[ad_1]
That’s before you start scrolling through acronyms; Apart from the above, there are GOTS (Global Organic Textile Standard) and CCS (carbon capture and storage) and NFFO (non-fossil fuel imperative) and TPH (total petroleum hydrocarbons). to name a few.
We need a better way to frame the discussion.
That’s why we’re going to use “responsible fashion”: a term that refers to a world where all players, from the consumer to the CEO, to the producer and farmer, take responsibility for their roles in the supply chain and creative process. and for the choices they make.
It may sound plausible, but it’s the difference between a seemingly impossible, perhaps discouraging, unattainable end goal, and the process of at least trying to get there: step-by-step, step-by-step increase, decision decision.
Because there is no simple answer to unraveling fashion’s role in climate change. Even the most obvious – don’t make or buy new things and throw away old things – have negative implications for employment, know-how and self-identification. (After all, since people understand themselves as “the self,” they dress up to express themselves.) Whichever side of the equation we are on, the most important issue for each of us is thinking. and understanding the implications of the choices we make so we can do better in the future.
And perhaps even seeing these challenges as creative opportunities rather than burdens. Especially for brands. Oftentimes, limitations lead to new ways of thinking and designing.
To bring to life what this means when it comes to clothing – especially as we start coming into the world after two years of semi-hibernation and rethinking sleeper wardrobes – we bring you stories of a bunch. smaller brands and manufacturers as we try to act responsibly, weigh the trade-offs involved, and make choices that balance a positive outcome, not zero.
[ad_2]
Source link