Despite being in the age where we are all connected through social media and information is available at the touch of our fingertips, we are more disconnected than ever before. As a nation we are spending increasingly more time in front of screens watching television marathons, looking through endless pages of photos of ourselves, and videos of our newest clothing haul. With ads constantly being fed to us, as a society, we have moved to a life of single use purchases and constant consumption. One of the biggest growing industries and the one that creates incomparable waste is the clothing industry. Quickly, the clothing industry has turned into a hidden environmental crisis and even a human rights concern. Little has been done to control the waste in this sector, and the few attempts at solutions have turned into problems themselves. Breaking down the crisis to its’ causes and resulting complications will allow for new recommendations and actions to be taken by individuals, and companies.
An introduction to the fast fashion industry
Fast fashion is characterized by heavy marketing, disposable clothing sold at a cheap cost to the consumer, and is the latest fashion trend. Fast fashion has changed the clothing industry from the traditional fashion seasons (Fall/Winter & Spring/Summer) to 52 distinct micro fashion seasons. Stores like H&M, Forever 21, Zara, among countless others utilize fast and eye-catching marketing, to make consumers feel the need to purchase more in order to stay on trend. The unfortunate reality is that the consumer will automatically be out of trend the following week due to the 52 micro fashion seasons. This increase in fashion weeks causes a cycle of buying clothing, wearing the items either once or a handful of times and then the article either is hoarded in a closet or thrown away.
In the 1960’s women on average owned 25 articles of clothing, and today we purchase on average at least three times that amount[1]. The reason we purchase so much more is that clothing has gotten too cheap. Due to how affordable it is, we as consumers feel we can buy on trend rather than purchasing just essential pieces. When we head to the store, the overwhelming amount of cheap merchandise (which will not be there in a week) encourages us not just to purchase one item, but bags of items. Once these articles of clothing are brought home they’re worn only a few times because they are disposable and are of poor quality; they rip, they will wear out after a wash, and they were not designed to fit properly. Women in the 1960’s wore their items time after time because they purchased investments and quality, timeless pieces. 95% of these garments were handmade in America, and today only a meager 2% of our clothes are created here.[2] Not only is the clothing today made outside our country, but the lifecycle of a piece of clothing is also about 2-3 weeks, including being on the designer drawing board. Within that timespan we go from raw materials to fiber production, to the actual garment production, transportation to the US, bought, worn and washed, thrown away into a landfill, and finally, consumers purchase more the next week. Having this quick turnaround time, brands have the ability to change the trends fast, creating new financial opportunities mid-season. This rate of capitalism and consumerism has extreme consequences all along the supply chain and lifecycle of the garments we purchase.
How did we get here: Chief causes of fast fashion pollution
When a blouse only costs $10, just think about how that cost includes materials, a factory charge, labor, transportation, and a brands markup. This alone, should inspire questions about what the wages are for the people who sewed this item and what materials are being used that are so cheap to purchase? Unfortunately, fast fashion comes with a high cost in the form of dangerous work environments, extremely low wages, and a horrible environmental impact. The garment industry is the second largest polluter in this world, behind the fuel industry[3].
While consumerism, capitalism, the changing fashion weeks, and as well as the cheap cost to make clothing are all causes of the pollution created by the garment industry; they are just the foundation of the core issues. The chief causes of pollution from the garment industry concern the materials being used to create fabrics, the resources being utilized to create the actual clothes, and what happens to the clothing at the end of their lifecycle.
Materials
The fabrics being utilized by the garment industry has changed from naturally sourced materials and fibers to man-made chemical-based materials. The fiber that is now most commonly found in clothing, especially in fast fashion is polyester[4]. Unlike cotton and other naturally sourced materials, polyester takes more than 200 years to decompose[5]. These synthetic fibers are a type of plastic that is created from petroleum[6]. In addition to polyester, fleece is another synthetic material (that is a subgroup of polyester) that is not only created with plastics but also sheds microfibers each time it is washed. These microfibers then leave your home and upwards of 40% of them go into our freshwater[7]. While cotton is not a synthetic material, non-organic cotton has been a large contributor to fast fashion pollution. Cotton utilizes more than 16% of the worlds’ pesticides[8], so even though it is a natural material it is taking a toll on the environment. These are only a select few materials and fabrics that are contributing to the pollution in the garment industry, the depth of the consequences will be discussed further on.
