This is a blog post example
The first in a series of papers highlights a flawed definition of sustainability in fashion and how unscientific methods and selective implementation hinder meaningful change.
Sustainability in fashion has become an elitist concept in which the interests of the global north define the conversation whilst the global south does not appear to be represented in any of the major sustainability initiatives or groups.
Despite these well-meaning industry efforts, the perceived holistic sustainability benefits do not appear to be trickling down to the producers, some of the least represented and underpaid in fashion’s global value chain. The vast majority of those living below the social foundation are to be found in the global south. Yet not only are their needs not given priority, but the global south does not even appear to be represented in any of the major sustainability initiatives and groups. Nor do Zambian or Burkinabe cotton farmers, Brazilian silk, or Peruvian alpaca farmers appear to be consulted at any of the major fashion weeks or conferences.
This white paper first outlines the definition of sustainability, going back to the roots of origin in the 1987 United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development – also known as the Brundtland Commission – that underpins the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to this day.
It then delves into a critical assessment of how current sustainability claims in fashion deviate from the Brundtland definition and exposes the vast consequences and outcomes resulting from fashion’s failure to meet it.
The first part in the series of papers provides two concrete measures, with three associated action points for policymakers and corporations; the aim of which is to ensure that in meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs, overriding priority is given to meeting the essential needs of the world’s poor.