circularity

Built to Break: Making a Circular Economy Calls for Repair Economics by Nina Gbor

Photo by Bulat369

When your toaster breaks, you probably go out to buy a new one. It’s easier, cheaper, and usually the only option. Replacing your toaster contributes 18 kilograms of CO2 to the atmosphere. 

When your jeans develop a hole, you go and buy a new pair. You probably are not patching them yourself. According to a lifecycle assessment by the United Nations Environmental Programme, this single pair of denim contributes 33.4 kilograms of carbon equivalent to the atmosphere. Making this new pair of jeans uses 3,718 litres of water

Looking beyond toasters, Australia generated 511,000 tonnes of e-waste in 2019, of which the majority is not recovered. Including all waste types, Australia generated an estimated 75.6 million tonnes (Mt) of waste in the 2022-2023 fiscal year.. In 2018, the United States sent 37,410,000 tonnes of durable goods, products with a lifetime of three years or more, to the landfill. 

These numbers are not to shame the urge to remain stylish or guilt for wanting toasted bread, but to show how things are and raise the question of how things could be. Instead of tossing and replacing these toasters and jeans, a circular economy with a focus on repair and reuse offers us the opportunity to extend the lifecycle of our items.  

The habit of throwing away and replacing our stuff represents our present linear economy. This capitalist model rewards companies building items designed to fail, leading to companies favoring profit over people, planet, and progress. This is a concept called planned obsolescence. These products with a designed and predetermined lifespan include electronic devices, cellphones, appliances, toys, books, furniture, clothing, and nearly every manufactured product. No matter how well you take care of an item, it is built with a limited lifespan and designed to fail. 

Shorter buy-again windows mean companies are selling the same product more frequently to repeat customers, increasing yearly profits. When products are cheaper to replace than they are to repair, it is a no-brainer why people choose to simply buy the product again. 

Apple is an example of a company that sees record sales as a result of its planned obsolescence in its iPad, iPhone, and Mac products. As highlighted in multiple lawsuits and federal hearings in the United States, Apple has acknowledged that it builds devices with deteriorating battery lives, meaning consumers will have to either struggle with their old model or pay to upgrade after just a few years. 

Not limited to Apple or even cellphones, the furniture giant Ikea has committed to reforming its entire value chain following a long history of environmental and quality complaints around products that uphold the definition of planned obsolescence. This intentional design failure is embedded in nearly all products, and it is catastrophic for the Earth.

Source: Amadori, F. B., Felta, L., Fernandez, A. R., Simeoni, F., & Vehanen, T. (2020, September 28). Planned Obsolescence and the Lifespan of Electronics. Infragraphy. https://blogs.aalto.fi/mediainfrastructures/2020/09/28/planned-obsolescence-and-the-lifespan-of-electronics/

The solution to this model is to bend the line into a circle, creating a circular economy. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation defines the circular economy as a system in which materials never become waste, and there is a greater emphasis placed on regenerating nature. In this circular system, products and materials are not sent to landfill, and instead remain in circulation through processes like maintenance, reuse, refurbishment, remanufacture, recycling, and composting

The circular economy’s core pillars are circular design, reuse of materials, and regeneration. Focusing on circular design means that products are built for repair, reuse, repurposing, and remanufacturing. Repair is the antidote to the waste crisis created by planned obsolescence. In challenging companies’ overproduction practices, we create better products, greatly reducing new manufacturing. In tandem, repair becomes cheaper, easier, and more accessible

Source: van Ewijk, S., & Stegemann, J. (2023). THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY. In An Introduction to Waste Management and Circular Economy (pp. 306–348). UCL Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.4350575.17

Repair is one of the most crucial aspects of the circular economy that receives the least amount of utilisation. A repair economy helps to bend the line by reducing new manufacturing and extending the lifespan of products. There is power in repurposing and repairing an item, and it also makes a consumer’s connection to their stuff more personal, further enhancing the desire to repair rather than replace. 

A focus on repair also means slower depletion of natural resources, less biodiversity loss, smaller quantities of pollution, and even the potential for natural areas to regenerate. When a landfill is filled, it contaminates nearby soil and water, leaches into the local environment, disrupts avian migration patterns, poses a significant threat to both physical and environmental health when toxic materials are not properly disposed of, and has a laundry list of other negative impacts. Slowing the rate of waste sent to landfills means fewer raw materials are taken from our natural world, and the negative impacts of landfills are reduced. 