Resources
The second grouping of chief causes of pollution within the garment industry is the types of resources that are being utilized during the garment production phase. During this period fabric and materials are not in the state needed to be cut and sewn together, an example would be blue jeans. Denim fabric doesn’t start out in that classic blue color, the material is bleached and then dyed to the desired color[9]. In large batches, fabrics and materials are often dyed and bleached utilizing industrial chemicals that are not only dangerous to those who are using them, but also when they’re disposed of improperly. There have been numerous cases where these dye houses allow runoff of these chemicals into local rivers or lakes. In addition to the chemicals used in the dying and bleaching process, the chemicals used when tanning leather is incredibly toxic[10] and too often factories do not have appropriate protocols[11] in place, for their employees to be using these dangerous chemicals. Finally, to create finished garments and fabrics, an astonishing amount of energy and oil are utilized in the process. Almost 70 million gallons[12] of oil is used in the process of creating polyester fiber, this does not include the oil used in other garment industry operations. In addition to oil, coal and other fossil fuels[13] are used to run the factories where the garments are created, contributing to the global carbon emissions.
Disposal
The disposal of garments is not only the final stage in its’ lifecycle but also the final chief cause of environmental distress due to fast fashion. Fast fashion clothes are made to be “disposable,” as in they’re made of such poor quality that they rip after one use, resulting in the consumer disposing of the item. According to the study conducted by G. Birtwistle, consumers are more likely to dispose of clothing when a new trend comes out, or they just don’t seem to wear the item anymore, especially if the item purchased was very competitively priced[14]. A majority of consumers, however, do not know the proper ways to dispose of clothing items, especially ones made of synthetic materials[15]. Garments made of natural fibers can be disposed of with standard trash items since they have the ability to break down like food items. Although, in addition to being unaware of proper synthetic disposal methods, communities share very little information with consumers about their ability to recycle clothing[16].
Consequences of the fast fashion pollution
Contaminants in our ecosystems
The aforementioned chief causes of fast fashion pollution, have very devastating consequences to the environment. When using synthetic materials like polyester and fleece, we as consumers are completely unaware of the contaminants that we are putting into the environment. Every time a garment is washed in a standard washing machine, microfibers and microplastics are released from the fabric. While microfibers aren’t a large concern because they are created from natural fabrics like wool or cotton which biodegrade very quickly; microplastics are of high interest. These microplastics are very tiny particles[17] that come from synthetic materials like fleece and polyester while washing our clothes. In one wash, thousands of particles[18] are released from our clothing and enters our waterways through runoff. The runoff eventually leads to our oceans causing and impacting our ecosystems there. The microplastics then accumulate in the water and interact with other pollutants, and are eventually eaten by fish and other organisms[19]. These microplastics remain in the body and bloodstream of the fish that consume them and then we eventually consume the contaminated fish. While small particles may not seem like such a concern, they are toxic plastics that do not belong in our bodies. In addition to accumulating within the oceans, microplastics impact the feeding and behavior of fish, as well as their cell function[20].
The impacts of toxic chemicals running off into fresh water are most often felt by the impoverished communities where dye houses and tanneries are typically located. The Buriganga river in Bangladesh is critically polluted due to in large part the garment industry[21]. This river can no longer be utilized within communities as drinking or bathing water, and cannot be used in any agricultural practices. The toxins completely contaminate the water due to runoff which includes dyes, by-products, and tanning chemicals. The chemicals and toxins further infect the fish, local plant life, and eventually, makes its’ way to the ocean.
