drive faster retail cycles and ever-increasing growth in commercial
production. The realization that climate change is linked to the consumer
lifestyle of the (over-) developed nations has prompted a critical
examination of modern industrial life and of consumption itself. Over the
past few decades, countless environmental campaigns have provided
compelling data; magazines such as Adbusters and movies such as Annie
Leonard’s Story Of Stuff, have ‘joined the dots’ between consumption and
environmental consequences, to present a hard-hitting critique of
capitalism and the industrial growth economy. Fashion in particular is often
placed front and centre to illustrate how frivolous and trite our wants for
variety are in an era where 20 per cent of the world’s population consumes
80 per cent of the Earth’s natural resources.
c h a p t e r 1 3 : n ee d s 139
Material goods and changing consumer behaviour

Making these connections known is clearly necessary – for people need to
understand what the problems are before they can act to mitigate them –
but growing evidence indicates that though environmental campaigns and
strategies have successfully raised the public’s awareness about ecological
issues, they have largely failed to change behaviour.65 Mainstream
consumers are intellectually informed, but not emotionally engaged in the
discourse on the consumer economy, nor are they translating these
messages into lifestyle changes. Perhaps one of the reasons for this malaise
is that a focus on halting material consumption not only challenges
corporations and the premise on which ‘Western progress’ was founded,
but also questions the social and cultural relevance of things to people –
the very foundation of meaning and sense of self that people have created
through goods. As such, failure to acknowledge the dynamic exchange of
meaning between people, the things they buy and consumer culture in
general, leaves these deep motivations unconsidered and therefore
unaddressed. At worst, it trivializes them.
Marchand and Walker’s (2008) research into what motivates people to
downshift to simpler, non-consumerist lifestyles provides some insights into
people’s behaviours around sustainability. They note that ‘(presenting) the
problems in the world simply as a set of abstract concepts that are “out
there” and “somewhere else” – (means) we understand them intellectually
not intuitively, factually but not viscerally; and this is why we can so easily
set them aside’.66 This might suggest that sustainability messages should be
more tailored and relevant to people’s day-to-day activities, for simply
amplifying an abstract message with a sense of urgency merely makes
people feel coerced and leads to even greater resistance to change.
In light of these findings, it is clear that the majority of approaches
to sustainability in fashion fall short of what might motivate shifts in
behaviour. Most ‘eco’ garments are fashioned in the same way as
conventional ones (indeed, most companies go to great lengths to ensure
that sustainability actions are invisible), rendering any subsequent ‘eco’
messaging distant and abstruse.Yet designers have an innate ability to tap
into human emotions; this can be put to good use to develop ways for the
mainstream public to ‘fit in’ and ‘relate’ to sustainability in their everyday
lives, without feeling coerced or impinged upon; and similarly, for
sustainability to ‘fit in’ and ‘relate’ to a mainstream mindset, by redirecting
our attention from what people buy to how people behave and redirecting
consumers’ attention from having to doing.67
The example of travelling by bicycle

As easy as commuting to work by bicycle may seem, many people still
commute by car. Hurdles to making the switch include concerns about
cycling safety on congested urban streets, unpredictable weather conditions,
or simply the hassle of changing clothes at the office. Here, a lack of
convenience hinders a behavioural change – to the detriment of
sustainability.Yet, any one of these hurdles could be used as a driver for

creative intervention, and this is familiar and direct territory for designers.
Focused on enabling riders to transition easily from commuter
cycling into a business setting, Alite has developed jeans with ergonomic
considerations. A side seam forces articulation at the kneecap, and is
twinned with a seam at the back knee to eliminate excess fabric when
the leg is bent in a cycling position. Further comfort details include a
low-cut front rise, which prevents the waistband cutting into the belly,
and a forward-tipped back-rise, which avoids ‘plumber’s butt’! The slim
leg steers clear of the chain and the choice of a greaseproof fabric provides
an additional barrier to oil stains. By contrast, the Internet company
Betabrand designed a trouser with increased safety features for riding on
busy city streets. Rolled-up trouser legs and reversed-out back-pocket
bags feature reflective Illuminite Teflon fabric, which makes the rider more
visible on the road. The fabric stiffness minimizes creases in the trouser
leg and keeps cuffs rolled up, while additional taping details using 3M
Scotchlite™ reflective tape increase visibility even further. The pants are
a roomy fit to accommodate cycling movement, with front pockets and
waistband liner made from a soft seersucker that yields to the body when
crouched over the handlebars.
Both of these design strategies reject the Lycra® cycling-geek look
and broaden the appeal of commuter cycling, yet the final look of each
garment is quite different from the other. What is most notable about both
is their decided absence of any ‘traditional’ sustainability attributes – no
mention of organic or recycled fabric here – for it is the product itself, not
the textile, that becomes the link that empowers individuals and enables
behavioural change. When the emphasis shifts from having to doing, space
is created for the wearer’s own value system to provide the motivation for
action. This foretells a radically different approach to communicating about
sustainability and clothing.
Commuter cycling
trousers by Betabrand
with reflector pockets
and trouser turn-ups.
c h a p t e r 1 3 : n ee d s 141
‌Being (clothing as nurturer)
‘The artist appeals to that part of our being … which is a gift and not an
acquisition – and therefore, more permanently enduring.’
‌Joseph Conrad
The nuances of a consumer’s needs and how they relate to patterns of

consumption and sustainability are largely invisible to professional designers.
Information that goes beyond the simple recording of a purchase and the
sell-through data of a product’s retail performance is not generated or tracked
by companies. Nor can it necessarily be tracked. For in contrast to the impacts
in the supply chain, which can be measured, analysed and assessed, the reasons
for buying, keeping and wearing garments are elusive and intensely personal
to each individual. A garment may represent a symbol of social status to one
person, or to another a period of personal growth. No two people perceive
or respond to a single garment the same way.68 Moreover, the global nature
of our industry makes the gathering of this personal information unwieldy and
its formation into appropriate design strategy for mainstream business practically
impossible – the fundamental desires of the individual are irrelevant information
for an industry whose whole purpose is to deliver garments en masse.
Yet each of us owns at least one garment that has remained in our
possession for several years. And somehow these garments trigger deep emotional
responses in us, which we savour over and again whenever we look at, touch,
smell or wear them. Designing to allow for these emotional connections to be
present in or evolve into an article of clothing starts to open up new and yet
familiar capacities for design; new because they feel so alien to our usual
commercial practice, and familiar because they touch on basic human sensibilities
that we hold dear nonetheless. Artefacts designed this way follow completely
different routes into being and engage the designer on a multitude of levels
in addition to the physical and intellectual cleverness of conventional design.
A yellow vintage dress has been in Lynda Grose’s possession for many
years, worn often for special occasions.When it became stained by strawberry
juice at a friend’s wedding, rather than disposing of the ‘damaged’ dress,
Lynda enlisted fellow designer Nathalie Chanin to embroider over the
stains with the names of the newly espoused couple and the date of their
marriage. As a result, a series of enduring qualities was brought to life. The
embroidery created an emotional link between the wearer and the newly
married couple, evoking the memory of the event with each wearing of
the dress. And it simultaneously strengthened the bond with the friend
who executed the embroidery with such care. These qualities, in the words
of Lewis Hyde, ‘move the heart, revive the soul, and delight the senses’.69
But this small act of sustainability brings another endearing quality
to life, for through the embroidery, the dress is not only ‘repaired’, but also
transformed from being static to active. It captures a narrative from the past,
makes it visible in the present, and opens up the potential for additional stains to
be treated in the same way – neither prescribed nor intended, but simply evoked.
chapter 14: Engaged 143
Chapter 14: Engaged

‘‌No humans or other living beings can survive without multiple interconnections
with other organisms.’
‌Ernest Callenbach70
At the heart of sustainability is an experience of the connectedness of

things; a lived understanding of the countless interrelationships that link
material, socio-cultural and economic systems with nature. These
connections operate at different scales and with different spheres of
influence, some on a direct local level and others globally. Openness to
these relationships is a key precursor for change as it demonstrates the
dynamic effect of each part on every other. Put simply, when working with
sustainability ideas and practices, nothing exists in isolation.
Such an approach contrasts sharply with most fashion products on
offer today, which can be seen to epitomize value-free expression and
equip us to appear in a world that has little or nothing to do with the
Earth, the health of its soil or its people. Such a world is abstract and
remote and has a tenuous relationship with the reality of how fashion is
made, used and discarded. Robert Farrell has described this as a ‘world of
ideas’;71 an imaginary place where the consequences of actions need not be
felt, where almost anything is possible, where there are few limits.Yet our
reality is different to this: our planet plainly does have limits. Many of the
ecological systems on Earth are closed systems of finite capacity, and
fashion is as subject to them as anything else is. Restoring the relationship
between fashion and the social and ecological systems that support it
requires transformation of the remote, abstract ‘world’ that has so far shaped
conventional industry into something more direct and connected.
Sustainability is based on action

Much of the shift towards interconnectedness implied by sustainability is
predicated on us being active – as individuals (in our roles as designers and
also as consumers) and collectively as a society. This means engaging with
and enquiring about material flows, design processes, business models,
social questions, ecosystems and so on as an intrinsic part of life and, by
extension, of the fashion experience. However, for many consumers of
fashion, it is passivity rather than activity that characterizes their experience
of buying and dressing in clothes. The products on sale in the high street
are largely homogenous and this lack of choice erodes individual
expression, dulling consumers’ imagination and limiting their confidence
about what clothes can be. This lack of self-belief spills over into hesitance
to make, alter and personalize pieces. Consumers find themselves with little
choice but to be on the receiving end of the fashion industry’s ‘product’. Lynda Grose’s yellow
Here they choose between styles created for them by designers, vintage dress with
embroidery by
manufactured by distant workers, selected for them by buyers, presented to Nathalie Chanin makes
them by marketers. They then wear these pieces in combinations directed narratives of wear and
by stylists and magazine editors and replace them regularly as trends relationships between
friends visible.
manufactured by forecasters change. Select information about each garment
flows one way down the supply chain from producer to consumer with
little or no opportunity to interrupt this flow and ask questions. The effect
is to create a physical and emotional void between those who wear the garment
and those actors, and environments, who produce it. This leads to an absence
of connection on a global scale, underscored by the growing corporate
practices of brand loyalty creation and offshore production; legitimized by
the trading rules of global institutions such as the IMF and the WTO; and
reinforced by the established hierarchies of the fashion industry elite, who
benefit from the status quo and the passive state of most consumers.
Innovating to bring change in the form of a new engagement with
fashion is highly politically charged. It challenges the dominance of the
growth model – large-scale, globalized production, non-transparent supply
chains, the flow of large volumes of similar garments, and the mystique of
the fashion creation process.Yet the benefits it promises are linked to the
possibility of recreating counter-flows where consumers do not just follow
but can perhaps also lead, and thereby participate in fashion in a more
co-operative, healthy, active relationship with the whole.
Co-design
Co-design, the practice of designing with others, involves the collaborative
design of products together with the people who will use them. At a
fundamental level, co-design contests the economic growth-driven logic of
most design activities today and offers an alternative based on different
imperatives such as greater democracy, improved empowerment and less
domination, through practices such as inclusiveness, co-operative processes
and participative action. Its premise is that those who use a product are
entitled to have a say in determining how it is designed. And that when
stakeholders and their interests shape and contribute to the design process,
the quality of a design increases.
Designing with users

Over the last decade, the practice of designing with users rather than for
them has been on the rise, no doubt influenced by growing interest in the
social and political dimensions of design and by, for example, the role of
the Internet in opening up new design opportunities. Co-design’s political
and social potential springs from its influence over who in society holds
power, who controls knowledge and who makes decisions. Some Internet-
based co-design initiatives such as Linux software and the online
encyclopedia Wikipedia exemplify this set of changed relationships. These
initiatives, created by a widely distributed network of volunteer creator-
users, make the knowledge within the product available for the common
good. Those involved share the work and also share the benefits.
Co-design’s aim, to ‘reduce top-down mechanisms to a minimum
and… to share practice between a multiplicity of participants on as equal
terms as possible’,72 greatly disrupts traditional fashion hierarchies, where
most power is conferred to those at the top of the tree. Elite designers,
high-street retailers and global brands cement and even augment their
positions by protecting their concepts and products. Select ‘auteurs’ hold
knowledge in a secretive system closed to outsiders. Information flows one
way down the hierarchy from top to bottom, as decisions about design
direction, finish, fabric and cost are handed down to producers, supply
chains and consumers. Maintaining the security and exclusivity of the
knowledge system keeps the fashion establishment in power and in the
money. For without access to knowledge and associated skills, in both the
material and symbolic aspects of fashion, users cannot do-it-themselves.
Co-designer Otto von Busch invokes the ‘Cathedral and Bazaar’
metaphor first developed by online open-source pioneer Eric S. Raymond,
to contrast the different social organization of traditional and co-designed
fashion. The top-down, stratified and closed model of fashion is the
Cathedral, ‘where strict chains of command are built into the structure
itself ’.73 The Bazaar, by contrast, is co-designed fashion, ‘a free buzzing
market where everyone is talking simultaneously. It is chaotic yet somehow
organized, like a street market or anthill.’74 The Bazaar’s (or co-design’s)
organization is flat, or heterarchical, and all elements are linked or networked.
Collective understanding
In co-design, the design process is turned out on itself. Here, the concern
is less about producing rarefied objects and more with building capacity in
the user population. It stresses collective understanding, designing and doing
– and this expanding knowledge and experience is not just reserved for the
amateur designer, but influences the professional one too. Sociologist
Elizabeth Shove and colleagues put it in these terms: ‘rather than a
design(er)-led process in which products are imbued with values for
consumers to discover and respond to, proponents [of co-design] … argue
that the traffic flows both ways.’75 It is in this two-way flow of ‘traffic’ that
the co-designer dwells, working in multipart roles as facilitator, catalyst and
encourager, both learning from and teaching other actors in the process.
Different approaches to co-design

Co-design often emerges from the grass roots and builds on processes and
appetites that already exist. In his book Design Activism, Alastair Fuad-Luke
explores a spectrum of design and making activity (see fig. 11).76 While
established industry practices tend to fall in the lower left quadrant of the
chart, between the axes of manufactured production and professional
design, new activities and interests are beginning to populate other areas.
Home dressmaking, for example, has experienced considerable growth in
recent years as people begin to self-design and make, largely as a low-cost
alternative to buying clothing in recession-hit times. And the development
of modular products (see page 80), where a series of panel pieces can be
built into a variety of garments, leaving space for the user to refashion
how a garment is made, also marks out a different role for designing
and making.
146 Pa r t 2 : t r a n s f o r m i n g fa s h i o n s Y s t E m s
Antiform Industries works within the Hyde Park community in

Leeds, UK, to create fashion co-operatively.77 Tapping into pre-existing
sewing, repair, craft and embellishment skills and offering training where
skills are in short supply, Antiform has facilitated the creation of an
eight-piece collection with 64 local people (beaders, knitters, artists,
FIG. 11 WAyS OF DESIGNING AND MAKING.78
100% self-design
true personalization diY
true customization self-design-make
Products ‘finished’ by user
Products ‘worked on’ by user

Manufactured 100% self-made
manufacturer’s customization
Products are built by the
professional design
user, designed by others

Products are assembled by the user
majority of mass-produced goods
seamstresses and volunteers) sold in the Leeds districts of Hyde Park,