The environmental benefits of repair quickly stack. If one-fifteenth of American households were to extend the expected 15-year lifespan of their refrigerators by only one year with stronger repair infrastructure, some 2.95 million tonnes of CO2 would be spared from entering the atmosphere. This is the amount of emissions released by the entire New York City urban area, 790 square km and over eight million people, in just about 6 days. The environmental cost to manufacture one refrigeration unit is around 350 kg of CO2. Reducing emissions is not controlled by an on or off switch, but we create wins by tackling small victories at once. 

The biggest struggle of the repair movement is cost and convenience. Currently, LG Electronics’ Flat-Rate Repair Program for a refrigerator starts at USD 399, while a new 420L bottom freezer and fridge costs USD 891. When a product needs repair, consumers begin to see the end of its life. With the repair cost being just under half the cost of a new refrigerator unit, it often makes replacing more appealing or logical than repairing the unit. Additionally, it is simply easier and more convenient to replace a product than to find a qualified and available repairperson. 

Repair has monumental potential, but policy failure challenges its success. In many places, a personal or professional attempt at repair often voids a product's warranty, if it has one. In response to corporate hostility against repairs, the right to repair movement has emerged across the world, aiming to pass legislation that protects consumers as they seek out repairs and enforces cooperation from firms in making these repairs successful. 

Photo by KC Shum

Many nations, like the United States, do not have a nationwide right to repair law. The United Kingdom and Australia have selective right-to-repair legislation, largely limited to motor vehicles, failing to include household electronics or clothing. Australia’s restrictive right to repair legislation is limited to the automotive industry and requires vehicle service and repair information to be available for purchase at a fair market price. Although not progressive enough, if it can be done for automobiles, the same legislation can be used as a model in other repairable industries. 

In 2024, the European Union finally passed a largely encompassing Right to Repair legislation, providing increased protection and resources for consumers to opt to repair instead of being forced to replace. The legislation requires manufacturers to provide repair information, supply spare parts at reasonable cost, and repair products, even if a company’s warranty has lapsed for the product.

France was the first country to pass Extended Producer Responsibility legislation applicable to clothes and textiles. This legislation requires companies subject to the law to finance the management and prevention of the end-of-life of products that they put on the market. Made possible through an “eco-tax,” France’s partner in EPR uses this tax for collection, sorting, treatment management, eco-modulations, a repair fund, and a reuse fund. This tax and legislation limit the landfill impact of textiles and clothing. This repair fund sets aside €154 million between 2023 and 2028, allowing consumers who visit a participating repair shop to claim back between €6 and €25 towards the cost of their repairs. France’s progressive repair legislation sets the standard for other national repair laws and demonstrates that advocacy for repair legislation works.

With intensifying climate regulations coupled with right-to-repair movements, companies must take accountability for their role in creating waste while finding ways of making profits as they transition to circular business. By designing quality products with repair in mind, businesses can offer services for their products and diversify revenue streams. Additionally, companies can begin to design platforms and spaces where consumers can resell their products. 

In 2012, Patagonia began solving this repair puzzle through its Worn Wear program, and also powers iFixit to educate consumers on at-home repairs and product care. A commitment to repair and high-quality products has given Patagonia a committed consumer base who are willing to pay more for this service and their products.  

Photo by Luba Glazunova

Nudie Jeans is another company that wins consumers with a lifetime guarantee of free repairs. The denim company understands its products will not last forever, regardless of how well its jeans are made. They meet consumers' needs and offer free repairs, so the life of the garment is extended by years. 

It will take some time to create a system that’s more circular. It is challenging to know where to begin with such an enormous issue; however, we can start by supporting local craftspeople. Find a local seamstress to patch your jeans, discover a local repairsperson to take a crack at your toaster. Save the atmosphere from the carbon emissions and minimise waste to landfill by repairing products when possible instead of replacing them. 