Pesticide usage and impacts
When synthetic materials aren’t used in garments, cotton is typically the go-to natural fiber. The cotton industry on its own causes extreme amounts of environmental degradation, when compounded with the demand for cost-effective cotton to be used in the garment industry, the degradation becomes exacerbated. Cotton alone utilizes a quarter of the world’s pesticides [22]. With this amount of pesticide usage, the soil on and near the cotton farms have become completely deprived of nutrition and are thoroughly contaminated by the toxic chemicals. Often pesticides are sprayed by air, and when they are, there is further contamination in the surrounding area, including rivers and other sources of water. Even when the chemicals are applied to the crop by hand (reducing the overspray), contamination is still found in streams and ground water[23]. With the spread of pesticides, local insects and non-target organisms are killed off, throwing off ecosystem food chains.
One insect and non-target organism, in particular, that is impacted by pesticides are honey bees. The chemicals used in a variety of pesticides have been found to be highly toxic to bees and may be a contributor to colony collapse disorder[24]. Pollinating bees are responsible for the reproduction of crops and plants that our agricultural industry relies on upon, as well as other plant species in our ecosystem. With the poisoning and substantial deaths of pollinating bees, the pollination and reproduction of plants are severely threatened. The ecosystem relies on the keystone of the pollinating bees, and the implications can be dire.
Disposal problems and biodegradation
As mentioned previously, consumers do not know what to do with the clothing items that they need to dispose of. In 2012, 84%[25] of unwanted garments went straight to landfills, this number, however, has been slowly climbing. The synthetic garments that are sitting in landfills are a cause for concern as we lose more and more landfill space because these items will take a minimum of 200 years[26] to biodegrade, some articles of clothing will take thousands. Per Triple Pundit, one years’ worth of disposed of garments takes up to about 126 million cubic yards[27] of space in landfills. Items that do have the ability to biodegrade because they are constructed of natural fibers like cotton and wool, will cause chemical runoff. As the fibers break down, the chemicals that these items were treated with enter our soil and contaminate our groundwater. Additionally, when garments find themselves discarded improperly they also become a hazard to wildlife, whom may consume these chemically dosed items.
Carbon emissions
Finally, one of the bigger and global concerns of fast fashion is a number of carbon emissions that come from the industry. The clothing and fast fashion industry account for 10% of the global carbon emissions[28]. Americans discard of 14 million tons of clothing if instead this clothing was recycled it would equate to removing about 7.3 million cars[29] and their carbon emissions off the road entirely, just from recycling. The whole industry is utilizing too much energy and uses too many fossil fuels, especially when it is forced to keep up with capitalist demands of the United States. Being energy intensive, the garment industry is putting lots of strain on the environment and is propelling global climate change. The Obama administration made the goal of reducing carbon emissions by a minimum of 26% by 2025[30], without acknowledging the role of the garment industry in carbon emissions, the US will be losing out on a great opportunity for change.
Key attempts at mitigating the problem and their efficacy
Very few actions have been taken to mitigate the environmental impacts of the fast fashion industry. While the United States has developed regulations to control waste product of farms and factories, although very relaxed; most developing states have not enacted comparable regulations. One of the primary explanations for the lack of regulation is due to most factories are located within very impoverished communities, and the state needs to export products to help their economies. For example, the garment industry in Tamil Nadu has the ability to employ about 500 thousand people and helps the state earn billions of dollars through the exporting of fast fashion garments[31]. In forcing environmental regulations upon states like Tamil Nadu, their competitive cost for clothing companies would decrease, making the companies look elsewhere for lower standards and cheaper labor. Corruption is also another real problem when developing regulations for factories and dye houses to follow. If there are regulations established, it doesn’t take much for the regulators to turn a blind eye to those facilities that are outright breaking the regulations. Investigative journalist Adam Matthews and Sinnathamby Prithviraj discovered the extent of illegal operation of dye houses and the corruption of regulation boards first hand in Tamil Nadu, India. While yes, there have been boards created to regulate environmental degradation, there is little accountability and far too much corruption.