Woodhouse and Chapeltown. All materials for the collection are waste
clothing gathered in the area from free monthly exchange events, which
bring an influx of materials and people into the project. The symbiotic
relationship between the resulting collection and the materials exchange is
key to the project’s development, allowing local residents to get involved in
many different levels of the project, creating a new system for local fashion.
In contrast, Self-Couture by Diane Steverlynck is a multifunction
piece, exploring a different way of designing and making.79 Both garment
and bedding, the piece is composed of two to five layers of fabric in
different materials, chosen for their specific character between bedding and
clothing. Each layer is evenly perforated with buttonholes and double
buttons that can transform every layer into a sleeping bag, a single or
double sheet, a winter or summer blanket, a dress, a blouse, a jacket or a
skirt. The project designs with the user, offering the prospect of many
changed forms and uses from a simple piece of fabric.
Active craft
Craft is hands-on, resource-based and practical. It has a visceral connection
with materials and the way they are shaped into forms for display or use. It
involves the actual doing of something rather than merely the experience of
Leeds-based Antiform
being done to – that is, the practice (in the case of fashion) of stitching, Industries designs and
knitting, cutting, draping, folding and joining to make fabric into garment. produces garments in
Also essential to craft – and to crafting well – is experience: long a collaborative,

community process
hours working and reworking the same technique. Crafting is a slow with the people who
activity, with skills maturing over time as the crafter reflects, thinks deeply will wear them.
and constantly tests the limits of his or her activity. In his book The
Craftsman, Richard Sennett describes craftsmanship as ‘the desire to do a
job well for its own sake’.80 This motivation brings the powerful promise of
emotional rewards; it anchors people in material reality and allows them to
take pride in their work.81 For all of these reasons – for its connection to
Self-couture garments/
bedding by Diane
Steverlynck.
resources, for its active, hands-on quality, for the value it places on lived,
grounded experience and emotional satisfaction – craft supports many
sustainability values.
Craft is political and democratic

There are other reasons why the relationship between craft and clothing is
a rich seam in sustainability terms. Highly developed craft skills can be seen
to support democratic ideals, for their potential is distributed widely
among us all rather than attributed only to those with wealth or privilege.
Crafting garments employs hands in combination with materials and
machines. Here it is what you do – that is, technique, honed by years of
experience – not who you are or how much technology you can access, that
plays a defining role. Further, craft production can be seen to convey a
sense of restraint in consumption, a speed limit and volume cap, for after all
you can only consume as much, and as fast, as the craftsperson can produce.
Craft can, perhaps covertly, even imply further restrictions. It can suggest
that we produce just enough for our own personal consumption (and in so
doing opt out of the corporate, industrial model); or produce as a protest
against, say, poor treatment of garment workers and degrading
environmental quality, because it allows us to control more closely
production conditions and material provenance.
In all of these contexts, craft is clearly political. It is an expression of
production values, power relations, decision-making and pragmatism. Its
sharp political edge is felt perhaps most distinctly in needlecraft’s changed
role in women’s lives over the past 50 years. As recently as two generations
ago, knitting, embroidery and dressmaking were part of women’s domestic
duties and household obligations, keeping females’ ‘idle hands busy’. By
contrast, in the past decade, vastly different socio-cultural, labour and
material conditions have seen needlecraft reclaimed by women as liberating
feminist action rather than as subjugating work. It has been recovered as a
practical, satisfying, expressive and creative act in and of itself. It is now
sometimes referred to as part of the ‘new domesticity’, where meaning is
brought to a society dominated by mass-production and ready-made
products and with decreasing space and time for hobbies.
Craftivism
Richard Sennett describes the meaning and contribution of craft to society
as, ‘the special human condition of being engaged’, and something that
reflects a satisfying process rather than the action of simply getting things
to work.82 He continues: ‘At its higher reaches technique is no longer a
mechanical activity; people can feel fully and think deeply about what they
are doing once they do it well.’ Thus craftsmanship fuses head and hand,
bringing thought to life through action. At the level of expert, when
feelings and thoughts are maximally open, ethical, political and environmental
questions appear uncloaked. It is in this context that the term ‘craftivism’ has
evolved, a neologism naming craft as a change agent in material, political
and social culture. It describes a role for practical

work to participate in and shape negotiations about
consumerism, industrial production, equality,
environmental conditions, individuality and
materialism, among other issues. It blends political
questions and practical action.
Craftivism is an area of rapidly growing
interest, as evidenced by Craft Lab, a new creative
hub with emphasis on critical making set up at
California College of Arts,83 and the highly popular
‘Craftwerk 2.0: New household tactics for popular
crafts’ exhibition in Sweden.84 Irrespective of
academic interest in craft as activism, its power as an
agent of change emerges from widespread public
involvement, where for example users engage in the
skilful process of constructing pieces that are more
than the sum of their parts. To work in this way
requires users to have such skills as self-confidence,
reflective awareness, practical knowledge and an
ability to operate in modes of social organization
different from the status quo. Practical technique
hewn from experience is used to influence a social
and economic agenda in the ways of quality over
quantity, active making over passive consuming,
empowerment over domination, and rebellion over
acceptance. Such practices can help users engage
with fashion on a level deeper than as consumers,
and help connect with materials, skills and language
necessary to create both physical objects and a brave
new world of sustainability ideas.
Elisheva Cohen-Fried’s short jacket is designed with finger-knitted The short jacket with
extensions that the user adds to after buying the garment. Loops are finger-knitted
extensions by Elisheva
strategically placed on the garment to capture the lengthening knitted Cohen-Fried starts to
pieces, and creativity is enabled through the simplest of craft techniques: reintroduce craft into
finger knitting. The jacket invites the wearer to be more than a consumer a fast-paced modern
lifestyle.
of commercial products, engaging her as a co-designer, adding craft and
personality and gaining making skills in the process. Moreover, in a world
of de-skilled wearers, this concept allows for the creative contribution to
be easily accomplished without specialized tools and even in our fast-paced
modern lifestyles: on a bus or a train, in a taxi, during a flight…
Hacking
In line with the intensely political nature of participatory design actions,
hacking and fashion production can enhance the promise of engagement
with a garment by challenging the control and power of the fashion
system. A hacked garment is one that may provide a clever or quick fix to a
particular issue such as fit, or hacking may involve the modification of a

piece, its production process or its advertising and semiotics to subvert it
for political gain, or more practically, to give the user access to features that
were otherwise unavailable.
Direct action
Hacking in fashion borrows heavily from the language and practice of
computer hackers, who open up commonly available consumer electronics,
modify software and parody and sabotage web sites, among many other
activities. In its most positive forms, computer hacking explores how
electronic direct action might work towards (technological) change by
combining programming skills with critical thinking. Though it is also
associated with more destructive acts across a wide span of political ideals
and issues, including those that attempt maliciously to undermine
individual, corporate and state security, in the main, electronic hacking is
seen as activity that is productive rather than destructive. It needs the
system that is being hacked to continue working in order for the hack to
be a success. Its goal is not to damage a system and switch it off, but to
build something extra in that system into which it plugs: ‘hacking is the
mastery of a system but usually not with ill intent. While it is true that
every hack needs a crack, a central aspect of hacking (unlike in cracking
and breaking) is building and constructive modification.’85
Keeping the power on

In sustainability, the model for understanding and organizing society is
ecological and based on networks. Likewise, most participatory and co-
design activities are best understood in terms of networked flat structures.
Networked forms propose alternative structures for practice and it is in
altering and tuning networks and rerouting the energies of the system that
hackers have made their home. Otto von Busch, the leading instigator of
work on fashion hacking, describes one role for fashion hackers: ‘Diktats
from Paris, London, Tokyo, Milan or New York can be short-circuited,
tuned and repurposed… Not opposing the inherent magic of fashion, but
re-circuiting its flows and its channels. Keeping the power on.’86 This
implies action from individuals, changing how they wear, modify and put
together pieces but also more than this: it can lead to modified communities
and changes in the ways fashion is communicated. For when a system is
hacked, it is made ‘to do new things by explicitly using the existing forces
and infrastructure within the system for changing it’.87 Black Spot sneakers,
for example, invites every purchaser to contribute ideas on product marketing
strategy, and designs a blank space on the shoe specifically to accommodate a
logo developed by each wearer, thereby using existing and accepted mechanisms
to reverse the usual flow of power. Here the implications stretch beyond
changes to physical products to include also people and behaviour.
Hacking is both process- and outcome-focused; the activity itself has
a finesse described by the journalist Steven Levy thus: ‘the feat must be
imbued with innovation, style and technical virtuosity.’88 This brings The process and
hacking firmly into the territory of design and, more specifically, co-design products of ‘hacking’
the manufacturing
actions, which share a similar concern with the technique or process. process of hand-
Hacking activities themselves are potentially wide-ranging and, according made shoes at the
to social researcher Anne Galloway, may involve:89 Dale Sko shoe factory
in Norway.
• access to technology and knowledge about it (transparency);

• empowering users;
• decentralizing control;
• creating beauty and exceeding limitations.
Hacking in a fashion context

The challenge in hacking, as in most forms of engaged practice, is to create
something beyond the original design intentions; this can be product-
based, process-focused, or system-wide. This helps differentiate hacking
from, say, customization, which largely works within the original design’s
framework. In his PhD thesis, Otto von Busch gives form to what some of
these might mean in fashion:
It could be anything from the product–service relationships in the form of

barbershop-like recycling boutiques, to offering restyling help and infrastructure for
drop-in updating of clothes. It could be workshops that engage in secondary
school craft curricula. It could be free DIY books created in collaboration with the
greatest haute couture designers. It could be projects exploring the full width of
user engagement, from various forms of Lego-like kits to shared workshops for
co-production inside fashion stores. It could be new forms of Swap-O-Rama-
Ramas where whole new scenes are formed and shared and that intersect both a
wide range of lifestyles and high-quality production.90
The hacking project at the Dale Sko shoe factory in Norway was a
three-day experiment in 2006 that explored the forces at play between
globalized fashion and small-scale local production of shoes using
collaborative design approaches. The project brought Norwegian fashion
designers into a small hundred-year-old shoe factory, reduced by the
pressures of a globalized market to a small unit creating a line of hand-
made shoes. The aim was to tinker and manipulate (hack) the flows and
functions of design and production by allowing designers better to
understand the limits and potential of production and the shoe producers.
This provided greater access to the creative and business potential sparked
by creating shoes and remixing existing models with new materials and
processes. The outcome was a collection of shoes and a newly invigorated
business approach for Dale Sko shoe factory, where collaboration between
some designers involved in the original hack and the factory is continuing.
Here both the fashion system and shoe production are firmly redirected at
the same time as small-scale creation and tradition.
TRANSFORMING
FASHION DESIGN
PRACTICE
‘Designers alone can’t bring about a steady state economy, but we can begin
to use the economy for sustainable ends, rather than letting the economy use
us for economic growth.’
ann thorpe
3
155
Designers influence and shape our material world. Most design work is
closely allied with a commercial agenda based on transforming matter and
energy into products and products into waste, in ever-increasing quantities,
in order to ensure that sales increase and businesses grow.Yet these
activities, which are afforded ‘logic’ by larger economic models, are at the
same time widely seen as the chief factor inhibiting broad and deep change
towards sustainability. The activities themselves and their associated thought
patterns and values are at the root of many environmental and social
problems. It is as the understanding of these underlying cultural and social
influences builds that challenges posed by sustainability to business more
generally, and to designers in particular, become clearer. In fact, design is
currently at an ‘inflection point’, where larger ecological, socio-cultural and
economic forces are causing a re-examination of both design’s prevalent
value systems and the places where design skills are traditionally applied.1
As a result of this scrutiny, designers are beginning to explore their
potential to transform things in ways that we might not expect.
Applying design thinking and skills to serve goals broader than
commerce has given new momentum to design practice in the era of
sustainability.Yet as we come to question our established role in companies
and in society as a whole, designers find that it’s not so easy to turn away
from the mainstream culture of consumption. As Buckminster Fuller noted:
‘As you get more and more over-specialized, you in-breed specialization
(and) breeding in specialization also breeds out adaptability.’2 A radical
departure from consumerist design is therefore hard to achieve. When we
do devise a way to influence the sustainability direction of the companies
we work for, designers often meet with a wall of systemic resistance.Yet, if
a commercial designer’s efforts influence the mainstream business model
even slightly, the sheer scale of change can have an enormously positive
effect. Conversely, a small design business can also be an effective change
agent, as these smaller structures are nimble and adaptable and can present
completely new models of business that over time and collectively
influence mainstream culture. Indeed, there are many examples where
innovation starts small and leads to a business megatrend, eventually
restructuring the competitive landscape – the digital revolution being a
case in point. Dan Esty, professor of environmental law at Yale Law School,
views sustainability as just such a business megatrend – ‘a societal value
that’s not going away’.3
As the desire of designers to support this ‘societal value’ builds, so
does the realization that this level of change is bigger than any one
company or business system, for sustainability issues extend beyond the
boundaries of individual corporations or disciplines. Finding how to relate
to sustainability in design practice involves uncovering potential in
contexts beyond the norm (see figs. 12 and 13). Stepping into other sectors
of the economy – and even back into existing sectors but with fresh insight
– provides more opportunities for designers to apply their professional
skills to the public and ecological good.
156 pa r t 3 : t r a n s f o r m i n g fa s h i o n D e s i g n p r a c t i c e
figs. 12 and 13
public sector public sector
private sector private sector
research research
non-profit sector
non-profit sector
Designers need not be confined to one area of activity. Designers can

apply their skills across all economic sectors and to the areas in between
each in order to be most eﬀective in bringing change for sustainability.
As more designers begin to populate other sectors of the economy,

totally new patterns of designing, of consumption and of behaviour are
likely to evolve,4 for the range of issues and information that designers
become exposed to is much broader than can be afforded through the
simple lens of business and the market, and this inevitably informs practice.
These new ways of working see designers becoming more deeply engaged
in culture and society and their institutions than at present, and over the
long term this will have the potential to afford designers the opportunity
to lead systemic change. The following pages, then, present some early
examples of new roles, patterns of behaviour and opportunities that
designers are already exploring as they engage with the process of
sustainability. These examples show that experts in creating and producing
things are finding new ways of operating – as communicators, educators,
facilitators, activists and entrepreneurs. They represent an integration of
new values into mainstream design culture, and promise to widen design’s
sphere of influence,5 creating opportunities for meaningful work alongside
personal, professional, societal and ecological well-being.
c h a p t e r 1 5 : D e s i g n e r a s c o m m u n i c at o r - e d u c at o r 157
Chapter 15: Designer as

communicator-educator
‘‌A society that talks about productivity, but that hardly uses the word ‘resilience,’
is going to become productive and not resilient. A society that doesn’t understand
or use the term ‘carrying capacity’ will exceed its carrying capacity. A society that
talks about creating jobs as if that is something only companies can do, will not
inspire the great majority of its people to create jobs for themselves or anyone else.’
‌Donella Meadows
In the cycle of fashion production and consumption, sustainability

initiatives have so far been led by industry – the producers of fashion
clothes. People working in companies, and specifically in technical
functions and in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), hold considerably
more knowledge about the ecological and social impacts of garments than
the consumer.Yet rarely is this knowledge communicated beyond the
confines of the technical functions of the supply chain to society more
broadly. The scope of what is communicated by a fashion company is
shaped by an organization’s image, corporate culture, customer base and
most critically by its obligation to sell products. To an outdoor company,
for example, broadcasting information on ecological issues may be a natural
fit. It is easier to imagine the connections to and within an ecosystem
when you are trekking through a forest or climbing a rocky crag. But for a
fashion brand, ecology is far removed from a company’s normal interface
with the customer, for fashion is seen to connect people to cultural
systems, not natural ones. For these products, sustainability innovation
– where it exists at all – is presented as a tool for brand differentiation with
the intention of leading to increased sales. Communication around
sustainability is therefore reduced to simple slogans on existing products
with limited environmental or social qualities. It becomes about conveying
the ‘sustainable’ attributes of a ‘greener’ product on a hangtag or billboard
to a consumer who is ‘pre-ecological’6 and has little sustainability
knowledge or awareness. This perpetuates the poverty of understanding as
to how the fashion industry might be reimagined to fit within Earth’s
natural systems over the long haul.7
Consumers or citizens?
Today, all companies speak to their customers as consumers; barely any also
speak to them as active citizens. Few give their customers the tools or the
occasion to ask questions and build knowledge about an ecosystem’s
carrying capacity or resource cycles. Even fewer see their role as to support
consumers in interrogating the underpinning structures that shape our
society. In order for sustainability ideas and practices to transform the
fashion sector fully, a deeper and broader communication and education
movement has to develop to build ‘literacy’ in the general population
around ecology and natural systems and their interconnections with
human systems. It is here that opportunities for designers emerge to
158 Pa r t 3 : t r a n s f o r m i n g fa s h i o n D ESIGN PRACTICE
communicate a vision of fashion and sustainability in new ways; to provide

tools, examples, skills and language to amplify a collective voice so that
deep change can come to the sector more rapidly.
The most effective communication does not always manifest itself in
traditional visual or two-dimensional forms, and education often works
best when not confined to a classroom. It may take the form of new
prototype businesses that ‘speak from’ a fresh vision of fashion or artefacts
and services that interrupt current ways of thinking while moulding new
ones; hands-on workshops; Internet competitions and calls to action. Once
designers start to work outside the usual corporate culture mould, there are
few limits.
Alternative ways of knowing