Make circular actions a regular part of your lifestyle. Swap or trade items with your friends. When possible, purchase the variety of products you use from second-hand stores. Visit repair cafes, repair shops, join or host mending circles, and host and attend swaps. These choices are not just environmental: they are community and financial investments. Each of these solutions bring us a little closer to a more circular society. 

To more fully bend the linear economy into a circle, we need systems change via policy and legislation. This means, for example, campaigning for laws that eliminate planned obsolescence, right-to-repair policies, product repair schemes and rebates. Similar legislation can be created for other circular solutions. We can bring this system into effect by contacting our local and federal representatives to push these issues forward and request change. Share information about these issues to your groups, communities and neighbourhoods while encouraging advocacy actions to support systems change. This way, we will have as many people as possible coming together to form a circle. 


Article by Tyler Branigan. Tyler has a passion for sustainable solutions and circular economics.

Policies and initiatives to help save the Australian fashion industry for future generations by Nina Gbor

Nina Gbor Joanna Cheng Eco Styles upcycling 1

We recently had Joanna visit our office. Joanna received the Young Creator of the Year Award for demonstrating strong creativity and leadership through her self-initiated school club, Passion for Fashion Fridays. She mentors younger students in upcycling textiles into functional and stylish art pieces. Her commitment to sustainability and community engagement underpins her long-term goal of opening a business that teaches others to repurpose clothing into meaningful, eco-friendly creations.

Joanna brought an terrific upcycled art piece she made with fishes made from a mix of discarded textiles. It’s inspiring to see Joanna’s hard work, talent and her dreams for the future. She could potentially make a real impact in textiles circularity. She is currently deciding which tertiary institution to further develop her skills in hope of a successful career in her future.

I had to caution her about the lack of sufficient jobs in Australian textiles industry. Every week I mentor a couple of people who is either a young person or adult wanting to have a career in the sustainable fashion space. Fashion is one of the top career choices for teenagers and young people in general. Sadly, the lack of sufficient and varied career opportunities is a real bug bear.

Many Australian clothing brands have had to close their doors in the last few years. I’m still in the process of ascertaining a more precise number but it’s a lot. Ultra-fast fashion and conventional fast fashion have played a big role in some of this but they’re not the only reason. We need This is one of the reasons I’ve been strongly advocating for reform in the industry. It’s the protection of Australian textiles businesses and also incubating the talent and dreams of young people.

The industry is currently worth $28 billion to the national economy and can potentially escalate to $38 billion dollars within a decade with the right reform and support from the federal government. This progress would mean not only more jobs but a broader array in the nature of jobs in the industry to accommodate young people like Joanna and others.

With over 300,000 tonnes of textiles discarded each year, we can invest in scaling reuse, repairs, mending, upcycling, repurposing, renting and recycling. As one of the wealthiest countries in the world, an investment into research and development towards recycling textiles could see all existing and innovations and scaling of all textile recycling capabilities in Australia. This would be a boost to the economy, even more jobs and keeping all the materials in the circularity loop which is important for the environment. Ultimately this will be a triple win for us.

Here are some of the existing government programs that can boost the textiles industry:

  • The $900 million investment of the Albanese Labor Government into the new National Productivity Fund is part of an initial step towards “delivering broader ‘right to repair’ reforms – driving down repair costs, increasing business opportunities and reducing wastage by removing barriers to competition for repairs….”

  • With Australia being one of the biggest consumers of clothing in the world per capita and one of the most wasteful, it’s fortunate that we also have the Recycling Modernisation Fund (RMF). This is a $200 million national initiative for the expansion of Australia’s capacity to sort, process and remanufacture glass, plastic, tyres, paper and cardboard. Textiles can be added to the RMF. The Albanese government is looking towards new and upgraded recycling infrastructure through the RMF.

  • Other government programs that can support a textiles industry include the Future Made in Australia, which has $22.7 billion private sector investment over a 10-year period to help Australia build a stronger and more resilient economy.

  • There’s also an Advanced Manufacturing program which is a $1.6 billion accelerator fund for to enable development of more complex domestic manufacturing industries using cutting-edge technologies and innovative processes to improve existing manufacturing operations and create new products. This could potentially suit 3-D printing initiatives, blockchain, textile software operations, chemical textile recycling and other areas.