Recently more second-hand shops have been opening up, however, they have been unable to handle the high volume of donations they are given. When these stores fail to handle the volume of donated items, they often either get recycled,[32] thrown away or further donated to developing countries. Companies like the Trans-Americas Trading Co. go through donated clothing and sort these items by quality and ship them to Asia, South American countries, and African countries. The poorest quality items and ones that no one else will accept are the ones sent to African countries[33]. Oxfam reported that over 81%[34] of clothing items purchased in Uganda were secondhand and this imported clothing has become a detriment to their economy. The importing of secondhand disposable clothing to developing states has become a new form of disposal which avoids American landfills by passing off the trash and burden.
Fast fashion companies have also begun trying to cater to ethically minded consumers by using “green advertising.” Green advertising in clothing companies can include sharing photos of factories or tagging clothes that have been made using recycled materials, or are organically produced. While this is great that fast fashion companies are attempting to “turn over a new leaf”, these actions are very superficial. The photos of clean factories, do not share the whole story of the factory. It does not say where the factories are located, the regulations in place for waste disposal, the type of chemicals being utilized or the treatment of the workers. Consumers are very visual, seeing a photograph of happy employees and clean facilities encourages consumers to trust a brand and support their products because they’re “doing good.” Photographs do not equate to transparency along the supply chain. The eco or green tags are another way that fast fashion companies are attempting to gain trust from consumers. There are no real regulations or standards to use tags like these and are typically a marketing ploy. Marketing something green is still encouraging the purchasing of fast fashion items.
While these steps are in the right direction to mitigate the problems of fast fashion pollution, they are too often superficial solutions and are not sustainable. The actions also do not address one of the biggest complications with fast fashion which is the rate of consumption. If companies were to take the pollution of fast fashion seriously, they would look into slowing down fashion and consumerism. This, however, will impact companies bottom line.
Actions to combat fast fashion pollution
Consumers
A solution that is not only sustainable but addresses one of the key foundations that fast fashion is built upon is changing the rate of consumption. Companies cater to what consumers want, and unless the consumer is ready to slow down their consumption, the companies are not going to do it on their own. The 1960s had one thing right, and it was the amount of clothing one person owned. Moving back to the capsule wardrobe will help consumers control the amount of money they spend on clothing, the amount they own, help invest in quality pieces, and feel timeless. Having fewer items of clothing is surprisingly not limiting, the pieces that are selected are of high quality and truly are classic pieces that will never be out of style. When consumers purchase for quality, they’re making an investment and will not be buying that same item again for ideally a minimum of a year, hopefully, longer. For example, when purchasing a pair of boots, they should be of a quality that allows a consumer to use them for at least three seasons and are constructed in a way that allows them to be amended to further extend their lifespan. Although the initial purchase was an investment, the consumer will not repurchase; thus the demand increases for quality items, and the environment is spared to some degree. When purchasing for quality and being mindful of the environment, consumers need to look for non-synthetic fibers like organic cotton and sustainably sourced fibers like hemp or bamboo. This cuts down on the pesticides and resources utilized when making fabrics. In particular, when purchasing organic fabrics, the consumer is supporting the removal of chemicals being employed in the supply chain process.
Doing this with all clothing items and having the bulk of consumers take part will change the fashion industry. It will slow the sector down, forcing companies to react to the slower pace and higher expectations in quality. In addition to creating a capsule wardrobe, we should all look into creating our own work uniforms. This as well cuts down on our clothing consumption as well as keeps maintains our focus on important tasks rather than if one is uncomfortable in their clothing that day. These workplace uniforms still allow one to express themselves, but also is a way for one to brand themselves.