Building knowledge through experience, perhaps through the act of
making garments, through imagery or film, or by going on a field trip, is
recognized in the field of co-operative inquiry as one of the ‘four ways of
knowing’ used to explain how we discern something beyond the
traditional reaches of scientific and academic study. The four ways of
knowing are described as: experiential, presentational, propositional and
practical. They are said to have most value when they build on each other
– that is, when ‘our knowing is grounded in our experience, expressed
through our stories and images, understood through theories which make
sense to us, and expressed in worthwhile action in our lives’.8 Here the role
for the designer as communicator is to take abstract information, which is
often ineffective at prompting action, and make it real and appropriate, to
trigger new behaviour.
The Permacouture Institute, founded by artist and designer Sasha
Duerr, for example, organizes dye workshops where participants forage for
plants and make dye baths to colour their own fabric and yarn. These
creative exchanges culminate in a dinner arranged around the same plants
used as ingredients in the meal, thereby linking together food, fibre and
textiles. By piggy-backing on to what is already understood and accepted
– eating locally produced food and designing menus around the seasonal
availability of the ingredients – Duerr suggests that fibres, colours and
clothing might also be directed as they become available locally and in
season. Events are a combination of activity and creativity, and the
knowledge gained stays with the individual, opening up minds to the
potential of clothing becoming reconnected to natural systems and cycles.
The Sustainable Cotton Project (SCP) (see page 160) farm tours
connect fashion industry participants to natural systems in a completely
different way. SCP is an NGO working with Californian farmers to help
them transition to biologically based systems of cotton cultivation. Hosted
in California’s San Joaquin Valley every October, SCP’s tours run at the
height of activity during the harvesting season. Participants directly
experience familiar themes of sustainability, including, among others: issues
of scale, human presence on the land, the influence of economics and
c h a p t e r 1 5 : D e s i g n e r a s c o m m u n i c at o r - e d u c at o r 159
trading systems, use of natural resources, struggling rural communities, and

small-scale farmers. Tour participants come from across the fashion industry
supply chain and the agricultural sector – farmers and agricultural
specialists, brokers, designers, production and sales people, buyers, reporters
and activists. When thrown together in a new environment where they are
able to ask questions directly of each other, they find that perceptions that
fuel polarized and simplistic positions often dissipate. People recognize
their collective position within larger economic and ecological systems and
conversations move from the dollars and cents of business and marketing to
mechanisms and ideas that facilitate changes in supply chain and cultivation
practices.
Graphic designer Roberto Cara, writer Dan Imhoff and fashion
designer Lynda Grose developed the communication tools used by SCP.
These highly visual materials appeal to the fashion sector, yet incorporate
scientific data and apply it to a fashion context so that it can be understood
and acted upon. Tools include a ‘cotton calculator’ (see fig. 14) that
translates pounds (or kilos) of fibre (the language of farmers) into units of
garments (the language of the fashion sector), thereby creating a bridge
between the worlds of agriculture and garment-making.
fig. 14 Cleaner Cotton Calculator to convert poundage to products
Weight of fabric divided by 36 inches = weight per square inch
Weight per square inch x width of fabric = weight per square yard
Weight per square yard x yield for product = weight of product
Add 10% waste = total poundage per product
In her 2008 interactive video piece ‘Mirror/Africa’, artist Nicole

Mackinlay Hahn promotes awareness to improve trade, conservation and
restorative development in the African fashion supply chain. The piece, first
on show at the US department store Barneys New York, uses video clips of
farmers, artisans and factory workers – and their continent and culture – to
communicate where the items originated or were produced. Using RFID
tags placed in selected items from designers, a consumer can scan a garment,
and a mirror within the video installation ‘reflects’ a clip from somewhere
along the supply chain – Madagascar, Kenya, Lesotho, Mali, Uganda,
Swaziland, Tunisia, Ghana or South Africa. The goal of ‘Mirror/Africa’ is to
try to connect the consumer emotionally with the ‘great heart and soul’
behind much of the fashion design value chain and to re-personalize it.
Above: ‘Sheep and Above right: Wall Below: Cotton, planted Opposite: The ‘Mirror/
Weeds’, held at artwork by Sasha with corn and sunflower Africa’ video
August Shop in Duerr. Fennel, one hedgerows, grows as installation by Nicole
Oakland, California, of the ingredients in part of a biological Mackinlay Hahn,
was a collaboration the dinner, provided IMP (integrated pest communicating to
between dyer Sasha the dye. management) system consumers about the
Duerr, felter Ashley seen on farm tours fashion supply chain
Helvey and chef hosted by the in Africa.
Jerome Waag, Sustainable Cotton
inspired by Project.
Permacouture
Institute’s ‘Dinners
to Dye For’.
Chapter 16:
Designer as facilitator
‘‌Designing is not a profession but an attitude.’
‌László Moholy-Nagy
The range of skills required of working designers – such as being

comfortable with the unknown, synthesizing complex information,
working across disciplinary boundaries and making intuitive leaps in
thinking – are similar in scope and nature to many of the challenges
thrown up by sustainability. Both tend to be highly interrelated, know no
industrial or disciplinary borders, and often necessitate that we see and
understand the issues in different ways. These multiple points of overlap
suggest that design thinking and skills are extremely well placed to respond
to sustainability challenges and in so doing offer many new opportunities
for designers. Certainly ‘traditional’ design practices such as sketching,
prototyping and making will still exist; but there will be much greater
emphasis placed on ‘designing’ the activities, ideas and platforms of the
systems and behaviours that shape our industry as a whole. Fashion
designers will move from working in the supply chain to working at the
‘hub’ of change, using their skills differently9 – envisioning change,
organizing it and enabling something different to happen. Designers will
work as facilitators.
Enabling action and change

This new enabling role for designers may take a variety of forms, from
developing strategies to change the industry and business of fashion, to
being a ‘street-level practical facilitator and creative teaser’10 whose role is
to orchestrate change by creating opportunities for people to work in
completely different ways. In many contexts, this role is more complex
than traditional design activities and involves intense negotiation, steering
a course between stakeholders and the need to take practical action. It is
also unpredictable and produces outcomes that may not conform to
traditional design norms. For acting in a capacity as facilitator tends to
emphasize process over outcome and re-engineers the ego boundaries
of designers by framing ‘success’ as contingent on group effort rather than
isolated brilliance.
Co-design
One of the most complete immersions in the practice of designer as
facilitator is in co-design (discussed on page 144). Here the users of clothes
design and make garments for their own consumption in a process
facilitated by someone experienced in the technical and practical details of
transforming ideas into products. The ‘professional’ designer supports the
co-designers both in the practical making and conceptualization skills, and
c h a p t e r 1 6 : D e s i g n e r a s fa c i l i tat o r 163
also in a wholesale switch in their thinking and behaviour, as they segue

from the role of consumer to one of active citizen. The journey from one
to the other involves a burgeoning sense of responsibility and interaction as
the ‘rights’ of the consumer give way to a blend of the ‘rights’ and
‘responsibilities’ of the citizen; it is a journey that positively engages people
emotionally, practically and politically with their clothes and that is
brought to bear on each piece worn.
Clothes swaps
Also promoting a sense of extended consumer responsibility, ‘clothes swaps’
facilitate access to new-to-you clothes through exchanging garments. In
this case, the role the designer plays is in setting up a workable process for
swapping and staging an event that creates a fashion ‘experience’ that goes
at least some way to meeting needs for identity, communication and
creativity, yet without perpetuating the cycle of production and
consumption of virgin resources.
Professionally run clothes swaps are now widespread, and most
frequently centre on an event that is fun and sociable. The rules of
swapping vary between organizations and events. In Australia, Clothing
Exchange, which was started by Kate Luckins in 2004, sets a limit of six
swaps per person. Clothes must be clean, pressed, in good condition and
likely to be valued by others, thereby upholding the quality of garments for
everyone. Button tokens are issued for each garment brought along and
exchanged for another garment to take away.
In contrast, at Swap-O-Rama-Rama (originated by Wendy Tremayne
in the US in 2005), no limit is set as to what can be brought or taken away, A Clothing Exchange
clothes-swapping
and the event is augmented by a series of do-it-yourself workshops in event in Melbourne,
which the attendees can explore creative reuse of clothes. Sewing stations Australia.
staffed by skilled designers help clothes swappers modify their ‘finds’ and
also learn such skills as embroidery, knitting and crochet. The evening
culminates in a participatory catwalk show, giving attendees a chance to
show off their fashion finds, showcasing the work of the local designers
who staffed the event and providing an opportunity to exchange stories
around the swapped items to build further emotional attachment. Swap-O-
Rama-Rama also provides clothes swappers the opportunity to cover up
the original garment’s corporate branding with a new label. The ‘100%
Recycled’ or ‘Modified by Me’ labels celebrate the DIY community’s
collective creativity and subvert the political power and social positioning
of the previously branded goods. Other variations on the clothes-swap
format see swapping organized by commercial organizations online or by
local authorities as part of a strategy of waste reduction (such as is the case
with Islington Council in London, England); the concept has even
percolated into the mainstream through a BBC television series fronted by
1960s fashion model Twiggy.
Ready-to-wear versus readiness-to-make

Acting in a different facilitatory capacity, designer Otto von Busch
produces ‘collections’ of patterns, instructions and sewing tips to promote
clothes-making and skills development.11 Making use of the cultural power
and influence of fashion language and imagery, von Busch’s ‘cookbooks’
and ‘recyclopedia’ connect the home-made garment with the symbolic
power of fashion creation and subvert the system in a stylistic form it
understands. The cookbooks attempt to change the attitude towards
fashion from something that is ready-to-wear, to fashion as a ‘readiness-to-
make’, involving a process that promotes personal growth, skills
development and empowerment through making clothes. The role played
by the designer here is to turn fashion’s established consumerist power
structures inside out and set in motion an ad hoc training programme for
sewing skills that seeds a positive and enabling attitude to fashion –
expressed in more diverse ways than simply what can be bought and
consumed on the high street. The online communities that build from this
type of hands-on project are breaking open the traditional structures of
producing and consuming fashion.Von Busch’s recyclopedia is free to
download on the Web, and has rapidly inspired workshops in other
countries – a concept unthinkable just a few years ago.
Designer as intensifier
Opportunities for designers to act as facilitators can take on a variety of
additional forms, one of which is simply to recognize and intensify the
possibility of ‘good’ work. A London-based on-going fashion project, Local
Wisdom, seeks to celebrate a user’s ‘craft’ – that is, the practices of expertly
using garments in satisfying and resourceful ways. The result is a host of
stories and images that describe how individuals have used their ingenuity
to enhance their own fashion experience within the limits of the clothes
they already have. Local Wisdom documents tales from volunteer members Garment remaking
of the public recorded at community photo ‘shoots’. The practices to workshop in the Kernel
Gallery in Athens,
emerge so far include the ways in which people keep pieces in active use Greece, using Otto
for longer; the practicalities and emotional intensity of garment sharing; von Busch’s
the subtle and multiple reasons that dissuade us from ever laundering our ‘recyclopedia’.
clothes. The craft of use often falls outside industrial or commercial ideas
about what sustainability is or should be, emerging instead from the
culturally embedded ‘wisdoms’ of thrift, domestic provisioning and care of
loved ones. These practices typically need little money or materials, but tap
into an abundance of experience, ingenuity and free-thinking to comprise
activity that is rarely acknowledged and never makes it on to catwalks or
business or political agendas.
The Local Wisdom project frames these activities as part of a new
prosperity in fashion that exists outside the predominant economic and
business model of growth. In this space, sustainability in fashion is about
action in everyday life.Yet Local Wisdom is also seen to have commercial
application, for the craft of users supplies industry with an array of starting
HOME-MADE: Easy to fix
‘This dress I got in a thrift shop and
somebody sewed it at home. It had a
bunch of rips and things in it so I
took it home and put a new zipper
in and… because it’s home-made...
if anything rips, if any seam tears, it
is so much easier to fix because it’s
not overlocked. It fits me absolutely,
perfectly and I love it.’
points, ideas and pragmatic examples of a more satisfying use of fashion

resources that dissociates material throughput from commercial success.
The fashion industry’s industrial cut-and-sew techniques produce a
garment so polished that it seems complete as is, closed to improvisation
from the ‘outside’. But the design and construction of home-made
garments are more like a work in progress, open to adaptation and repair
and to building understanding about how things are made.
Social and cultural sustainability

Engaging with the public about their relationship with clothing is a
powerful way to take theory and research ideas about a more satisfying use
of fashion out of academia, and prototypes (based on these theories and
empirical research) out of the studio, bringing them into the community at
large, where they can become a catalyst for discussion. This activity sees
artefacts as extended tools of enquiry for excavating attitudes and social
mores while also testing and reinforming the artefacts themselves. It also
allows designers to serve as pragmatic ambassadors for how we might
de-link profit from selling more product. This type of research is a natural
extension of life-cycle thinking, expanding the activities and focus of
design to include not only product sustainability but also social and cultural
sustainability, and involving not only design and industry experts but also
the wearer-citizens.
In many ways then, when inhabiting the role of facilitator, a designer
operates in such a way as to influence courses of action both within the
existing fashion system and at the systems level itself, to affect not only
products, processes and practice but also economics, power relations,
established production structures and commercial business preferences, and
so on. This brings vision and practical skills together in collaboration with
others to change the fashion sector at root.
Opposite: The story

and image of a
home-made dress
whose non-
overlocked seams
make it easier to
repair; part of the
Local Wisdom Project.
Chapter 17:
Designer as activist
‌‘We have to become not just stronger fish swimming against the stream, we have
to change the current.’
‌James Gustave Speth
Activists believe in and practise vigorous, often direct, action to achieve

social or political ends. For those designers actively engaging with the
process of sustainability, their practice often follows a route alert to both
economic and enviro-social goals, sometimes working to reconcile them, at
other times trying to transform one with knowledge of the other, and at
still others, holding the tension between these goals in order to foster change.
Fashion activists can work in many contexts, both inside and outside
traditional fashion sector institutions. Working in mainstream industry,
operating as a sustainability activist can be rewarding when the company is
‘responsible’ and open to integrating ecological values into its practices.
Much good work has gone on in recent years in large, commercially focused
fashion companies where company directives and commitment at a top
management level allow sustainability advocates from CSR departments,
technical production functions and design to come together and drive
innovation forwards. Here technological developments and managerial
ingenuity tend to lead change, bringing more resourceful materials and
products to market, which evolve and improve the sustainability profile of
a company within the bounds of existing ways of doing things.
Roles for activist designers