  • A new program designed to cater to the development of an Australian textiles industry with necessary investments and nuanced support can also be created by the government. However, we need to advocate for it, loudly and persistently. Think of all the young people like Joanna whose dreams depend on it.

Article by Nina Gbor

The Halloween waste economy; creating a more circular and sustainable Halloween by Nina Gbor

Halloween waste sustainable Halloween Nina Gbor 1

Image credit: Nikola Johnny Mirkovic

Halloween is gradually becoming synonymous with waste with its rituals of single-use costumes, party kits and other paraphernalia. Overconsumption and excessive waste levels can be high at any given time of the year; however, holidays like Halloween spike the charts of environmental degradation. Australia, the US, and the UK are big-time celebrating Halloween with the usual accoutrements of costumes, food, decorations, and candy/sweets.

In a Halloween waste article last year, we wrote more in depth about the economic and environmental categories of the holiday celebrations. Here's an update on Halloween spending in these countries for 2024:

Australia is set to spend A$450 million (approximately USD 296 million or £228 million). 21% of Australians are celebrating Halloween, and each celebrant will spend an average of A$93 ($61 USD or £47), according to the Australian Retail Association and Roy Morgan.

The US is set to spend USD 11.6 billion (approximately A$17.6 billion or £8.9 billion). 72% of Americans are celebrating with an average $104 USD spent per person (A$158 or £80), based on data from the National Retail Federation.

The UK is set to spend £776 million (approximately A$1.5 billion or $1 billion USD). 58% of Brits are celebrating to an average of £25 per person (A$50 or $39 USD) according to Finder.

Australia

The Halloween categories Australians will have spent on this year, according to Roy Morgan and the Australian Retail Association, include:

•         Trick or treating - 45%

•         Treats for trick-or-treaters – 38%

•         Halloween costumes – 37%

•         Home decorations - 32%

•         Attending or hosting – 18%

The USA

The 2024 Halloween spending in the US from the National Retail Federation are:

  • Costumes - $3.8B (USD)

  • Decorations - $3.8B

  • Candy - $3.5B

  • Greeting cards - $0.5B.

The UK

Halloween spending in the UK quadrupled in the last ten years since 2013 to about £1 billion. According to Mirror UK, the biggest Halloween purchases in 2024 were:

•         Plastic-wrapped sweets – 85%

•         Decorations – 74%

•         Costumes – 70%.

Halloween’s toll on the environment

While these figures may be gold for some aspects of the economy on the surface and also the retail sector, they are a tragedy for the environment. These high surges in holiday product sales result in enormous plastic, paper, food and other material waste. For instance, 46 million products, such as decorations and costumes, are thrown out each year in the UK. But there is hope. By choosing sustainable alternatives, we can significantly reduce this waste.

Costumes and physical health

83% of Halloween costumes are made with non-recyclable, oil-based plastics, so they will likely end up in landfill. They are often made with the cheapest and poor-quality polyester, nylon and acrylic materials. They are designed through a planned obsolescence strategy with a single-use intention. These store-bought costumes usually release microplastics into the air and shed microplastics if washed. Another disconcerting fact is that more than 63% of plastic Halloween costumes can take hundreds of years to decompose. And only 1% of these costumes and the materials they comprise are recycled. With the US spending $3.8 billion USD on costumes and 37% of Australia's Halloween spending going to costumes, plus 70% of the UK's Halloween purchasing also going to costumes, the costume waste from these countries alone will be outrageous.

According to a 2024 textiles waste report by The Australia Institute, Australia is the biggest consumer of clothing in the world per capita. Australia also happens to be one of the world's biggest consumers of single-use plastics per capita, according to a plastic waste makers index by the Minderoo Foundation. However, these statistics also present an opportunity for change. By rethinking our approach to Halloween, we can significantly impact Australia's environmental footprint.

Toxic chemicals from the materials used in Halloween costumes are a terrifying fact about the holiday.  Harmful chemicals such as PFAS, phthalates, BPA, lead and cadmium are found on products made by many costume and fast fashion suppliers. The accumulation of these chemicals in the body can lead to heart, liver and kidney problems, infertility, congenital disabilities, migraines, skin irritations, endocrine disruption and other ailments. Scientists found twenty times the amount of lead that's considered safe in a toddler jacket made by the ultra-fast fashion brand Shein. Lead is known to affect the brain and nervous system as well as create intellectual inabilities, behavioural disorders and other developmental problems in children. Children's clothing with Disney characters had to be recalled 2022 by a company called the Bentex Group for containing high amounts of lead.