Companies
On a company level, more needs to be done to support the environment. Patagonia has been a leading brand in working to create an environmentally sustainable clothing supply, as well as being a figurehead for ethical corporations. Corporations should be running assessments on their supply and processing chain to evaluate the real environmental cost of their company. Following the environmental assessments; companies must work on each part of their chain to address all environmental concerns. This includes running audits, tracking carbon emissions, employing a department to focus on environmental concerns, and including environmental goals in strategic planning. They should also often invest in research of sustainable practices for some of their processes like utilizing post-consumer waste in fabrics or using eco-safe dyes.
Shareholders will need to be included in such a task due to the cost of addressing environmental problems along the supply chain, however, in the long term, companies only benefit[35] from environmental management. Accepting the responsibility for the environment and returning to slow fashion is the key for the garment industry to resolve the extreme pollution problems. While the state is another key player in ensuring the protection of the environment, it’s truly in the hands of the consumer and corporations. The state can create incentives for corporations to be greener. However, the corporations will make the ultimate decisions on what they want to do and the consumers are the ones who will force their hand.
Concluding thoughts
Consumers see fast fashion as something that is affordable, desirable, and harmless; companies develop marketing strategies to keep this vision of fast fashion in the consumers’ minds, pushing sales and increasing profits. Fast fashion, however cheap it is, has an incredibly high cost to the environment. This cost isn’t to be taken lightly, and globally, we can no longer afford to ignore it. Our water supply, ground, and even our food are continually becoming contaminated due to chemicals and microplastics; directly contributed from our clothing and the supply chains of the garment industry. The rate of demands for fabrics increases the usage of pesticides to protect crop yield which is drastically impacting non-target pests and local fauna. Additionally, this demand is overfilling our landfills to such a degree, that the US is finding it difficult to handle the waste. Despite all of these huge issues, consumers and companies can turn fast fashion pollution around. Consumers can quickly change their consumption habits by returning to capsule wardrobes and supporting more durable, ethically sourced goods. Companies can answer the demands of consumers and restructure their brands to address environmental concerns. It isn’t too late to change the cost of fashion; it will, however, take real commitment from both consumers and corporations.
[1], Morgan, Andrew, dir. 2015. The True Cost. Untold Creative, LLC.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Morgan, Andrew, dir. 2015. The True Cost. Untold Creative, LLC.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Conca, James. 2015. “Making Climate Change Fashionable – The Garment Industry Takes On Global Warming.” Forbes. Forbes Magazine. December 3.
[6] Wicker, Alden. 2016. “The Earth Is Covered in the Waste of Your Old Clothes.” Newsweek. Newsweek. September 21.
[7] Karba, Stephanie. 2016. “Microfiber Pollution,” Accessed November 25.
[8] Myer, Melody. 2016. “Dig Deeper.” Rodale Institute. Rodale Institute. Accessed December 5.
[9] Brooks, Andrew. 2015. Clothing Poverty: the Hidden World of Fast Fashion and Second-Hand Clothes. London, UK: Zed Books. 23.
[10] Matthews, Adam. 2016. “The Environmental Crisis in Your Closet.” Newsweek. Newsweek. April 13.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Conca, James. 2015. “Making Climate Change Fashionable – The Garment Industry Takes On Global Warming.” Forbes. Forbes Magazine. December 3.
[13]Morgan, Andrew, dir. 2015. The True Cost. Untold Creative, LLC.
[14] Birtwistle, G., and C.m. Moore. 2007. “Fashion Clothing-Where Does It All End up?” International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management 35 (3): 213.
[15] Ibid, 215.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Treinish, Gregg. 2015. “Fleece to Food: Explorer Gregg Treinish on Microplastics.” National Geographic Society. National Geographic Society. August 12.
[18] Karba, Stephanie. 2016. “Microfiber Pollution,” 1–105. Accessed November 25.
[19] “Adventure Scientists Worldwide Microplastics Project.” 2016. Adventure Scientists. Accessed November 9.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Chakraborty, Chandan, Md Mazaharul Huq, Sobur Ahmed, Taslima Tabassum, and Md. Rubel Miah. 2013. “Analysis Of The Causes And Impacts Of Water Pollution Of Buriganga River: A Critical Study.” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC & TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH 2 (9): 245–52.