Yet the inherently political nature of sustainability activism, which critiques
the business objectives being furthered by the industry status quo, finds
little representation in mainstream institutions, for no matter how
‘responsible’ a company may be, its long-term direction is limited by the
ethics of conventional business and economic practice. Eventually
‘responsible’ designers may feel compromised and pressured to make a
choice between expressing their own values through their work and
maintaining an income flow (job): never an easy decision.
There are a number of roles designer-activists have invented for
themselves in order to circumvent such a conflict of values. Working
independently offers one means of release from the established corporate
culture and enables designers to direct their practice based on their own
ethics and goals. Many find this self-directed ‘free’-lance way of working to
be liberating. In a conventional context, it permits the taking on of a
diverse array of projects across all economic sectors, bringing variety and
interest to creative practice. In the context of sustainability, it allows
designers to, ‘make a judgment as to whether the products he/she is asked
chapter 17: Designer as activist 169
to design or redesign merit his/her attention at all. In other words, will his
design be on the side of social good or not.’12
Public and private spheres

Designing for social good is likely to be best promoted by combining the
contribution of both public and private sectors, in actively pursuing design
opportunities that span civil society as well as government and the
commercial institutions of the market. The strengths and abilities of each to
affect social change are at their most effective when combined. NGOs have
the trust of the public and can provide detailed research to justify proposed
plans of action. Government can implement policy changes and incentives
that steer business behaviour and help shape the market over the long term,
and private companies bring innovation and have the power and
infrastructure to deliver on products or services and to reach the end user.
Combined well, these collaborations can bring citizens, business and
public/ecological interests into one holistic effort.
Yet in the free-market economy, corporate interests are seen to be
best served with minimal or no interference from government.
Corporations vehemently protect their ability to maximize profits, hiring
lobbyists and lawyers to influence policy in favour of this view, and
narrowing the role of government to support economic growth. In the
absence of interventionist policy, the lion’s share of the burden for
checking the environmental and social impacts of loosely regulated
business frequently falls upon the NGO sector, which can barely keep up
with the speed of corporate growth and associated degradation. There is
therefore a great need (and correspondingly many opportunities) for
designers to work in this sector of the economy. This was evidenced in a
recent study initiated by Rockefeller Foundation enlisting design firm
IDEO to research how the design industry might make a greater
contribution to solving social problems. Results indicated that there are ten
potential (NGO) projects for every design thinker.13
Though the private and non-profit sectors of the economy are often
polarized, over the past decade the role of some NGOs has shifted from
attacking companies and shaming them into changing their practices to
providing direction and leadership on the type of change needed. Some
NGOs may now provide third-party monitoring of the supply chain,
conduct research on the ecological impacts of business, and facilitate
increased supply-chain transparency in partnership with rather than in
opposition to the private sector. A tension still exists between the watchdog
role of NGO partners and core business goals, but it has a positive function,
spurring the implementation of progressively higher yet pragmatic
standards, a markedly different dynamic from the negativity of boycotts.
NGO–fashion brand collaborations

While there will undoubtedly always be a need for NGOs to provide the
proverbial stick with which to beat unscrupulous corporations, fashion
designers can help improve the social and ecological performance of the
apparel industry by bringing a practical knowledge from the fashion
industry into the NGO sector; knowing the impacts of fabric processing,
the price constraints of the market, the limits and potential of a strong
corporate culture, and speaking the same language as the brand-partners
helps build mutual trust and empathy and allows brands to look more
openly and critically at their operations, rather than immediately being on
the defensive about change.
Such has been the case for Tierra Del Forte, who designed for such
companies as Mudd Jeans before starting her own company – Del Forte
Denim – designing high-end organic cotton jeans, made in the US. Having
spent all her professional career in the private sector, Del Forte now works
for the NGO Fair Trade USA, where she spearheads efforts to monitor the
apparel supply chain and ensure that fair wages are paid to factory workers.
Similarly, Patti Jurewitz trained as a fashion designer/illustrator and first
worked with artisans in South America before gaining an MBA and
moving into supply-chain sourcing for the private sector. She is now back
in the NGO sector working with As You Sow, a San Francisco-based
organization focused on establishing dialogues with company shareholders
to influence a wider set of values than maximizing profits, as well as
spearheading the Boycott Uzbek Cotton campaign in the US.
Most designers indicate that non-profit experience brings them a
deep sense of satisfaction, since what they were aiming to achieve through
their own companies or inside a large corporation can be worked through
on a much larger scale within the supply chains of several brands at any
one time. Working in this way allows designers to look at the ‘big picture’,
far beyond a product and a market, and to get to the root causes of
egregious issues. Here the practice of design-making yields to design-
‘thinking’14, adding depth and breadth to the creative process itself.
Embedded deeply in the supply chain, the designer sees at first hand the
impacts that design decisions make on workers’ lives in producing countries,
and these experiences inevitably come back to reinform practice.
Designers working independently

For some designers, starting their own NGO provides the best option for
working independently. Here designers are able to choose projects on their
own terms and then fundraise to support them. This is the route designer
Mimi Robinson took when she established Bridging Cultures Through
Design (BCTD). Robinson first worked in the private sector and then
with the NGO Aid to Artisans, before setting up BCTD to foster creative
exchanges among artists, designers and artisan communities. BCTD links
designers and artists in developed nations to craft-makers in poorer nations
and creates bridges to markets as a way to generate income and improve
lives for producers. Working alongside the artisans to develop products,
Robinson arranges her work as a series of projects that stretch long-term
– a stark contrast to the single-project assignments that typify the usual
design brief. With repeated visits to the same communities, Robinson is

now intimately aware of the local resources available, the materials at hand
and the skills and abilities of each artisan group, and has built a relationship
with the communities based on years of mutual trust. BCTD’s aim is to
link artisans to local and regional markets, where possible with international
links supplementing locally generated income. Robinson chooses exporters
who share the same goal of supporting crafts and local communities and
who understand the complexities and pace of the work. By establishing
strong working partnerships, developing the sensitivity to manage
expectations of both makers and consumers in wildly different cultures,
and holding the skill to negotiate complex relationships and build them
over the long term, the designer truly begins to inhabit the activist role.
Working as an independent business or as a non-profit changes the
nature of design practice. The Fibershed Project by Rebecca Burgess is one
such example. Beginning simply as a project researching fibres and plants
for colouring available within a 240-kilometre geographical radius of her
home in northern California, the project has grown to include mapping of
the suppliers and ranchers, documenting their lives and local communities,
tracing the local economies associated with fibre production and enlisting
local artists and designers to make garments out of these fibres for Burgess’s
own year-round use. The personal story of each designer is also told on the
Fibershed web site, revealing the extended web of human, cultural and
environmental relationships of the garments – a web that would remain
completely unknown if this were a commercially based sourcing project.
The extended aim of the Fibershed Project is for Burgess to live for a year
wearing only clothes made from these local fibres and fashioned by local
artist-designers. While this project is focused on northern California, it is
designed to create a replicable model that can be used as inspiration and
technical assistance for other communities around the world. The concept
Bridging Cultures
Through Design –
on-site learning at
Cojolya Association
of Women Weavers,
Santiago, Atitlán,
Guatemala.
is an example of what the founder of the Transition Towns movement, The Fibershed Project:
Rob Hopkins, calls a ‘new ethic’ in our society, where local community is planting dye plants for
colouring locally
comprised of many internal connections reducing vulnerability to outside sourced fibres.
forces, and yet engages with the wider world as a network.
Working with government

In addition to operating in direct contact with fibre and dye plants, makers
and producers, designer-activists can work in other ways, including at a
policy level, supporting the government’s role in protecting the long-term
interests of society. When governments conduct research projects and
environmental impact analysis to ensure policies are well grounded,
designers can apply this research swiftly to practice and help speed its
widespread acceptance. Designers can also brief legislators and offer
important insight into the opportunities for innovation to promote
sustainability. In fact, the UK House of Lords’ All Party Parliamentary
Group of Ethical Fashion established a forum in 2011 that brings together
many designers and politicians to open up such channels of communication
around sustainability issues in the fashion industry. Designers have also

participated in the development of government-initiated environmental
‘roadmaps’ (such as that in the UK) to influence policy in support of new
business models and markets to include values beyond monetary
considerations; and they can also help to craft universal standards for
textiles and clothing that start to move the whole industry, and the systems
within which it operates, towards a better balance between economic,
social and ecological health.
Working with government, NGOs and in civil society can seem slow
and laborious to designers who are used to implementing ideas rapidly. But
consider this: the role of design in serving companies, clients and
consumers restricts the scope of our work and influence to products and to
retail timeframes of a few weeks, or a year or two at maximum. In contrast,
the role of design in serving the well-being of citizens and the
environment broadens the scope of our work to the policies and
mechanisms that shape the very cultural logic of society. In this context, a
designer’s influence has the potential to span years, decades and even
generations and to be critical in developing initiatives that do not have
financial viability as their only measure. Rather than becoming stronger at
navigating an established (faulty) system with the most integrity and still
feeling compromised, designers working at the level of policy start to
confront and change the system itself.15
Chapter 18:
Designer as entrepreneur
‘‌The best way to promote a good cause is to provide a good example.’

‌Arne Naess
As designers, we create products for corporations, for our own companies

or for clients. In any of these cases, our designs feed into an economic
system that depends on people buying our products. The business model in
all cases is based on volume of product throughput. As Bob Adams of the
design firm IDEO states: ‘Businesses need more things because that’s the
business model they are working with.’16
Though we may do our bit to change product materials and
processes to make them more environmentally friendly, each of us knows
that ‘green’ products (and ‘green’ consumption) change things only
superficially. For they, like all products, are totally dependent upon a
consumer market. And when the market wanes, so does ‘green’ production.
This is evidenced by a recent report from Organic Exchange, an
organization supporting organic agriculture, which recommends that
farmers only grow organic cotton when they have a secure commitment
from a brand to purchase it.17
Designers continue to work within the current business models even
though we know that they inhibit the most progressive ideas for
sustainability. The dissonance between what designers know and what we
do creates a tension – a ‘dis-ease’ – in our daily practice.Yet as a growing
number of economists begin to recognize the shortcomings of the market
as a capable mechanism for achieving change, then designers too will
develop confidence to act on these issues to prototype new products and
establish new models of commercial practice, using our ability to make
leaps of imagination. Joanna Macy calls this systemic innovation.18
Changing ways of thinking and acting

Systemic innovation around sustainability begins with a change of thought
patterns and behaviours, which leads to the building of structures and practices
defining and describing economic activity by ecological limits. Here, designers
ask how new businesses will be built and how they will differ from what
has gone before; what new roles design will play in them; and what sort of
aesthetic will emerge when the products and services of the fashion sector
are built on a fundamentally different set of values. They explore the creative
potential of what economist Tim Jackson calls ‘bounded capabilities’,
which help us prosper and live well within clearly defined limits.19 Several
established designers have already carved out their own niches and practice
within a bounded capabilities model. Their businesses present a variety and
pluralism that sits in stark contrast to the usual industry design function.
chapter 18: Designer as Entrepreneur 175
Nathalie Chanin, for example, has been building business

opportunity around prosperity and community capability for the last
decade. Her fashion business Alabama Chanin offers an enterprise model
where quality products are made by hand by artisans who live and work in
and around Florence, Alabama. Chanin’s business model is not fixed on
growth but rather on a commitment to the local community and the
traditional skills normally used for quilting, which she applies to exquisitely
crafted cut-and-sew knitted garments. This central purpose directs all
Chanin’s business decisions, including the target market (up-market,
retailing at such stores as Barneys New York or through special showings).
Since the clothing line is limited by the speed of hand-crafting, so is the
volume of material throughput also limited. Chanin supplements product
sales with those of her books (The Alabama Stitch Book, Alabama Studio Style
and Alabama Studio Design), in which pattern and making instructions for
best-selling pieces are disclosed. She also conducts stitching workshops to
train people in DIY, using the techniques employed on Alabama Chanin
garments; and the company web site also offers a wide range of fabric,
thread and beads as well as notions for home use. Besides providing
additional income streams, these sidelines build community, connect wearer
to maker and re-skill individuals. It is a fundamentally different model of
business than in the conventional fashion industry, where a focus on
economic growth alone might typically drive production to India, where
the Alabama techniques could be copied at lower cost. Chanin’s model
supports a local economy and changes the relationships and experiences
between wearers, makers and community.
Christina Kim of Dosa has also found a way to support her own
creative activities as well as communities in India and China, working with
the same groups of women for more than a decade. Garments are
beautifully hand-crafted, with new lines offered just twice a year and
featuring pieces that champion the traditional skills and local materials of
the producer communities. Presenting only two seasons of clothing a year
Crafted embroidery
and appliqué on a
wedding gown by
Alabama Chanin.
Left: Artist and

designer Claudy
Jongstra creates
felt pieces from
wool from a
breed of sheep
indigenous to her
area of Holland.
Opposite: Garments
from Dosa’s Spring
2010 line, shown in
gallery setting.
affords Kim the time to pursue other lines of creative interest, including
jewellery, furniture design (Herman Miller), ceramics (Heath Pottery), art
installations and working with Alice Waters and the Edible Schoolyard in
Berkeley, California.
Also working at the high end of the industry, Dutch designer Claudy
Jongstra creates felted fabrics for a range of uses, with her most important
projects involving embellishments for interiors, wall coverings and rugs.
She is based in the far and remote north of The Netherlands, where she
tends her own sheep, a rare breed called Drenthe Heath, native to the
region. Jongstra has also established her own dyeworks on site, and grows
many of the plants she uses to colour her felt pieces. Since she controls the
entire process, from raw materials to end product, Jongstra is subject to
none of the usual confines of industrial minimums, speed and waste. This
sense of freedom rolls over into her client list; Jongstra selectively chooses
the number of people for whom she creates work.
The entrepreneurial approach of Jongstra, Kim and Chanin takes the
opposite track to conventional industry, which narrowly focuses the mode
of production to maximize efficiencies and aims to open as many markets
as possible with the same garments, competing primarily on price. In contrast,
these designers work within the limits of slowness and hand-work, natural
processing and a small scale, and their markets seek them out for their
uniqueness.Yet entrepreneurial work is not exclusively high-end. For Bedlam
Boudoir, the model of fashion production is shaped by ecological limits and
utilized to generate enough income to support four families based in the
UK. Bedlam Boudoir’s operations are powered by 12V batteries charged
by wind generators and solar panels. This deliberate low-impact solution
complements its factory set-up (a yurt) and its products – sassy, burlesque-
inspired ‘recycled couture’ available for sale or hire at festivals or online.
Shirt by Bedlam
Boudoir, created in a
low-impact operation
that generates
enough income to
support four families.
chapter 18: Designer as Entrepreneur 179
Using new media