Food

According to Hubbub, in 2023, 15.8 million pumpkins were set to go to waste during Halloween in the UK, which is the equivalent of 95 million meals ending up in the bin.  

In Australia, 7.6 million tonnes of food are wasted in a year. Holiday rituals are typically highly wasteful, and Halloween waste could potentially contribute to food waste as an increasing number of Australians are celebrating the holiday (currently, 21%).

It’s been reported that almost 2 billion pounds of pumpkins are produced in the US each year, with more than 1.3 billion pounds of pumpkins thrown away based on information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The US will also spend USD $3.5 billion on candy and sweets this year. Some of it might go to waste but it will lead to increased plastics pollution because many candy wrappers are made of plastic.

Plastic

In addition to costumes, tremendous plastic waste accompanies Halloween celebrations, such as popular trick-or-treat buckets with the jack-o-lantern image used by many children and the barrage of ‘landfill fillers’ single-use, disposable party cutlery, plates, and cups.

Creating a more circular and sustainable Halloween

However, there are ways to enjoy the holiday without polluting the planet or making it another annual waste disaster.

1. Adopt a circularity mindset

First and foremost, with all holiday celebrations, adopt a mindset that EVERYTHING you purchase or use for holiday celebrations must be something you can and will use again. And at worst, be recyclable.

2. Halloween costume swap

Instead of buying brand new costumes yearly, people can host costume clothes swaps in their schools, homes, neighbourhoods and social groups. This reduces the flow of costumes to landfill and high levels of toxic chemicals from brand-new costumes. Swapping can also include costumes from activities such as book week.

3. Decorate a reusable bag or create a reusable Halloween bag

The world uses around 5 trillion plastic bags a year. Australia alone uses 6.9 billion plastic bags a year, of which 3.6 billion are plastic shopping bags, while Americans use an average of 365 plastic bags per person per year.

Halloween is an opportunity to get into the habit of reusable bags by painting a reusable bag in your favourite holiday look and colours. Alternatively, you can repurpose a pillowcase or tie together an old t-shirt.

4. DIY Costumes

Search online for easy, fun Halloween costumes you can make with friends, alone or with children. Costume-making can be an exciting social activity that people enjoy. Use platforms like TikTok, YouTube, Instagram and Facebook for ideas and inspiration. There can be a level of pride and confidence in children making their own costumes.

5. Shop secondhand

Diverting reusable stuff from landfill is a purposeful act. Before you hit the conventional online and in-person retail spots for holiday stuff, check out the secondhand stores first. You might even have local online neighbourhood groups such as Buy, Sell, and Swap groups on Facebook or other preloved platforms such as Craigslist, Gumtree, Marketplace, etc.

6. Compost, preserve or store food

Whether it’s leftover party food, candy, sweets or pumpkin flesh from your carved jack-o-lantern, you can freeze, refrigerate, compost, or even donate leftover food to charity to prevent it from becoming waste.

7. Hire, borrow or rent disposable party gear and utensils

Search for party kit hire places in your local area or online to prevent buying new, disposable stuff. Considering the items will only be used for a single holiday celebration, it’s possibly not worth buying brand new.  

Article by Nina Gbor

The fashion TRENDmill explained by Nina Gbor

Nina Gbor wearing a secondhand ensemble with items from an op shop and consignment store acquired in 2017 and 2019. Image credit: Pepper Street Photography

I've been into sustainable fashion since I was 15 years old - wearing, promoting, styling and living the preloved lifestyle. This was long before sustainable fashion was a global movement and long before the term ‘sustainable fashion’ was a buzz word for nearly every brand and flocks of influencers. I abhorred fashion trends from a young age. I couldn’t understand why so many people clung tenaciously to a made-up reality where everyone is expected to wear the same trending styles of clothing until the dictators of fashion decided it was time to decree the next short-lived trend. This is fashion’s Jedi mind trick.