[22] Claudio, Luz. 2007. “Waste Couture: Environmental Impact of the Clothing Industry.” Environmental Health Perspectives. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. September.
[23] Aktar, Md. Wasim, Dwaipayan Sengupta, and Ashim Chowdhury. 2009. “Impact of Pesticides Use in Agriculture: Their Benefits and Hazards.” Interdisciplinary Toxicology. Slovak Toxicology Society SETOX. March.
[24] Hopwood, Jennifer. “Are Neonicotinoids Killing Bees?” Are Neonicotinoids Killing Bees?
[25] EPA. 2016. “Typical Wastes Generated by Industry Sectors.” EPA. Environmental Protection Agency. Accessed November 9.
[26], Conca, James. 2015. “Making Climate Change Fashionable – The Garment Industry Takes On Global Warming.” Forbes. Forbes Magazine. December 3.
[27] “Why Textile Waste Should Be Banned From Landfills.” 2015. Triple Pundit: People, Planet, Profit. Triple Pundit: People, Planet, Profit. February 7.
[28] Conca, James. 2015. “Making Climate Change Fashionable – The Garment Industry Takes On Global Warming.” Forbes. Forbes Magazine. December 3.
[29] EPA. 2015. “Advancing Sustainable Materials Management:” Environmental Protection Agency, June.
[30] FACT SHEET: U.S. Reports Its 2025 Emissions Target to the UNFCCC.” 2015. The White House. The United States Government. March 31.
[31] Matthews, Adam. 2016. “The Environmental Crisis in Your Closet.” Newsweek. Newsweek. April 13.
[32] Wicker, Alden. 2016. “The Earth Is Covered in the Waste of Your Old Clothes.” Newsweek. Newsweek. September 21.
[33] Ibid.
[34] Baden, Sally, and Catherine Barber. 2005. “The Impact of the Second-Hand Clothing Trade on Developing Countries | Oxfam GB | Policy &Amp; Practice.” Oxfam Policy &Amp; Practice. Oxfam . September 1.
[35] Chouinard, Yvon, and Vincent Stanley. 2012. The Responsible Company. Ventura, CA: Patagonia Books.
Bibliography
“Adventure Scientists Worldwide Microplastics Project.” 2016. Adventure Scientists. Accessed November 9. http://www.adventurescience.org/microplastics.html.
Aktar, Md. Wasim, Dwaipayan Sengupta, and Ashim Chowdhury. 2009. “Impact of Pesticides Use in Agriculture: Their Benefits and Hazards.” Interdisciplinary Toxicology. Slovak Toxicology Society SETOX. March. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2984095/.
“Anywhere But Here.” 2015. NRDC. NRDC. January 13. https://www.nrdc.org/onearth/anywhere-here-0.
Baden, Sally, and Catherine Barber. 2005. “The Impact of the Second-Hand Clothing Trade on Developing Countries | Oxfam GB | Policy &Amp; Practice.” Oxfam Policy &Amp; Practice. Oxfam . September 1. http://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/the-impact-of-the-second-hand-clothing-trade-on-developing-countries-112464.
Barnes, Dr Liz, Ms Gaynor Lea-Greenwood, and Gaynor Lea-Greenwood. 2006. “Fast Fashion.” Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management 10 (3).
Birtwistle, G., and C.m. Moore. 2007. “Fashion Clothing & Where Does It All End up?” International Journal of Retail &Amp; Distribution Management 35 (3): 210–16. doi:10.1108/09590550710735068.
Brooks, Andrew. 2015. Clothing Poverty: the Hidden World of Fast Fashion and Second-Hand Clothes. London, UK: Zed Books.
Caniato, Federico, Maria Caridi, Luca Crippa, and Antonella Moretto. 2011. “Environmental Sustainability in Fashion Supply Chains: An Exploratory Case Based Research.” International Journal of Production Economics 135 (2): 659–70. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2011.06.001.