Much design entrepreneurial activity has found a home online, where
alternative business models and new channels of communication and
networking bring a wealth of opportunities for sustainability innovation.
The online company Betabrand (see page 129), for example, is driven by
the pull of ‘crowdsourcing’ rather than the traditional high-volume push to
market, and uses images of customers wearing its pieces (dubbed ‘model
citizens’) as the main source of its web imagery. And SANS (see page 105)
supplements its garment sales by selling downloadable patterns online. Its
web site includes videos to support customers in making the garment and
adapting it from instructions given. Online initiatives such as these are
gaining further ground and momentum as ‘digital natives’ come of age and
new possibilities are found in combining skills, information and fashion
products together in novel and valuable ways. New designer-entrepreneurs
will no longer simply create companies to make innovative products for
the existing industry: rather, they will engage in innovative and generative
thinking that changes the industry itself.
CONCLUSIONS
‌‘By failing to understand the drivers underpinning human consumption and

waste of goods, sustainable design resigns itself to peripheral activity rather than
the central pioneer of positive social change that it could potentially be.’
‌Jonathan Chapman20
‘‌Imagining a practice based on new paradigms brings huge potential for change. It
breaks open… possibilities and points of leverage for implementing
sustainability.This type of realization and the actions that are liberated through
it are coming to be seen as ‘an economic, cultural and social renaissance’.
‌Rob Hopkins21
This book has brought together a set of ideas and innovation opportunities
for the fashion sector that has its origins in sustainability thinking. The
challenges posed by sustainability for fashion are profound, for at their core
they aim to foster activity that creates social and environmental ‘richness’
and value in the long term, a goal that is qualitatively different from that of
the fashion industry today. This book has explored some of the ‘poverties’
and ‘wealths’ of fashion as well as fashion practice that moves beyond
minimizing the problems of unsustainability to also create (design)
conditions for a new fashion system where the problems disappear
altogether. Meeting this potential requires designers to think in terms of
platforms that change paradigms rather than products and processes.
A new generation of design minds is already beginning to think in this
way. They are well informed and motivated, and are finding unconventional
means to leapfrog the old ways of working. Their strategies include hacking
products and systems, co-designing and selling via Internet only, to name a
few. Other, more established designers have developed their own niches, with
unique networked relationships, based on trust and flexibility to
accommodate a variety of creative interests and values. These different
forms of practice start to change the fashion system as a whole, simply by
being there. The task for fashion industry veterans is to embrace these
practices and many more besides. To open up paths, support efforts, invest
in new businesses, fund research and development, provide rich soil for
new ideas to take root and populate: to build what David Korten calls ‘real
wealth’.22 Over time, these combined actions will transform the fashion
sector’s activities and the meaning of its products and services in our society.
And whatever is achieved in fashion will inevitably be disseminated widely,
for the currency of fashion is global and as such has the potential to spark
creative minds, shape cultural attitudes and suggest new behaviours around
the world.
We conclude with a summary of possible activities, innovation and
opportunities for designers and the fashion sector in a sustainable future:
chapter 18: Conclusions 181
• Fashion design will be impact- rather than trend-led.23 As new ideas arise
for ways to restore environment and society, these will become the drivers
of innovation and emerge from diverse locations, collaborative working
relationships and cultures, rather than from abstract ‘oracles of trend’.
• Fashion will have a pluralistic aesthetic that reflects different approaches to

business, and which emerges from regionally available materials, accessible
processes/skills and culture,and the mode of production.
• Immaterial aspects of fashion will become more celebrated as raw

materials become scarcer. The material components of fashion will be
treated with greater reverence and respect for the same reason.
• Fashion products and services will adapt, flex and change according to
regional environmental conditions and the stocks, flows and capacities of
regional ecosystems.
• As a matter of course, designers will optimize use of embodied energy and

water in garments, whether tthrough the craft of use, the craft of reuse, the
craft of minimal extraction or crafting the immaterial qualities of fashion.
• Designers will become strategists and comfortably work alongside

economists, policy-makers, ecologists, business leaders and scientists,
working collaboratively to influence positive societal and cultural change.
• Designers will reference the ‘slow knowledge’ of sociology, ethics,

psychology and ecology and facilitate its rapid application to practice and
industry to spawn completely new business models.
• Many different business types will emerge with sustainability at their core.
Commerce will still act as the driver, but success will be measured in
social, cultural and environmental value.
• The scale of fashion production will be linked to a community’s ability to

monitor the social, environmental and cultural benefits and failings, and
will adjust accordingly.
• Businesses will be restructured in size. No business model will be too big

to fail or too big to adapt and change. Scale of production will be defined
by the ecosystem in which the business sits and the capacity of the
community to monitor its true benefits. As they grow, businesses will also
grow in their capacity to restore social and environmental quality.
• Educational establishments will be sources of ‘slow knowledge’ and will