The fashion industry

In 2019, the size of the global apparel and footwear market was $1.9 trillion USD. It’s been projected to reach $3.3 trillion dollars by 2030. Several reasons exist as to why this industry is so lucrative. There’s the craftmanship, art, design, creativity, skills, beauty, artisanry and of course practicality that leads to the production of items that we love and find useful. In many instances, most or perhaps even all of these talents deserve to garner significant profits. But then there’s the dark side of the industry that has been inducing tremendous profits through atrocious practices. This side has been thriving on extreme capitalism with no concern for humans, animals nor the planet. The sole purpose is to amass huge profits at all costs. This is why we currently have 100 – 150 billion garments being manufactured each year, with only an estimated 8 billion humans to use them. It’s unsurprising that about 87% of items manufactured each year end up in landfill or incinerated.  

Where fashion trends went wrong

This unchecked, environmentally degrading side of fashion has been able to grow and thrive so expeditiously in part due to the use of fashion trends. For probably about a century, following fashion trends was a significant part of social culture and clothing. It was portrayed in different forms. Fashion collections produced by brands have traditionally been designed and manufactured based on the four western weather seasons of Spring, Summer, Fall and Winter. The trends generally adhered to this as well. Fast fashion hijacked and exacerbated the idea of trends and took it from about 4 trend cycle collections a year, to about 110 trend and microtrend collections a year. Naturally the time from one trend to the next decreased in the process. This is one of the factors that lead to over 100 billion garments being manufactured each year. Not to mention the tsunami of environmental and social justice issues from this overproduction and overconsumption.

Fashion’s environmental and social injustice issues

For too many decades, the grody side of the fashion industry has been using clever big-budget advertising, marketing, influencers and celebrities, to successfully manipulate people into feeling that they’re not enough unless they’re wearing the latest fashion trends. They’ve been able to control this aspect of social culture and use it to catapult their profits by somehow coercing many people to consistently buy apparel they don’t need. This is all in the name of aspiring to fit into this warped system that requires allegiance to whatever is trending in the moment.

With more trends being put out each year, planned obsolescence by clothing brands has become rampant. This means clothes are being designed for limited use with shorter life spans so that consumers are forced or encouraged to repeat purchases because the initially purchased items are not durable. The garments made by many fashion brands are increasingly being made from cheaper, poorer quality materials such as polyester. When something is damaged, it’s often less costly to buy a new one than to repair it. Products made in this manner very often end up in landfill in relatively short periods of time. In other words, these clothes are made to be disposable. This is the take-make-waste system that exists in fashion and several other industries.

The cost of the trends

The environmental damage from this excessive oversupply occurs at scale through deforestation, ocean and freshwater pollution, destruction of ecosystems and animal habitats, desertification, toxic chemical loading in soil and water bodies, etc. UN Climate Change states that annually, 1.2 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases are emitted from textiles production. By some calculations, sector emissions are projected to increase by more than 60% by 2030. In addition to that, there’s the devastating problem of modern slavery where garment workers are exploited, abused and drastically underpaid so that brands can make extreme profits. According to the 2022 Ethical Fashion Report conducted by The World Baptist Aid, 60 million people work in the global fashion industry. To give context to the general nature of social injustice and inequality in the industry, only 10% of companies surveyed in the report could show evidence of paying liveable wages to garment workers.

The personal style con

In the last few years, mainstream fashion began to drop the habit and promotion of following fashion trends. Embracing one’s own personal style became the thing to do. At the outset this shift appeared very positive for the environment and consumers alike. However, it didn't take long for fast fashion to find a way to also capitalise on the personal style wave by getting people to 'find or express their personal style' through constantly buying lots of fast fashion.

The shocking and sad truth is that following fashion trends never stopped. It simply changed form. OVERCONSUMPTION HAS BECOME THE LONGSTANDING TREND. In fact, overconsumption is our modern cultural trend. We’re consuming 400% more clothing than we did 20 years ago, while the length of time we use the garments has fallen by almost 40%. It’s no longer only about buying trends and microtrends to fit in with everyone else and the culture. Now the normal thing is to just buy stuff period because it’s easy, cheap or convenient to do so, then throw it away when you’re bored with it. And then buy other brand new stuff again and repeat the cycle. Fast fashion has made clothes more affordable than ever before.