Chouinard, Yvon, and Vincent Stanley. 2012. The Responsible Company. Ventura, CA: Patagonia Books.
Christian, Scott. 2016. “Fast Fashion Is Absolutely Destroying the Planet.” Esquire. Esquire. November 14. http://www.esquire.com/style/news/a50655/fast-fashion-environment/.
Claudio, Luz. 2007. “Waste Couture: Environmental Impact of the Clothing Industry.” Environmental Health Perspectives. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. September. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1964887/.
Conca, James. 2015. “Making Climate Change Fashionable – The Garment Industry Takes On Global Warming.” Forbes. Forbes Magazine. December 3. http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2015/12/03/making-climate-change-fashionable-the-garment-industry-takes-on-global-warming/#361e3750778a.
Darnall, Nicole, Irene Henriques, and Perry Sadorsky. 2008. “Do Environmental Management Systems Improve Business Performance in an International Setting?” Journal of International Management 14 (4): 364–76. doi:10.1016/j.intman.2007.09.006.
“End Fast Fashion.” 2016. Zady. Zady. March 9. https://zady.com/features/end-fast-fashion.
“Environmental Impact of the Clothing Industry | Ecology Global Network.” 2011. Ecology Global Network. Ecology Global Network. November 25. http://www.ecology.com/2010/11/02/environmental-impact-clothing-industry/.
EPA. 1993. “RCRA Post-Closure Permits. RCRA Information Brief,” January. doi:10.2172/10133342.
EPA. 2015. “Advancing Sustainable Materials Management:” Environmental Protection Agency, June.
EPA. 2016. “Typical Wastes Generated by Industry Sectors.” EPA. Environmental Protection Agency. Accessed November 9. https://www.epa.gov/hwgenerators/typical-wastes-generated-industry-sectors.
“FACT SHEET: U.S. Reports Its 2025 Emissions Target to the UNFCCC.” 2015. The White House. The United States Government. March 31. https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/03/31/fact-sheet-us-reports-its-2025-emissions-target-unfccc.
“Fixing the Fashion Industry.” 2016. NRDC. NRDC. January 5. https://www.nrdc.org/stories/fixing-fashion-industry.
Hopwood, Jennifer. n.d. “Are Neonicotinoids Killing Bees?” Are Neonicotinoids Killing Bees? http://www.xerces.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Are-Neonicotinoids-Killing-Bees_Xerces-Society1.pdf.
Huq, Md Mazaharul, Sobur Ahmed, Taslima Tabassum, Md. Rubel Miah, and Chandan Chakraborty. 2013. “Analysis Of The Causes And Impacts Of Water Pollution Of Buriganga River: A Critical Study.” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC &Amp; TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH 2 (9): 245–52.
Hustvedt, Gwendolyn, and Marsha A. Dickson. 2009. “Consumer Likelihood of Purchasing Organic Cotton Apparel.” Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal 13 (1): 49–65. doi:10.1108/13612020910939879.
Jaganathan, Dr. Venkatesh, Priyesh Cherurveettil, Aarthy Chellasamy, and Dr. M.S. Premapriya. 2014. “ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION RISK ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT IN TEXTILE INDUSTRY: A PREVENTIVE MECHANISM.” European Scientific Journal 2 (September).
Joung, Hyun-Mee. 2013. “Fast-Fashion Consumerism & Post-Purchase Behaviours.” International Journal of Retail &Amp; Distribution Management 42 (8): 688–97. doi:10.1108/ijrdm-03-2013-0055.
Kang, Jiyun, Chuanlan Liu, and Sang-Hoon Kim. 2013. “Environmentally Sustainable Textile and Apparel Consumption: the Role of Consumer Knowledge, Perceived Consumer Effectiveness and Perceived Personal Relevance.” International Journal of Consumer Studies 37 (4): 442–52. doi:10.1111/ijcs.12013.