become incubators for new business models, providing a safe place for
putting sustainability into practice quickly: ‘fail early to succeed sooner’.24
GLOSSARY
INDEX &
RESOURCES
183
Glossary
bast fibres Long fibres collected from the stem of certain LCA Lifecycle Assessment.
plants to use in textile manufacture, e.g. flax, hemp and jute. lyocell A biodegradable fibre made from wood pulp
biodegradable synthetic fibres Plant-based synthetic cellulose from managed forests.
textile materials that meet minimum standards for madder Natural dye plant used to produce a red colour.
decomposition.
mercerization
biofuel Also known as agrofuel, these fuels are mainly The treatment of cotton yarn or fabric with a caustic alkali
derived from biomass, plant crops or bio waste and may cut solution which swells the fibres to improve strength, add
down on greenhouse gas emissions. lustre and increase affinity to dye.
biomass A renewable energy source, derived from mordant Substance used to fix dyes on fabric.
biological material such as wood, waste, hydrogen gas and
alcohol fuels. NGO Non-Governmental Organization: a legally
constituted organization that operates independently from
CAD/CAM Computer-aided design/computer-aided any government.
manufacture.
non-degradable fibres Based on synthetic polymers
cellulose fibre Fibre made from plant carbohydrate from oil and which do not decompose within human and
cellulose, whether naturally occurring (such as cotton, industrial timescales.
linen, nettle, sisal, etc.) or manufactured (e.g. lyocell, modal,
viscose). PES Polyester: synthetic material derived from
petrochemicals.
CMT Cut, make and trim: refers to a contractor who is
supplied with fabric and other necessary materials by a PET Polyethylene terephthalate: thermoplastic polymer
manufacturer in order to cut, make and trim them into resin of the polyester family that is used in synthetic fibres.
finished garments. PFC Perfluorinates/perfluorinated chemicals: organic
CSR Corporate Social Responsibility. chemical compounds utilized to make fabrics stain,- oil-
and waterproof.
degradable fibres Fibres based on synthetic polymers
from oil, which decompose far more rapidly than other PLA Polylactide: a biodegradable polymer derived from
synthetic fibres, although this process typically take several corn starch.
years. polymer A high molecular substance from which
elastomeric yarn /elastomer Materials that demonstrate manufactured fibres are produced.
elasticity. Elastane is blended with other fibres to provide quaternized silicone An antimicrobial finish that reduces
stretch and improve comfort and fit. bacterial content on a fabric’s surface in order to keep
embodied energy The energy used in making a product, fabrics ‘fresher’.
including fibre production, manufacturing, shipping to retting A fermentation process of separating the fibre
market and final disposal. from the woody matter and plant tissue of the plant stem;
facing A strengthening layer of fabric added to an internal usually for bast fibres.
section or underside of a garment to improve shape, RFID Radio Frequency Identification: information-
rigidity and/or durability. collecting technology developed to optimize the flow of
Fairtrade Denotes a trading partnership based on dialogue, garments through the supply chain.
respect and transparency, that seeks greater equity in inter- selvedge The warpwise edge of a woven fabric that has
national trade by offering better trading conditions to, and been finished to prevent fraying.
securing the rights of, marginalized producers and workers.
triclosan Chemical used as an antimicrobial treatment
ginning Method of separating cotton fibres from seeds. on textiles.
GM Genetic modification: using biotechnology to create UNEP United Nations Environment Programme.
plants and their products that display novel characteristics UNESCO The United Nations Educational, Scientific and
such as increased resistance to pest infestations and the Cultural Organization.
ability to withstand higher doses of herbicide. USDA United States Department of Agriculture.
GOTS Global Organic Textile Standards. viscose A regenerated cellulose fibre and one of the first
greige Fabric in its raw state before dyeing or bleaching. large-scale manufactured fibres.
integrated pest management warp threads The strongest yarn or thread in a woven
A systems approach to pest management based on an fabric, running lengthways and parallel to the selvedge.
understanding of pest ecology and relying on a range of weft threads The crosswise yarn or thread in a woven
preventative tactics and biological controls to keep pest fabric, interlaced at right angles with the warp.
populations within acceptable limits. Reduced-risk
pesticides are used only as a last resort, and with care to woad Natural dye plant used to produce a blue colour.
minimize risks.
184
Endnotes
Preface [28] Grose, L., ‘Sustainable Cotton Production’, in R. Blackburn,
[1] Riegels Melchoir, M., ‘“Doing” Danish Fashion’, Fashion Practice, 2 Sustainable Textiles: life cycle and environmental impact, Cambridge, UK:
(1) (2010), p.20. Woodhead Publishing (2009), p.33–62.
[2] Orr, D.W. (2009), Lecture at the Brower Center, Berkeley, Calif., 24 [29] Fitt, G. and L.J. Wilson (2002), as cited in ICAC (2004), op.cit.,
August 2009. p.31.
[3] Spratt, S., A. Simms, E. Neitzert and J. Ryan-Collins, The Great [30] ICAC, ‘Concerns, apprehensions and risks of biotech cotton’,
Transition, London: New Economics Foundation (2009). ICAC Recorder, March, XXIII (1).
[31] http://peakoil.com/ (accessed 17 April 2009).
[32] Patagonia (undated), Patagonia’s Common Threads Garment Recycling
Part 1 Program: A Detailed Analysis, p.7; and ‘Toray offers recycled nylon’,
[1] Schwartz, B., ‘Wise Up’, Sublime, No. 16 (2009), p.47. Ecotextile News, No. 4 (2007), p.23.
[2] GMO Compass, Rising trend: Genetically modified crops worldwide on [33] Laursen, S.E. and J. Hansen, Environmental Assessment of Textiles,
125 million hectares (2009), http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/agri_ Project No. 369, Copenhagen: Danish Environmental Protection
biotechnology/gmo_planting/257.global_gm_planting_2008.html Agency (1997), pp.31–101.
(accessed 15 April 2009). [34] Food and Environment Research Agency, Centre for Technical
[3] Fletcher, K., Sustainable Fashion and Textiles: Design Journeys, Textiles, University of Leeds and Textile Engineering and Materials
London: Earthscan (2008), p.32. Research Group, De Montfort University, The role and business case for
[4] DuPont, Sorona (2009), http://www2.dupont.com/Sorona/en_ existing and emerging fibres in sustainable clothing, Draft Final Report,
US/index.html (accessed 14 October 2009). London: DEFRA (2009).
[5] Wilson, A., ‘A question of sport’, Ecotextile News, No. 22 (2009), [35] Carbon Trust, Working with Continental Clothing: Product Carbon
pp.28–30. Footprinting in Practise, Case study CTS056 (2008), http://www.
[6] White, P., M. Hyhurst, J. Taylor and A. Slater, ‘Lyocell fibres’ in R.S. carbon-label.com/casestudies/ContinentalClothing.pdf (accessed 22
Blackburn (ed.), Biodegradable and Sustainable Fibres, Cambridge, UK: September 2009).
Woodhead Publishing (2005), p.171. [36] http://www.cottonroots.co.uk/ (accessed 22 September 2009).
[7] ‘GM trees could boost Tencel’, Ecotextile News , No. 35 (2010), p.1. [37] http://www.birdtextile.com/ (accessed 22 September 2009).
[8] Blackburn, R.S., Introduction, in R.S. Blackburn (ed.) (2005), op. [38] Kiernan, I., Public Information – Ian Kiernan, UNEP (1998),
cit., p.xvi. http://www.unep.org/sasakawa/index.asp?ct=pubinfo&info=kiernan
[9] Fedorak, P.M., ‘Microbial processes in the degradation of fibres’, in (accessed 23 April 2009).
R.S. Blackburn (ed.) (2005), op. cit., p.1. [39] UNESCO, World Water Development Report 3,Water in a Changing
[10] Fletcher, K. (2008), op. cit., p.100. World (2009), http://webworld.unesco.org/water/wwap/wwdr/
[11] McDonough, W. and M. Braungart, Cradle to Cradle, New York: wwdr3/index.shtml (accessed 23 April 2009), and World Economic
North Point Press (2002). Forum Water Initiative, Managing Our Future Water Needs for Agriculture,
[12] ‘Teijin to roll out “Biofront” in 2009’, Ecotextile News (2009), No. Industry, Human Health and the Environment (2009), http://www.
21, p.7. weforum.org/en/initiatives/water/index.htm (accessed 23 April
[13] ‘DuPont joins race to offer biopolymers’, ENDS (Environmental 2009).
Data Services) report no. 346 (2003), p.32–3. [40] Grose, L., ‘Sustainable cotton production’, in R. Blackburn (2009),
[14] ‘Biodegradable clothing from Japan’, Ecotextile News, No. 9, 2007, op. cit., p.39.
p.28. [41] Kininmonth, M., ‘Planting Ideas’, Ecotextile News, No. 7 (2007),
[15] http://www.trigema.de/ (accessed 8 June 2010). pp.28–9.
[16] PAN UK, ‘Living with poison – pesticides in West African cotton [42] Food and Environment Research Agency, Centre for Technical
growing’, Pesticides News, No. 74 (December 2006), p.17–19. Textiles (2009), op. cit.
[17] Environmental Justice Foundation, Child Labour and Cotton in [43] Patagonia.com, Footprint Chronicles (2009), http://www.patagonia.
Uzbekistan (undated), http://www.ejfoundation.org/page145.html com/web/us/footprint/index.jsp?slc=en_US&sct=US (accessed 22
(accessed 6 May 2009). September 2009).
[18] Fairtrade Foundation, The Fairtrade Mark (2008), http://www. [44] Callenbach, E., Ecology, A Pocket Guide (10th edn), Berkeley, Calif.:
fairtrade.org.uk/what_is_fairtrade/fairtrade_certification_and_the_ University of California Press (2008), p.156.
fairtrade_mark/the_fairtrade_mark.aspx (accessed 22 April 2009). [45] Imhoff, D., Farming With the Wild, Healdsburg, Calif: Watershed
[19] PAN UK, My Sustainable T-Shirt, London: PAN UK (2007), p.20. Media and Sierra Club Books (2003).
[20] Environmental Justice Foundation and PAN UK, The Deadly [46] http://www.patagonia.com/ (accessed 9 June 2010).
Chemicals in Cotton, London: Environmental Justice Foundation and [47] Imhoff, D. (2003), op. cit.
PAN UK (2007). [48] Ibid.
[21] GMO Compass, Rising trend: Genetically modified crops worldwide on [49] Ibid., p.143.
125 million hectares (2009), http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/agri_ [50] Macy, J. and M.Young Brown, Coming Back to Life, Gabriola
biotechnology/gmo_planting/257.global_gm_planting_2008.html Island, Canada: New Society Publishers (1998).
(accessed 15 April 2009). [51] Moore, G. and K. Walsh-Lawlor, Gap Inc, in conversation, 2007.
[22] US Department of Agriculture, Adoption of Genetically Engineered [52] Waeber, P., founder and CEO Bluesign, exchange via e-mail, 20
Crops in the U.S. (2009), http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/ May 2010.
BiotechCrops/ (accessed 3 September 2009). [53] ‘Waterless Denim Bleaching’, Ecotextile News, No. 24 (2009), p.22.
[23] International Cotton Advisory Committee (ICAC), Report of the [54] ‘Defying Logic to Save Precious Resources’, Ecotextile News, No.
second expert panel on biotechnology of cotton, Washington, DC: 24 (2009), p.20.
International Cotton Advisory Committee (2004), p.5. [55] http://www.bluesign.com/ (accessed 9 June 2010).
[24] Ibid. [56] http://www.thecleanestline.com/2010/01/competitors-working-
[25] ‘GM cotton under scrutiny’, Ecotextile News, No, 35 (2010), p.4. together-toward-a-common-good.html (accessed 19 May 2010).
[26] International Forum for Cotton Promotion, Prospects for Cotton [57] Weaber, P., Bluesign presentation, The Design of Prosperity
Promotion, The Journal of the International Forum for Cotton workshop, Boras Textile University (3 September 2009).
Promotion,Vol. 24 (2010), available at: http://www.cottonpromotion. [58] Clay, J. World Agriculture and the Environment, Washington, DC:
org/features/prospects_for_cotton_promotion/ (accessed 7 June Island Press (2004), p.288.
2010). [59] Clay, J. (2004), op. cit., p.295.
[27] The Organic Exchange, e-mail correspondence, 24 March 2010. [60] Grose, L. and E. Williams, ‘Environmental Impact Assessment of
185
Dye Methods on Cotton, Wool, Polyester and Nylon’, internal [92] Brown, L. Plan B 4.0: mobilizing to save civilization, New York:
research document for Patagonia, author’s archives, Muir Beach W.W. Norton (2009), p.131.
(1996), p.22. [93] http://www.unep.fr/scp/communications/ad/details.
[61] Milmo, S., ‘Developments in textile colorants’, Textile Outlook asp?id=6684432&cat=4 (accessed 9 June 2010).
International (Jan–Feb 2007), pp.26–8. [94] Beton, A., A. Schultze, J. Bain, M. Dowling, R. Holdway and J.
[62] Johnson, P., ‘Huntsman Textile Effects’, ‘Basics of Dyeing’ Owens, Reducing the environmental impacts of clothes cleaning, London:
presentation, Organic Exchange Conference, Seattle, Wash. (21 DEFRA research project EV0419 (2009).
October 2009). [95] Patterson, P., ‘Nature’s natural answer’, Ecotextile News, No. 30
[63] Salter, K., Environmental Impact of Textiles, Cambridge, UK: (2010), pp.20–21.
Woodhead Publishing (2000), p.201 [96] Beton, A. et al (2009), op. cit.
[64] ‘From Zero to Hero’, Ecotextile News, No. 24 (May 2009), p.18. [97] http://myoocreate.com/challenges/care-to-air-design-challenge
[65] http://www.tuscarorayarns.com/ (accessed 9 June 2010). (accessed on 10 June 2010).
[66] Subramanian Senthil Kannan, M., S. Gobalakrishnan, R. [98] Data: Levi Strauss and Co. Facilities Environmental Impact
Kumaravel and K.J. Nithyanadan, ‘Influence of cationization of cotton Assessment (FEIA) and 2007 Cycle Assessment of Levi’s 501 Jean, in
on reactive dyeing’, Journal of Textile and Apparel,Technology and Kobori M., (2010) Traceability, Cotton, and Collaboration: Levi Strauss and
Management, 5 (2) (2006), pp.1–16. Available from http://www.p2pays. Co.’s Drive for More Sustainable Agriculture, presentation at Stanford GSB:
org/ref/21/20821.pdf (accessed 24 June 2010). Socially and Environmentally Responsible Supply Chain Conference,
[67] Rissanen, T., ‘Creating fashion without the creation of fabric 29 April 2010.
waste’ in Sustainable Fashion,Why Now, J. Hethorne and C. Ulacewitz [99] Jorgenson, H., ‘Spotless laundry leaves less blemish on the
C (eds), New York: Fairchild Publishing (2008), pp.184–206. environment’, Corrections Forum, 17 (2) (2008), pp.39–41.
[68] Hawken, P., A. Lovins and L. Hunter Lovins, Natural Capitalism, [100] http://www.laundrylist.org/ (accessed 21 October 2009).
as cited in J. Thakara, In the Bubble, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press [101] Allwood, J.M. et al (2006), op. cit., p.16.
(2006), p.12. [102] ‘Council agrees on WEEE’, ENDS report, no. 317 (2001), p.37.
[69] Rissanen, T. (2008), ‘Creating Fashion without the Creation of [103] Marks and Spencer, ‘M&S and Oxfam Clothes Exchange
Fabric Waste’ in J. Hethorn and C. Ulaswewixz (eds.), Sustainable becomes UK’s biggest homewares recycling campaign’ (2009), http://
Fashion,Why Now? Fairchild Books. corporate.marksandspencer.com/investors/press_releases/planA/
[70] http://www.materialbyproduct.com/ (accessed 9 June 2010). Oxfam_Clothes_Exchange (accessed 18 March 2010).
[71] Oxfam International, Rigged Rules and Double Standards: trade, [104] Laursen, S.E., J.M. Allwood, M.P. De Brito and C. Malvido De
globalization, and the fight against poverty, New York: Oxfam Rodriguez, Sustainable recovery of products and materials – scenario analysis
International and Make Trade Fair (2002), p.7. of the UK clothing and textile sector, Design and Manufacture for
[72] Quigley, M. and O. Charlotte, Fair Trade Garment Standards: Sustainable Development, 4th International Conference, Newcastle,
Feasibility Study, San Francisco: Trans Fair USA (2006), p.16. UK (12–13 July 2005).
[73] Rivoli, P., Travels of a T-shirt in the Global Economy, Hoboken, N.J.: [105] Allwood, J.M. et al (2006), op. cit., pp.18–19.
John Wiley and Sons (2005), p.106. [106] Alvarez, D., CEO Goodwill Industries, San Francisco, San Mateo
[74] Allwood, J.M., S.E. Laursen, C. Malvido de Roderiguez and and Marin counties, Calif., in conversation, 2009.
N.M.P. Bocken, Well Dressed? Cambridge, UK: University of [107] ‘The carbon challenge for textile fibres’, Ecotextile News, No. 16
Cambridge, Institute of Manufacturing (2006), p.62. (2008), p.31.
[75] Oxfam International (2002), op.cit., p.12. [108] Patagonia (undated), Patagonia’s Common Threads Garment
[76] Quigley, M. and O. Charlotte (2006), op. cit., p.21. Recycling Program: A Detailed Analysis, p.7; and ‘Toray offers recycled
[77] H&M Hennes and Mauritz AB, 2008 Sustainability Report (2009) nylon’, Ecotextile News, No. 4 (2007), p.23.
at http://www.hm.com/us/__csrreporting2.nhtml (accessed 29
September 2009), p.61.
[78] Walsh Lawlor, K.,Vice President, Strategic Planning and Part 2
Environmental Affairs, Gap Inc, in conversation, 2009. [1] Daly, H., Steady-State Economics, 2nd edn, London: Earthscan
[79] Del Forte, T., TransFair USA Senior Manager, Apparel and Home (1992), p.20.
Goods, in conversation, 2009. [2] Rawles, K., ‘Changing Direction’, Resurgence (2009), 257, p.38.
[80] Allwood, J.M. et al (2006), op. cit., p.14. [3] Ehrenfeld, J.R., Sustainability by Design, New Haven, Conn.:Yale
[81] Oxfam International (2002), op. cit., p7. University Press (2008), p.9.
[82] Esprit International, Esprit collection, Fall 1992 update sheet, [4] Guralnik, D.B., Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American
Employee Reference Manual, Esprit International (1992), author’s Language, 2nd edn, New York: William Collins (1980).
archives, Muir Beach. [As before]. [5] Callenbach, E., Ecology, A Pocket Guide, 10th edn, Berkeley, Calif.:
[83] Loughman, E., Environmental Analysis, Patagonia, Horizon Issue: University of California Press (2008).
Climate Change, panel at Organic Exchange, Pacific Grove, 1 January [6] Chapman, J., Emotionally Durable Design: Objects, experiences and
2007. empathy, London: Earthscan (2005).
[84] Loker, S. (2009), op. cit., p.114. [7] Norman, D.A., Design of Everyday Things, New York: Doubleday/
[85] Graedel and Allenby (1995), as cited in H.B.C. Tibbs (2000), The Currency (1988).
Technology Strategy of the Sustainable Corporation, in D. Dunphy et al [8] Dunne, A. and F. Raby, Design Noir:The secret life of electronic objects,
(eds), Sustainability: the corporate challenge of the 21st century, St. Leonards, Basel: Birkhäuser, and London: August (2001), p.45, in J. Chapman
NSW: Allen and Unwin (2000), p.196. (2005), op. cit., p.71.
[86] Brown, M.S, founder, Brown and Williams Environmental [9] Chapman, J., (2005), op. cit., p.71.
Consulting, Santa Barbara, Calif., in conversation, 29 September 2009. [10] Ibid., p. 51
[87] Mau, B. and J. Leonard, Massive Change, London: Phaidon Press [11] Influenced by Callenbach, E., F. Capra and S. Marburg, Global
(2007), introduction, unpaginated. File Report No. 5: Eco-Auditing and Ecologically Conscious Management,
[88] Loughman, E. (2007), op. cit. Simplified Metabolic Chart of a Prototypical Company, Elmwood Institute,
[89] H&M Hennes and Mauritz AB (2009), op. cit. Berkeley, Calif. (undated), p.45.
[90] Donbur.co.uk, M&S Cuts Carbon with Teardrop Trailers, at http:// [12] Franklin Associates, Resource and Environmental Profile Analysis of a
www.donbur.co.uk/gb/news/mands_teardrop_trailer.shtml (accessed Manufactured Apparel Product:Woman’s knit polyester blouse, Washington,
10 February 2009). DC: American Fiber Manufacturers Association (1993).
[91] Ibid. [13] DEFRA, Sustainable Clothing Action Plan, London: HMSO (2008).
186
[14] ‘Perfluorinated pollutants linked to smaller babies’, ENDS [53] Anderson, C., The Long Tail, New York: Hyperion Books (2006).
(Environmental Data Services) report no. 392 (2007), pp.26–7. [54] Fletcher, K. (2008), op. cit., p.123.
[15] ‘Green groups publish chemical blacklist’, ENDS report no. 405 [55] Fletcher, K. and L. Grose, ‘Fashion That Helps Us Flourish’, Turin,
(2008), pp.24–5. Italy: Changing the Change conference proceedings (10–12 July
[16] Fletcher, K., Sustainable Fashion and Textiles: Design Journeys, 2008).
London: Earthscan (2008), p.86. [56] Fuad-Luke, A., Design Activism: Beautiful strangeness for a sustainable
[17] Fletcher, K., The Local Wisdom Project (2009), http://www. world, London: Earthscan (2010).
localwisdom.info/ (accessed 10 September 2009). [57] Banerjee, B., ‘Designer as Agent of Change, A Vision for
[18] Leventon, M., Fashion Historian, California College of the Arts, Catalyzing Rapid Change’, Turin, Italy: Changing the Change
Fashion Program, San Francisco (in conversation 2 April 2010). conference proceedings (10–12 July 2008), p.4.
[19] TED, The T-shirt Interactive, London: Chelsea College of Art and [58] Wendell, B. (1990), op. cit., p7.
Design (1997). [59] New American Dream, New American Dream Survey Report
[20] www.bagborroworsteal.com, March 2010. (Sept 2004), p.3, http://www.newdream.org/ (accessed 25 March
[21] Allwood, J.M., S.E. Laursen, C. Malvido de Roderiguez, and 2009).
N.M.P. Bocken, Well Dressed? Cambridge, UK: University of [60] Imhoff, D., Food Fight:The citizen’s guide to a food and farm bill,
Cambridge, Institute of Manufacturing (2006), p.34. Healdsburg, Calif.: Watershed Media (2007).
[22] Freese, B. (2007) in L. Grose (2009) Sustainable Textiles: Life cycle [61] Cohen, R., ‘Schools of Lost Children’, Pacific Sun, 19–25 March
and environmental impact, London: Woodhouse Publishing, p.37. 2010, pp.13–16, review of the movie Race to Nowhere by Vicki Abeles.
[23] http://www.jennywelwert.com/iWeb/jennywelwert/Maca%20 [62] Daly, H. (1992), op. cit., p.xii.
bag%20project%20summary.html [63] Shah, D.R., publisher and editor, Textile View Magazine, e-mail
[24] Anonymous artisan, in conversation, working on location with correspondence, 21 May 2010.
Aid to Artisans, Tiblisi (1997). [64] Martin, A., http://www.littlebrowndress.com/brown%20dress%20
[25] Morris, W., (1996), op. cit., p.xxxii. archive%20home.htm (accessed 5 October 010).
[26] Morris, W., (1996), op. cit., p.132. [65] World Wildlife Fund for Nature, Natural Change: psychology and
[27] Imhoff, D., ‘Artisans in the global bazaar’, Whole Earth Review, sustainability (2010), available at www.naturalchange.org.uk.
no. 94 (Autumn 1998), pp.76–81. [66] Marchand, A. and S. Walker, ‘Beyond Abundance, Motivations and
[28] Sharambeyan, A., Leader of Armenian Crafts Enterprise Council, perceived benefits underlying choices for more sustainable lifestyles’,
now Sharan Crafts Center, in conversation, working on location with Turin, Italy: Changing the Change conference proceedings (10–12
Aid to Artisans,Yerevan (1997). July 2008).
[29] Morris, W., (1996), op. cit. [67] Badke, C. and S. Walker, ‘Being Here: Attitude, place, and design
[30] Benyus, J., Biomimicry: Innovation inspired by nature, New York: for sustainability’, Turin, Italy: Changing the Change conference
William Morrow (1997), p.240. proceedings (10–12 July 2008).
[31] http://www.biomimicryinstitute.org/ (accessed 2 March 2009). [68] Chapman, J. (2006), op. cit.
[32] Jackson, W., in J. Benyus (1997), op. cit., p.9. [69] Hyde, L., The Gift, New York:Vintage Books (1979).
[33] Brand, S., Whole Earth Discipline: An ecopragmatist manifesto, New [70] Callenbach, E. (2008), op. cit., p.83.
York: Penguin (2009), p.224. [71] Farrell, R., ‘Fashion and Presence’, Nomenus Quarterly 3, (2008),
[34] Meadows, D., Thinking in Systems, Earthscan: London (2010), p80. unpaginated.
[35] Hawken, P., A. Lovins and L. Hunter Lovins, Natural Capitalism: [72] Von Busch, O. (2008), op. cit., p.181.
Creating the next industrial revolution, Boston: Little Brown (1999), p.88. [73] Ibid., p.109.
[36] Asknature.org, http://www.asknature.org/strategy/1ebbd861249e [74] Ibid.
5657c8c21b4fabe0d0f4 (accessed 4 May 2010). [75] Shove, E., Watson, M., Hand, M. and Ingram, J. (2007), The Design
[37] Hawken, P. et al (1999), op. cit., p.14, p.81. of Everyday Life, Oxford: Berg, p.133.
[38] Benyus, J. (1997), op. cit., p.250. [76] Fuad-Luke, A. (2009), op. cit., p.99.
[39] Meadows, D.H., Thinking in Systems: A Primer, White River [77] Ibid.
Junction: Chelsea Green Publishing (2009). [78] http://www.antiformindustries.com/ (accessed 7 June 2010).
[40] Chaudhary, S., Managing Director, Pratibha Syntex, personal [79] http://www.dianesteverlynck.be/ (accessed 7 June 2010).
communication by e-mail, 19 May 2010. [80] Sennett, R., The Craftsman, London: Penguin Books (2008), p.9.
[41] Ibid p87. [81] Ibid., p.21.
[42] Korten, D.C., Agenda for a New Economy: From phantom wealth to [82] Ibid., p.20.
real wealth, San Francisco: Barrett-Koehler (2009), p.14. [83] http://www.cca.edu/academics/finar/curriculum/fall/604/16.
[43] Ibid., p.33. [84] http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/2010/01/
[44] Ibid., p.183. the-craftwerk-20-exhibition-th.php.
[45] Goodwill Industries, San Francisco, San Mateo and Marin [85] Von Busch, O. (2008), op.cit., p.62.
counties (undated), At a Glance Fact Sheet, San Francisco: Goodwill [86] Ibid.
Industries. [87] Ibid., p.59
[46] Berry, W., What Are People For? Berkeley, Calif.: North Point Press [88] Levy, S. (1994) as cited by von Busch, O. (2008), op. cit., p.62.
(1990). [89] Galloway, A. (2004) in von Busch, O. (2008), op. cit., p.63.
[47] Daly, H. (1992), op. cit. [90] Von Busch, O. (2008), op. cit., p.238
[48] Fashioning an Ethical Industry, The fashion industry and poverty
reduction, Factsheet 3a (undated), www.fashioninganethicalindustry. Part 3
org, p.3. [1] Banerjee, B., ‘Designer as Agent of Change, a Vision for Catalyzing
[49] Shah, D., ‘View’, Textile View Magazine, vol. 82 (2008). Rapid Change’, Turin, Italy: Changing the Change conference
[50] Carter, K., ‘Why fast fashion is so last season’, Guardian Online, proceedings (10–12 July 2008), p.3.
23 July 2008 http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/jul/23/ [2] Fuller, R.B., as cited in V. Papanek, Design for the Real World,
ethicalfashion.fashion (accessed 31 March 2010). London: Thames and Hudson (1984), p.326.
[51] Clark, H., ‘Slow + Fashion’, Fashion Theory, 12 (4) (2008), [3] Esty, D., ‘Is going green more than a fad?’ Interview on National
pp.427–46. Public Radio, Marketplace from America, 18 May 2010. Transcript
[52] Von Busch, O., FASHION-able: Hactivism and engaged fashion available at http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/
design, PhD thesis, Gothenburg, Sweden: Art Monitor (2008), p.56. web/2010/05/18.
187
[4] Papanek,V. (1984), Design For the Real World, London: Thames and
Hudson, p.228.
[5] Banerjee, B. (2008), op. cit., p3.
[6] Orr, D.W., The Nature of Design: ecology, culture and human intention,
New York: Oxford University Press (2002), p.31.
[7] Ibid., p.3.
[8] http://www.bath.ac.uk/carpp/publications/coop_inquiry.html
(accessed 27 June 2010).
[9] Brown, T., Change by Design: How design thinking transforms
organizations and inspires innovation, New York: Harper Business (2009),
p.5.
[10] Von Busch, O., Re-forming Appearance: Subversive strategies in the
fashion system – reflections on complementary modes of production (2005),
available from http://www.selfpassage.org, p.10.
[11] http://www.kulturservern.se/wronsov/selfpassage/disCook/
disCook.htm (accessed 11 May 2010).
[12] Papanek,V. (1984), op. cit., p.55.
[13] Brown, T. (2009), op. cit., p.216.
[14] Banerjee, B. (2008), op. cit., p.2.
[15] Influenced by Jensen, D. (2009), ‘Forget Shorter Showers’, in
Orion (July/August 2009), pp.18–19.
[16] Adams, B., Design Green Now panel, California College of the
Arts, San Francisco (27 March 2009), also accessible at: http://www.
designgreennow.com/2009/03/27/bob-adams-sustainability-lead-
ideo/.
[17] Organic Exchange, ‘Global Organic Cotton Market Hits $3.2
Billion in 2008, Organic Exchange Report Shows’ (2009), www.
organicexchange.org (accessed 4 February 2009).
[18] Macy, J. and M.Young Brown, Coming Back to Life, Gabriola
Island, Canada: New Society Publishers (1998).
[19] Jackson, T., Prosperity Without Growth, London: Sustainable
Development Commission (2009), p.34.
[20] Chapman, J., Emotionally Durable Design: Objects, experiences and
empathy, London: Earthscan (2005), p.10.
[21] Hopkins, R., The Transition Handbook, Totnes, UK: Green Books
(2008), p.213.
[22] Korten, D.C., Agenda for a New Economy: From phantom wealth to
real wealth, San Francisco: Berrett Koehler (2009).
[23] Banerjee, B. (2008), op. cit., p.10.
[24] Brown, T. (2009), op. cit., p.17.
188
Index
Figures in italics refer to captions and Callenbach, Ernest 30, 143 Craft Lab 150
diagrams Cambia T-shirt (Páramo) 79 crafting 146–50
Cara, Roberto 159 craftivism 149–50
A carbon dioxide/carbon footprinting 25–6, 28, The Craftsman (Sennett) 147
acrylic 14, 17, 26 38, 54, 55–8, 58, 61, 92 ‘Craftwerk 2.0: New household tactics for
activism see craftivism; designer as activist Carbon Trust 26 popular crafts’ 150
Adams, Bob 174 care labels 60–1, 61; see also garment care crease-resistant fibres 98
adaptability 76–84 cash crops 21 crowdsourcing 129, 179
Adbusters 138 cashmere 86 cultural knowledge 108–9
Aid to Artisans 170 ‘Cathedral and Bazaar’ 145 customization 152
Alabama Chanin 107, 175, 175 cationizing agents 39–40 cutting waste see minimum-waste garments
The Alabama Stitch Book, Alabama Studio Chanin, Nathalie 141, 143, 175, 176
Design and Alabama Studio Style (Chanin) 175 Chapman, Jonathan 76, 85, 180 D
Alite 140 charity shops see thrift stores Dale Sko shoe factory, Norway 152, 152
All Party Parliamentary Group of Ethical child labour 21, 50 Daly, Herman 75, 125, 125, 136
Fashion 172–3 children’s toys 82 De Beauvoir coat (Eloise Grey) 42
alpaca 107 chlorine 35, 37 Decay (Bourlanges) 130
alteration see repair services Clean Clothes Campaign 50 defibrillation 35
Andrews, Cheryl 109, 109 Cleaner Cotton™ 25, 25 degradable fibres 18
Antiform Industries 146, 147 cleaning see laundering Del Forte Denim 170
Apexa® (DuPont) 18 climate change 12, 13, 25–6, 38, 100, 126, Del Forte, Tierra 170
Ardalanish 41 138 denim 86, 96
Aristotle 11 Clothes Exchange 64 DePLOY 81, 81
artisans 110–12, 170–1, 175; see also local clothes hire see leasing Design Activism (Fuad-Luke) 145, 146
production clothes swaps 163, 163–4 design services 103, 105; see also co-design
As You Sow 121, 170 Clothing Exchange 163, 163 designer
Avelle 87, 103, 103 CMT (cut, make and trim) 49 as activist 168–73
co-design 144–6, 150–2, 162–3 as communicator-educator 157–9
B Cohen-Fried, Elisheva 134, 135, 150, 150 as entrepreneur 174–9
bacteria 93 co-operatives 51, 105, 106, 110, 122 as facilitator 162–7; see also co-design
Bag, Borrow or Steal see Avelle Cojolya Association of Women Weavers detergent see laundering
bamboo 14, 16 111–12, 112, 171 Devenney, Lauren 96, 98
Barneys New York 159, 175 collaborations and partnerships 22, 50–1, 64, disposal 63–73; see also recycling; waste
bast fibres 107 107, 118, 119, 122, 169; see also NGOs distribution 54–8, 64, 66, 106, 107
Bedlam Boudoir 176, 178 colour 40, 79–80 Dosa 85–6, 175–6, 176
Benyus, Janine 114, 115, 118 and laundering 60 downcycling 63; see also recycling
Berry, Wendell 49, 106, 114, 124, 136 natural 40–1 Duerr, Sasha 43, 44, 158, 160
bespoke designs 103, 105 theory 36 DuPont 16, 18
Betabrand 129, 140, 140, 179 see also dyes and dyeing durability 85–8
bicycle clothing 139–140, 140 commuter cycling 139–140, 140 dyes and dyeing 37–40
Bike Kitchen 100 composting 17, 18, 20, 90 cationizing agents 39–40
biodegradable fibres 13, 17–20 connectedness 143–4, 150 fixation rates 38
biofuel see renewable fuels Conrad, Joseph 141 natural 43, 43, 44, 86, 108, 108, 158, 171,
biomimicry 77, 114–23 consumer care 60–2 172, 176, 178
Biomimicry Institute 114 copper 38, 52–3 and water 37–9
biopolymers 18 corn 14, 18, 58, 160; see also PLA workshops 158, 160
biotechnology 23–4 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) 51,
Bird Textiles 26, 28 157, 168 E
Black Spot sneakers 151 cotton 13, 14, 21–5, 60, 96, 98, 99, 160 Earley, Becky 96, 134
bleaching 16, 34–7 Bt cotton 23, 24 Eco Circle technology (Tejin) 71
Bluesign 36, 36–7 calculator 159 ecosystems 31–2, 76, 77
bounded capabilities 174 cationic (Tuscarora Yarns) 39, 40 business 118, 125, 125
Bourlanges, Marie Ilse 130, 130 chemicals and pesticides 13, 21–3 Edible Schoolyard 176
Boycott Uzbek Cotton campaign 170 Cleaner Cotton™ 25, 25 Ehrenfeld, John 75
boycotts 169 cotton picking and labour issues 21–2 electroplating 52–3
Brand, Stewart 114 farming 107, 134 emotional attachment to garments 65, 85–7,
Bridging Cultures Through Design (BCTD) GM 13–14, 23, 24, 25, 134 141
170–1, 171 Home Grown Cleaner Cotton™ T-shirt empathy 85–6
Brower, David 33 (Prana) 25, 25 Endurance Shirt (Timo Rissanen) 46
Brown, Nick 116 irrigation 28–9 energy consumption
Bt cotton 23, 24 organic 23–4, 24, 25, 112, 133, 170, 174 in fibre production 25–6, 26, 28
Burgess, Rebecca 171 spinning 107 in garment care 57, 60–2, 93
Busch, Otto von 145, 151, 152, 164 sustainable cotton options 24 Energy Water Fashion 96, 96
buttons 17, 52–3, 53 Sustainable Cotton Project 158–9, 160 environmental campaigns 138, 139
Trigema biodegradable T-shirt 18, 20 enzyme technology 35–6, 37
C Cotton Connect 22 Etsy, Dan 155
C & A 22 Cotton Roots 26 eucalyptus 16
CAD 126 Cradle to Cradle (McDonough and Braungart) EW8 96
pattern cutting 44, 48 17; certification and concept 18, 20, 87
189
F Helvey, Ashley 160 London College of Fashion 96