The fashion TRENDmill explained

The fashion TRENDmill (or fashion treadmill) is a phrase I came up with in 2016 to describe this modern culture of mindless overproduction and overconsumption of clothing that has become too common and normalised in our world. With these factors being the trend, this conveyor belt system is fuelled by the continuous take-make-waste linear cycle on steroids.   

We take (extract raw materials or virgin resources from the environment at enormous rates far beyond what we need). Then make (manufacture far more garments than is necessary or will be used). Followed by waste (majority of clothes end up in landfill relatively quickly). Disposability of clothes is embedded and expected in this cycle either through the culture of it or through planned obsolescence. There’s little or no consideration for reusing or prolonging the life of the textiles or the damage the TRENDmill system inflicts on the planet and its inhabitants.  

The TRENDmill and general overconsumption

There’s a very strong throughline of the fashion trendmill concept with other waste streams such as food, furniture, electronics, automobiles, the built environment and hospitality.

We’re consuming more products than we ever have in human history. Nearly A$66 trillion worth of stuff is being purchased every year globally which is the equivalent of an estimated A$2 million per second. These purchases include the gamut of material stuff and possibly services. The world’s use of material resources has increased ten-fold since 1900 and is projected to double again by 2030. It’s been projected that the consumer class will reach 5 billion people by the year 2030, meaning 1.4 billion more people will have discretionary spending power which explains why consumption rates are expected to double unless we get off the TRENDmill.  

We’re consuming our way into our own extinction

With these enormous levels of manufacturing and consumption, environmental degradation is at an all time high. This comes with things like toxic chemical loading on soil and water and extreme plastics pollution. These and other factors have been known to have fatal impacts on human health. As production keeps increasing, it looks as if we’re consuming our way into our own extinction.

A drastic reduction of natural resource use is critical. We need cultures and systems based on environmental sustainability and circular economy principles. There are colossal opportunities for us to stop the rapid flow of materials to landfill and reuse or repurpose these materials instead. And in the process, only take what we need from the earth. It will make our lives healthier, save the lives of animal species, reduce biodiversity loss, give us cleaner water, a healthier planet amongst other benefits.

How to get off the fashion trendmill

We currently have enough clothing on the planet to cater for the next 6 generations of humans. From the start of my sustainable fashion career, I've always talked about ignoring trends in favour of finding and expressing your personal style for the long term through secondhand garments (and not fast fashion). Secondhand clothing includes contemporary styles and clothes from nearly every fashion era dating back almost a century. One of the coolest ways to curate a sustainable wardrobe is to mix and match styles from one or multiple fashion eras to create your own individual style. It’s likely that this one-of-a-kind wardrobe tailored to your preferences will have any or all of these outcomes:

 1. keeping your clothes for longer periods of time because you always look great even with very little effort

2. saving financial resources because you’re buying less brand new stuff

3. evolving to the best or desired version of yourself using secondhand clothes.

Getting off the fashion trendmill helps reduce clothing waste because in a sustainably curated wardrobe, the outfits suit your body, lifestyle and personality. With these aspects fulfilled, hopefully the temptation to consistently buy new clothes or fast fashion all the time can begin to fade or get eliminated altogether.

Getting off the trendmill on a systemic level

Ultimately, we need to implement circular economy principles into textiles and other industries. Things will shift when we change our relationship with clothing and the culture surrounding consumption of other material things. Here's how:

Reuse - restyle, repair, resell, repurpose, buy secondhand, redesign, swap, hire, rent, borrow, upcycle

Buy new from ethical & sustainable brands - (Not brands that greenwash). Patronise brands that are transparent about how many garments they manufacture, their entire supply chain and their manufacturing processes. Also buy from small, local and emerging designers

Advocate for system change - simply by living an authentic sustainable lifestyle when and where you’re able even if you don't proclaim it publicly. You can also gently and kindly nudge your immediate circles and communities into sustainable habits or run community events like clothes or other item swaps that inspire people to action. You can even push for policy and legislation change through your local and federal political representatives.

*Perhaps the most imperative option is for us to shift our focus away from filling our lives with material stuff and ascribing such extreme value to material things. Placing higher value on experiences and more positive developments could be the new and hopefully permanent wave.