Karba, Stephanie. 2016. “Microfiber Pollution,” 1–105. Accessed November 25. http://brenmicroplastics.weebly.com/uploads/5/1/7/0/51702815/bren-patagonia_final_report.pdf.
Kollmuss, Anja, and Julian Agyeman. 2002. “Mind the Gap: Why Do People Act Environmentally and What Are the Barriers to pro-Environmental Behavior?” Environmental Education Research 8 (3): 239–60. doi:10.1080/13504620220145401.
Kozar, Joy M., and Kim Y. Hiller Connell. 2013. “Socially and Environmentally Responsible Apparel Consumption: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviors.” Social Responsibility Journal 9 (2): 315–24. doi:10.1108/srj-09-2011-0076.
Matthews, Adam. 2016. “The Environmental Crisis in Your Closet.” Newsweek. Newsweek. April 13. http://www.newsweek.com/2015/08/21/environmental-crisis-your-closet-362409.html.
Mcneill, Lisa, and Rebecca Moore. 2015. “Sustainable Fashion Consumption and the Fast Fashion Conundrum: Fashionable Consumers and Attitudes to Sustainability in Clothing Choice.” International Journal of Consumer Studies 39 (3): 212–22. doi:10.1111/ijcs.12169.
Morgan, Andrew, dir. 2015. The True Cost. Untold Creative, LLC.
Morgan, Louise R., and Grete Birtwistle. 2009. “An Investigation of Young Fashion Consumers’ Disposal Habits.” International Journal of Consumer Studies 33 (2): 190–98. doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00756.x.
Myer, Melody. 2016. “Dig Deeper.” Rodale Institute. Rodale Institute. Accessed December 5. http://rodaleinstitute.org/chemical-cotton/.
O’Connor, Mary Catherine. 2016. “Patagonia’s New Study Finds Fleece Jackets Are a Serious Pollutant.” Outside Online. June 20. http://www.outsideonline.com/2091876/patagonias-new-study-finds-fleece-jackets-are-serious-pollutant.
Ryan, Peter, Julia Reisser, Marcus Eriksen, Laurent C. M. Lebreton, Henry S. Carson, and Martin Thiel. 2014. “Plastic Pollution in the World’s Oceans: More than 5 Trillion Plastic Pieces Weighing over 250,000 Tons Afloat at Sea.” Plastic Pollution in the World’s Oceans: More than 5 Trillion Plastic Pieces Weighing over 250,000 Tons Afloat at Sea. PLOS. December 10. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0111913
Treinish, Gregg. 2015. “Fleece to Food: Explorer Gregg Treinish on Microplastics.” National Geographic Society . National Geographic Society . August 12. http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2015/08/10/fleece-to-food-explorer-gregg-treinish-on-microplastics/.
“Typical Wastes Generated by Industry Sectors.” 2016. EPA. Environmental Protection Agency. October 6. https://yosemite.epa.gov/osw/rcra.nsf/ea6e50dc6214725285256bf00063269d/fa81a677177d858985257d170057beae!OpenDocument.
Westwood, Rosemary. 2014. “What Does That $14 Shirt Really Cost? – Macleans.ca.” Macleans.ca. April 24. http://www.macleans.ca/economy/business/what-does-that-14-shirt-really-cost/.
“Why Textile Waste Should Be Banned From Landfills.” 2015. Triple Pundit: People, Planet, Profit. Triple Pundit: People, Planet, Profit. February 7. http://www.triplepundit.com/2012/01/textile-waste-be-banned-landfills/.
Wicker, Alden. 2016. “The Earth Is Covered in the Waste of Your Old Clothes.” Newsweek. Newsweek. September 21. http://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/09/old-clothes-fashion-waste-crisis-494824.html.
Yan, Jack. 2002. “Corporate Responsibility and the Brands of Tomorrow.” Journal of Brand Management 10 (4): 290–302. doi:10.1057/palgrave.bm.2540125.