fabric coatings 93 hemp 14, 29, 107–8, 108 Lovins, Amory 121
facings 17 Herman Miller 176 Lovins, Hunter 121
Fairtrade/fair trade 13, 14, 21, 51, 70, 107, 133 high-tech/smart fabrics 77–8, 78, 79, 116–17 Low to No Waste jacket (Sam Forno) 44, 48
Fair Trade Labelling Initiative 51 Historic Futures 55 Luckins, Kate 163
Fairtrade Labelling Organizations Home Grown T-shirt (Prana) 25, 25 lyocell 14, 15, 16, 16, 26
International 51 Home Made (SANS) 105
Fair Trade USA 51, 170 home-made clothes/home sewing 145, 164, M
Farming With the Wild (Dan Imhoff) 30 167, 167, 175; see also workshops Maca 107–8, 108
farming, organic see organic agriculture Hopkins, Rob 172, 180 Macy, Joanna 174
Farrell, Robert 143 House of Cashmere 70 Maggie’s Organics 107
fashion as self expression 138–9 Hyde, Lewis 141 Marchand and Walker 139
fast fashion 126–7, 129 hydrogen peroxide 35, 36, 37 Marks and Spencer 57, 61, 64
fertilizers 20, 29, 58, 126 Martin, Alex 137
Fibershed Project 171, 172 I MATERIALBYPRODUCT 49
fibre production IDEO 169, 174 Mau, Bruce 57
low-energy/low-carbon 25–6, 28 Illuminite Teflon 140 Max-Neef, Manfred 110, 132, 132–5
low-water-use 28–30 Imhoff, Dan 159 MBDC 20; see also Cradle to Cradle
fibres Ingeo™ (NatureWorks) 18 McDonalds 128
animal- and plant-based 14, 17 International Labor Organization 50 Meadows, Donella 114–15, 157
biodegradable 13, 17–20 Internet 105, 129, 144, 158, 179 Melville, Emily 80, 80
degradable 18 inventory flows 54 methane 18
fibre blends 17, 99 IPM (integrated pest management) 22, 24, 160 Michel, Karina 73, 73
GM 22–5 ironing 98; see also garment care minimum-waste garments 44, 45, 46, 47,
non-biodegradable 17 48–9, 119, 119
non-degradable 18 J mining industry 52, 54
non-renewable 14 Jackson, Tim 174 ‘Mirror/Africa’ video installation (Hahn)
petrochemical 12, 14, 18 jeans 6, 53, 61, 61, 96, 140, 170 159, 160
renewable fibres 14, 16; ‘family tree’ 15 Jongstra, Claudy 176, 176 Miyake, Issey 99
synthetic fibres 13, 16, 17, 18, 26, 29, 70–1, Junky Styling 69, 105, 105 modular garments 80–1, 81, 82, 82, 83, 145
73, 98 Jurewitz, Patti 170 Moholy-Nagy, László 162
water use 29 just-in-time manufacturing 126 Mudd Jeans 170
see also organic agriculture; recycling Muji 99, 99
Filippa K 64, 66, 66 K multifunctional garments 78–9, 146
finishing treatments 93 Keep and Share 102, 129, 130
5 Ways project 96, 96, 134 Kernel Gallery, Athens 165 N
Flener, Manon 82, 82 Khamir 112 Naess, Arne 174
Fletcher, Kate 88, 96, 134 Kim, Christina 85–6, 175–6 nanofiltration 39
flocculation 39 Kirschenmann, Fred 30 natural dyes 43, 43, 44, 86, 108, 108, 158,
Forno, Sam 44, 48 Koch snowflake 114, 115 171, 172, 176, 178
From Somewhere 69 Konaka 94, 95 Nau 58, 58
Fuad-Luke, Alastair 135, 145, 146 Korten, David 123, 180 needs 132–41
Fuller, Richard Buckminster 155 new media see Internet
L NGOs 50–1, 93, 112, 121, 158, 169–73; see
G labels and labelling 20, 86, 96, 164 also partnerships and collaborations
Galloway, Anne 152 labour 20–2, 106, 124, 126 Nikwax 116, 117
garment care 60–2, 92–9 child labour 21, 50 No Stain dress (Devenney) 96, 98
garments, emotional attachment to 65, 85–7, cotton picking 21, 22 No Wash top (Earley and Fletcher) 96, 96
141; see also fashion as self expression in cut and sew 49–51 non-biodegradable fibres 17
Global Organic Textile Standard 36, 53 NGOs 50–1 non-degradable fibres 18
globalization 49, 106, 108, 144, 152 see also artisans non-renewable fibres 14
GM (genetic modification) 13, 16, 22–5, 36, 134 landfill 18, 52, 63, 67, 85, 123 North Face, The 36, 37
cotton 13–14, 23, 24, 25, 134 laundering 60–2, 92–9, 165 nylon 14, 16, 26, 30
Goodone 69–70, 71 leasing 90, 102–3 recycling 71, 73
Goodwill 66, 67, 69, 69, 122, 123 Leonard, Annie 138
government policies, influencing 172–3 Levi Strauss and Co 53, 53, 61, 61, 109, 109 O
Great American Apparel Diet 137 Levinson, Melissa 94 oil industry 52
Grey, Eloise 41, 42 Levy, Steven 151–2 One Night Stands (Sandstrom) 127, 127
Grose, Lynda 141, 143, 159 life-cycle assessment (LCA) 55–6, 134 online businesses see Internet
lifespan of a garment 85 optimized lifetimes 85–7
H Lifetimes project (Fletcher and Tham) 88, 90, 91 organic agriculture 13, 14, 22, 23–5, 30,
H & M (Hennes and Mauritz) 50; Garden linen 16, 29, 41, 96, 98 133, 174
Collection 16, 16 Linux software 144 Organic Exchange 174
hacking 150–2 Little Brown Dress project (Martin) 137, 137–8 over-printing 69, 86
Hahn, Nicole Mackinlay 159, 160 llamas 31, 32 Oxfam 50, 51, 64, 66
Hamnett, Katherine 22 local culture 108–9 ozone
hardware and trims 52–3, 53 local production 41, 106–12, 146, 171, 175; bleaching 35, 36, 37
Hawken, Paul 121 see also artisans; slow fashion laundering with 62, 62
Heath Pottery 176 Local Wisdom 164–5, 167, 167
190
P SANS 104, 105, 179 Tremayne, Wendy 163

