planned obsolescence

Built to Break: Making a Circular Economy Calls for Repair Economics / October 17, 2025 by Nina Gbor

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.

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.

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 is from Syracuse University and has a passion for sustainable solutions and circular economics.

The fashion TRENDmill explained / January 11, 2024 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.

Resolving the waste crisis / January 5, 2022 by Nina Gbor

Eco Styles Nina Gbor CharityBay Sidewalk furniture 1 — Image credit: Chantel Bann

I was out on a walk the other day and spotted a ‘FREE’ sign in front of someone’s house above a couple of art frames, a lamp, clothes rack, mirror, a chair and some books. It’s pretty common to see household items on the sidewalk, free for passers-by to take. I’ve come across everything from sofas to tvs, suitcases, washing machines, clothes, printers, desks, electronics and even fresh fruit.

I found out about a community Facebook group called Street Bounty Inner West where locals in a suburb can post reusable items they see in the street for anyone to pick up. The group aims to “promote the recycling and reuse of materials, keeping kerbs cleaner, landfill emptier and wallets fuller.” Movements like this divert so much stuff from going to landfills. However, sometimes these items can get damaged on the sidewalk by exposure to weather conditions: rain, extreme sun and wind. And/or eventually still end up in landfill if nobody takes it.

Images credit top row L to R: Kimberly Scott, Fi Paskulich, Anna Bailey, Obaydah Vetter. Second row L to R: Nicky Lewis, Sarah Bea, Carolyn Veg Ienna and Vanessa Jimenez.

The world’s waste

According to The World Counts, the world dumps 2.12 billion tonnes of waste each year. If it were all put on trucks, it would stretch around the earth 24 times! Part of the reason why this figure is so high is that 99% of the stuff we purchase is trashed within 6 months. According to the World Bank, global waste is expected to grow to 3.40 billion tonnes by 2050. A huge majority of the world’s waste is generated by countries in the global North like Australia, the US, the UK, and Canada.

According to Australia’s National Waste Report 2020, Australians generated around 74.1 million tonnes of waste in 2018-19 (this includes household waste, organics, masonry materials and ash). Community efforts like Street Bounty that salvage household waste from landfills by donating to random strangers are a noble act. Many movements like this are doing fantastic work in tackling the waste problem but they can only capture a tiny fraction of the overall waste that exists.

Planned obsolescence

It’s fair to say that planned obsolescence is probably the biggest factor behind the tremendously high amount of waste. It’s a modern capitalist trend that’s been a massive catalyst for manifesting more waste in the last few decades than humanity has ever witnessed. Planned obsolescence is a strategy during manufacture that ensures products are deliberately designed with an artificially limited useful life or designed to eventually slow down or become obsolete. This guarantees that consumers will regularly want to replace these products in the future. The purpose of this strategy is for corporations to gain stable and increased profits. The outcome is a massive increase in waste to landfills and huge greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change and environmental degradation.

Common waste streams

E-waste

Electronic waste (e-waste) is the quickest growing domestic waste stream. On a global scale, we generate over 50 million tonnes of e-waste each year. Only 20% of this is formally recycled. That comes to about 7.3 kilograms per person and the equivalent in weight to 350 cruise ships. The e-waste produced annually is worth over $62.5 billion. A lot of e-waste is toxic and gets exported to poorer countries in the global South where they end up polluting the environment in these countries and also in their landfills.

The average Australian household produces about 73 kg of e-waste a year. With a projection of a global total e-waste increase to 74.7 million tonnes (almost twice the amount of new e-waste in just 16 years). Planned obsolescence is a big feature in the electronics industry.

In 2018, Italy fined Samsung and Apple for purposely slowing down older models of their phones. Their plan was for people to get annoyed with the slowness of their phones to the point where they were forced to buy the newest and much more expensive models.

Furniture waste

With the popularity of flatpack furniture over the last few decades, there’s been a boom in furniture waste. When people are relocating, it can be more convenient to throw away old or damaged furniture instead of repairing or paying to move them to the new location.

Each year, Americans throw out more than 12 million tons of furniture and furnishings, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Only a small percentage is recycled. And in Australia, households dispose of around 24 kg of wooden furniture each year.

Images credit: Bee Yolanda, Clare Marshall, Jobi-Zane Pixus and Tom.

Waste from fashion & textiles

We’re producing about 150 billion garments a year with only 7.8 billion humans. It’s not surprising that 84% of all new clothing produced ends up in landfills each year. Fast fashion is to blame for these alarming figures.

Fast fashion brands through clever marketing amongst other things manipulate consumers into buying new clothes every few days or every week. These clothes usually get thrown out very quickly as trash and a huge portion is exported to countries in the global South where they eventually pollute those environments. Overconsumption is a modern cultural trend that’s detrimental to people and the planet. Fashion trends are one of the things that fuel fashion waste.

Solving the waste crisis

Australia has a national target of recovering 80% of waste by 2030. To make ambitious goals like this in Australia and other countries a reality, we’ll have to do a lot more than sidewalk donations. It’s so necessary to break the planet-destroying linear cycle of stuff that goes from retail to buyer then landfill in less than a year. In spite of planned obsolescence and our behaviours around consumption, many items are still useful and can be repurposed. A couple of ideas:

1. Make profits for yourself and charities

Reselling has always been a phenomenal way to divert waste from landfills and make a profit. However, CharityBay is next level! On this platform, you can do both of these things and help charities at the same time. People can sell items and donate some or all profits to a chosen charity. Imagine if all the stuff abandoned on the street and the useable stuff sent to landfill were resold for charity.

2. Rescue, Reuse, Repair, Repurpose

There are many community groups like the Street Bounty Inner West group that support waste reduction. You might find similar groups through a search on social media platforms. If you can’t find one for your local community then create one.

With a little love, imagination and a makeover, many items have the potential for a magical transformation into something ‘new’, useful and maybe even beautiful. Imagine what our societies would be like if repairing and upcycling were as much a cultural habit as overconsumption?

Image credit: Imran Zainal © Imran’s Ark via iProperty

3. Legislation and policy change

Local community action is very powerful but it’s only one piece of the puzzle. We have to have laws in effect that ban planned obsolescence. And

hold corporations accountable for ensuring durability and lifelong repair guarantee in the products they make
limit the number of goods manufactured to a reasonable number in harmony with planetary resources and product demand / usage
hold corporations accountable if they do not comply with these laws.

♥ Nina Gbor

Eco Styles

Style. Sustainability. Positive Change.