Páramo 79, 116, 117; see also smart/high-tech Scotchgard™ 93 triexta (PTT) 15, 16, 26, 29
fabrics seasons 79 Trigema biodegradable T-shirt 18, 20
partnerships and collaborations 22, 50–1, 64, seed cotton 14, 21 trims and hardware 52–3, 53
107, 118, 119, 122, 169; see also NGOs Self-Couture (Steverlynck) 146, 148 Tuscarora Yarns 39, 40
passive consumption 143–4, 150 self-storage 86 tweed 41
Patagonia 29, 29–30, 56, 87, 122 Sennett, Richard 147, 149 Twiggy 164
pattern and making instructions see Chanin, Shah, Nimish 112, 112 Tyler, Mike 32
Nathalie; Busch, Otto von shape-changing garments 82–4, 84
pattern cutting and wastage see minimum- sharing garments 65, 102, 165 U
waste garments sheep 30, 31, 31, 32, 41, 160, 176, 176 UNEP 28
patterns, downloadable 104, 105, 179 ‘Sheep and Weeds’ 160 UNESCO 28, 29
peak oil 26 Shell Foundation 22 United Nations Environment Programme 60
peak water 29 shoes 87, 127, 127, 151, 152, 153 upcycling 69; see also recycling
Pearse, John 94 Shove, Elizabeth 145
Permacouture Institute 158, 160 Shower Clean Suit (Konaka) 94, 95 V
pest control 22–3, 25 silk 14, 98 vintage clothing 65, 66, 69, 90, 102, 103, 141,
IPM (integrated pest management) 22, 24, 160 ‘SIN’ (Substitute It Now) list 93 143; see also recycling
see also organic agriculture; pesticides slow fashion 43, 127, 128–30; see also artisans; viscose 14, 16, 26, 29
pesticides 13, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 28, 29, 58 crafting; local production
PET (ployethylene terephthalate) 18, 70 Slow Food movement 128 W
Petrini, Carlo 128 smart/high-tech fabrics 77–8, 78, 79, 116–17, Waag, Jerome 160
PLA (polylactic acid) fibres 14, 18 117 Walmart 55, 61, 122
plants and dyeing see natural dyes snaps 52, 82 wardrobe metabolism 88, 88
Pleats Please concept (Issey Miyake) 99 Social Fabric Collaborative 100 washing clothes see laundering
polyester 14, 16, 17–18, 26, 29, 30, 38, 60, 99 Sorona® (DuPont) 16 waste 12, 13, 14, 18, 34, 63–4, 92 see also
recycling 70–1, 73 Speth, James Gustave 168 disposal; landfill; recycling; reuse
Pratibha Syntex 73, 119, 119, 120 stains 96 water 12, 13, 23, 28–30, 34, 35, 37–8, 39,
predator-friendly fibres 30–2, 107 stain-repellant coatings 93 52, 92
Primark 128 steady-state economics 125, 125 use in fibres 29
processing Stegner, Wallace 110 Waters, Alice 176
designers’ involvement in 33–4, 36 Steverlynck, Diane 146, 148 weaving 41, 111–12, 171
standards and accreditation 36–7 Story of Stuff (Leonard) 138 web sites see Internet
Project Laundry List 62 String technology 55 Weed, Becky 32
PTT (triexta) 15, 16, 26, 29 Sugar and Spice shoe (Patagonia) 87 Whole Earth Catalog (Brand) 114
supply chain 11, 21, 36, 54, 55–6, 106, 107, Wikipedia 144
Q 111, 126, 141, 144, 159, 170 women 136–7, 149, 171, 175
Quick Response (QR) codes 87 Sustainabilica 12 wool 14, 17, 29, 41, 42, 94, 107, 176, 176
‘Sustainable Clothing Roadmap’ 92 and predators 30–1, 31, 32
R Sustainable Cotton Project 158–9, 160 see also tweed
Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tags Swaine, Michael 101, 102 workers see labour
54, 61, 87 Swap-O-Rama-Rama 163–4 workshops 100, 110, 152, 158, 163, 164,
Rawles, Kate 75 synthetic fibres 13, 16, 17, 18, 26, 29, 70–1, 165, 175
Raymond, Eric S. 145 73, 98 World Economic Forum 28
reconditioning see recycling: garments systemic innovation 174 World Health Organization 22
recycling 17, 52, 56, 64, 138 WORN_RELICS© project 87
fibre 13, 16, 17, 26, 39, 48, 52, 63, 64, 70–1, T wrinkled garments 99, 99; see also ironing
73, 87, 107, 119, 120, 133, 140 take-back schemes 64, 66 WWF, Scotland 138
garments 63, 64, 67, 69–70, 122, 164, 176 Teflon® 93
shoes 127, 127 Tejin 71 Y
water 39 Tencel® 16, 30 Yamamoto, Kansai 94
REI 78, 78 Tesco 70
‘recyclopedia’ (von Busch) 164, 165 Textile Exchange 22 Z
renewable fibres 14, 16; ‘family tree’ 15 Tham, Mathilda 88 zips 17, 20, 52, 85
renewable fuels 58 Thirteen Mile Farm, Montana 31, 32 ZoZa 86
renting see leasing Thorpe, Ann 154
repair services 100–1, 101 thrift stores 66–7, 69, 122; see also recycling;
reuse 63–4, 64, 66–7; see also recycling vintage clothing
reverse osmosis 39 Tibbs, Hardin 54
RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) tags Tide 61
54, 61, 87, 159 Timberland 56–7
Rissanen, Timo 44, 46, 48–9 Titus, Crystal 82, 82
Robinson, Mimi 170–1 ToTEM (Tales of Things and Electronic
Rockefeller Foundation 169 Memory) project 87
Rosenfeld, Galya 84, 84 Touch Me dress (5 Ways Project) 134
transfunctional garments 77–8
S Transition Towns movement 172
Salvation Army 66 transportation 54, 57–8
Sandstrom, Stephanie 127 trans-seasonal garments 79–80
191
Image credits
The authors and publisher would like to thank the following institutions and individuals who
provided images for use in this book. In all cases, every effort has been made to credit the
copyright holders, but should there be any omissions or errors the publisher would be pleased
to insert the appropriate acknowledgment in any subsequent edition of this book.
Part 1
p12 Lucy Jane Batchelor p104 Image courtesy of Sans
p16 Courtesy of H&M p105 Photographer: Ness Sherry, model: Erica; Created by
p19 Shidume Lozada Photography Junky Styling
p25 Shidume Lozada Photography p108 Photograph by Sean Michael; image courtesy of London
p27 Image courtesy of Bird Textiles; photograph by Paul College of Fashion
Henderson Kelly p109 Photograph by Lynda Grose
p29 Image courtesy of Patagonia p112 Shidume Lozada Photography
p31 © Dan Imhoff, 13 Mile Lamb and Wool, Belgrade, Montana p113 Photograph by Sean Michael; image courtesy of London
p36 Shidume Lozada Photography College of Fashion
p40 Shidume Lozada Photography p117 © Páramo
p42 Eloise Grey Design; photograph by Tony Hudson p119 Shidume Lozada Photography
p43 Photograph by Sasha Duerr p123 Image courtesy of Goodwill Industries of San Francisco, San
p45 Shidume Lozada Photography Mateo and Marin Counties
p45 Shidume Lozada Photography p127 Photograph by Sean Michael; image courtesy of London
p46 Image courtesy of Timo Rissanen (2009); photography by College of Fashion
Silversalt Photography p130 Knitted garments by Keep & Share; photograph by Lily
p46 Image courtesy of Timo Rissanen Urbanska; styling by Amy Twigger Holroyd
p47 Collection: AW09/10 Same Air Different time. Image courtesy of p131 Photograph by Virginie Rebetez; image courtesy of Marie Ilse
MATERIALBYPRODUCT; photography by Susan Grdunac Bourlanges
p53 Photography by Lynda Grose p135 Shidume Lozada Photography
p59 Nau webfront, courtesy of Nau p137 Courtesy of Alex Martin
p61 Image courtesy of Levi Strauss and Co. p140 Shidume Lozada Photography
p62 Image courtesy of Annalisa Parent, www.parentstudios.com p142 Shidume Lozada Photography
p65 Lucy Jane Batchelor p147 Sally Cole Photography; images courtesy of Antiform Industries
p66 Photographer: Oscar Samuelsson p148 © Diana Steverlynck
p68 Shidume Lozada Photography p150 Shidume Lozada Photography
p71 Photography by Jess Bonham, model: Steph at Models 1, stylist: p153 Photograph by Bent Rene Synnevag
Carley Hague
p72 Photograph by Sean Michael; image courtesy of London College
of Fashion Part 3
p160 Photography by Aya Brackett
p160 Photography by Aya Brackett
Part 2 p160 Image courtesy of the Sustainable Cotton Project
p78 Shidume Lozada Photography p161 Photography by James Ryang, © Reap What You Sew LLC
p80 Shidume Lozada Photography p163 Photography by Darren James; The Clothing Exchange concept,
p81 All original images, design, drawings, logo, copyright owned by: Kate Luckins; The Clothing Exchange Team, Kate Luckins and Juliette
Seamsystemic Ltd. (T/A DEPLOY). Photograph by Matthieu Spohn; Anich
Creative Direction Bernice Pan; Hair & Makeup Chrysostomos p165 Images courtesy of Peggy Sali, Petros Moris and Theodoros
Chamalidis; Model: Elodie Bouedec Giannakis (project co-ordinators). Workshop participants: Olga
p82 Shidume Lozada Photography Evagelidou, Lia Mori, Irene Ragusini, Stella Tselepi (workshop
p83 Photograph by Sean Michael; image courtesy of London College participants)
of Fashion p166 Photograph by Sean Michael; images courtesy of Local
p84 Photograph by Yael Dahan Wisdom project
p84 Photograph by Galya Rosenfeld p171 Bridging Cultures Through Design, onsite learning at Cotoyla
p89 Lucy Jane Batchelor Association of Women Weavers, Santiago Atitlan, Guatemala
p89 Lucy Jane Batchelor p172 2010 © Paige Green
p90 Lucy Jane Batchelor p175 Photograph by Robert Rausch; image courtesy of
p90 Lucy Jane Batchelor Alabama Chanin
p91 Lucy Jane Batchelor p177 Image courtesy of Dosa
p91 Lucy Jane Batchelor p176 Photograph by Stephanie Gratz; image courtesy of Studio
p95 Image courtesy of Konaka Claudy Jongstra
p97 Photograph by Tom Gidley p178 Photograph by Jo Hodges
p97 Energy Water Fashion collection by Emma Rigby. Photograph by
Lukas Demgenski
p98 Photograph by Sean Michael; image courtesy of London College
of Fashion
p99 Photograph by Shidume Lozada
p101 Photograph by Fiona Bailey; image courtesy of Local Wisdom
project
p102 Photograph by Jeff Enlow
p103 Shidume Lozada Photography
192
Authors’ acknowledgments
It is hardly necessary to add that fashion and sustainability ideas did not begin in
these pages, and nor will they end here. We would therefore like to acknowledge
the hundreds of practitioners, theorists, colleagues, students and activists to whom
we are enormously grateful. In making this book we are thankful in particular to
Paul Hawken for his continued inspiration and thoughtful contribution, Katelyn
Toth-Fejel for keeping us organized, Lucy Jane Batchelor and Shidume Lozada
for bringing these pages to life visually and the team at Laurence King for their
general support and logistical guidance. We would like to thank all of the designers,
brands and organizations featured here who supplied us with images, and without
whom this book would not exist. Thanks also to Marcus for proofreading and for
lopping and pruning the manuscript with such resolve. And finally thank you to
our families and friends, for allowing us the time we needed to bring this book
to completion.

Kate Fletcher, Lynda Grose, Paul Hawken-Fashion & Sustainability - Design For Change-Laurence King Publishing (2012)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kate Fletcher, Lynda Grose, Paul Hawken-Fashion & Sustainability - Design For Change-Laurence King Publishing (2012)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fa s h i o n & S u s ta i n a b i l i t y

Copyright © Text 2011

All rights reserved. No part of this publication

A catalogue record for this book is available

ISBN: 978 1 85669 754 5

Project Editor: Gaynor Sermon

Designed by Jon Allan

Cover photograph by Sean Michael; courtesy

Laurence King Publishing

have delivered a masterpiece of systems redesign. In all economic sectors,

Foreword by Paul Hawken 4

Part 1: TRANSFORMING FASHION PRODUCTS

Part 2: TRANSFORMING FASHION SYSTEMS

Part 3: TRANSFORMING FASHION DESIGN PRACTICE

This book embodies around 40 years of our combined experience working

which focuses on modifying and renewing the ‘fashion industry system’

Lynda Grose and Kate Fletcher

Experience teaches us that most people start to change their practice by

The sustainability impacts of fibres

• increased interest in renewable source materials leading, for example,

now be found in almost 50 per cent of global conventional cotton

FIG. 2 TEXTILE FIBRE TYPES

NATURAL FIBRES MANUFACTURED FIBRES

VEgEtaBLE fiBrEs animaL fiBrEs minEraL fiBrEs

Wool & Hair Asbestos

Renewability: a route to extended responsibility

New-generation biodegradable fibres

1. Biodegradable synthetic fibres (such as the biopolymers described

It should be noted that within each class there is variability of speed of

Barriers to the introduction of biodegradable polymers

1. Design of completely biodegradable garments where all fibres and

Working in the first area of challenge highlighted above, a collaboration

The influence of trading and business systems

practices for growing cotton. Furthermore, ensuring a fair price to the

Options for reducing chemical use in cotton growing

use biotechnology to resist pest infestations and make weed management

Genetically modified cotton

methods as the key tool to reduce chemical use in cultivation. Indeed,

FIG. 3 EXPANDED OPTIONS FOR ‘SUSTAINABLE’ COTTON

BioLogicaL iPm (non-gm)

h i g h V o L umE LoW VoLumE

methods can make them appear ‘ideological’ and

Non-genetically modified cotton

FIG. 4 ENERGY CONSUMPTION OF FIBRES 34 Energy (mJ/kg)

90 per cent, to approximately 0.7 kilos per T-shirt, by switching to organic

Water: a major issue for fashion

FIG. 5 WATER USE IN FIBRES42 Water (l/kg)

While such farming practices as organic have been highly successful in

Integrating fibre-growing areas with surrounding ecosystems

Processing is an essential part of converting raw fibre to fabric to fashion

Working closer to nature

negative feedback loops and restrictive action, to one of collaboration,

Broad principles to support best practice

• Reduce the risk of pollution. • M

• Minimize water consumption. • Eliminate water-intensive processes.

• Reduce load on landfill. • Minimize waste generation at all stages.

In the following pages, we examine a select number of processing

bleach in paper production. Chlorine-based compounds, such as sodium

Shirt and trousers by

Processing standards and accreditation

built around five principles: resource productivity, consumer safety, air

Ecology of a dye bath

Ecology of a dye house