Ethical Clothing Australia: Insights on what an ethical industry looks like

"Our purpose is to give the faceless a face and the voiceless a voice" -- That was the remarkable opening message that Rachel Reilly, Ethical Clothing Australia National Manager, gave before the start of the panel for the Ethical Clothing Australia Week in Sydney, in partnership with The University of Sydney's Modern Slavery Unit and the Business School's MBA Dimensions Program.

Image supplied by ECA.

Ethical Clothing Australia (ECA) is an accreditation body that collaborates with local textile, clothing, and footwear (TCF) businesses to protect and uphold the rights of Australian garment workers. Their accreditation program maps a business' supply chain from design to dispatch, including initial design, pattern making, cut, make, trim, and all value-adding services.

Each year, ECA hosts a series of events, both virtual and in-person, to commemorate Ethical Clothing Australia Week. Now in its fourth year, it was an opportunity to celebrate the skilled workers in Australia who create and distribute the garments we wear and love. The week also recognised the businesses that have taken action to prove their ethical credentials by becoming Ethical Clothing Australia accredited and raising awareness about the issues regarding unfair worker treatment and different forms of exploitation.

From left to right: Ava Kalinauskas, Ella Spencer, Nina Gbor, Dr James Cockayne. Image credit: Lucie Davies, Ethical Clothing Australia.

This year's program ran from October 7-13, with events hosted in Victoria, New South Wales, and Queensland. In New South Wales' capital city, Sydney, the was called Ethical Clothing Australia Week 2024 x The University of Sydney's Modern Slavery Unit and the Business School's MBA Dimensions Program. The commemoration brought together several ECA member brands, such as The Social Outfit and Citizen Wolf. The NSW Anti-slavery Commissioner, Dr James Cockayne, was also present for the event which had an insightful panel discussion, and many more industry professionals in attendance.

From left to right: John Fields, Heather Chai, Andrew Quinn, Jenny Kruschel, Martijn Boeresma, Sarah Kaine, Carolyn Kitto, Rachel Reilly. Image credit: Lucie Davies, Ethical Clothing Australia.

Moderated by Heather Chai, Director Modern Slavery Unit at The University of Sydney, the panel featured:

• The Hon. Dr Sarah Kaine MLC 

• Jenny Kruschel | TCF National Secretary | CFMEU, Manufacturing Division 

• Associate Professor Martijn Boersma | The University of Sydney 

• Carolyn Kitto OAM | Co-Director | Be Slavery free 

• Andrew Quinn | Director | ABMT Apparel

The panellists shared personal anecdotes from their experiences in the industry, providing a unique perspective on the challenges that still exist and how they can be overcome. 

Image credit: Hermes Riviera

Ethics in the fashion industry

A persistent issue in the fashion industry is the rise of numerous “sustainable” labels with different criteria and definitions. Sustainability is often limited to the effects of clothing on the environment. However, sustainability should not be assessed solely through an environmental lens. The discourse should always include the impact on people, especially industry workers. It defies logic to label anything as “sustainable” if it requires the use of modern slavery to achieve its production goals.

The ethical issues in the fashion industry are extensive: unfair working conditions, extensive hours, forced labour and low pay are just a few of them. To provide some context, Fashion Checker (2023) states that 93% of some of the largest international brands are not paying garment workers a living wage. Besides that, many garment factories do not have the appropriate infrastructure for their workers to be safe and comfortable. Incidents like the 2013 Rana Plaza garment factory building collapse in Bangladesh killed more than 1,000 people died and injured over 2500 people. This greatly impacted the industry, exposing the need for significant changes to guarantee workers’ fundamental human rights and safety.

The fashion industry is considered one of the leading industries responsible for the existence of modern slavery. As a matter of fact, a 2018 report conducted by the Walk Free Foundation revealed that the garment industry is the second largest contributor to modern slavery, with technology being the first. The term modern slavery refers to when an individual is exploited by others for personal or commercial gain either through trickery, coercion, forceful labour or loss of freedom of some nature. Long work hours and correspondingly low wages are common characteristics of modern slavery. Workers are sometimes forced to work extended periods just to buy basic supplies.

According to the International Organisation for Migration’s 2021 study, Global Estimates of Modern Slavery, led by Walk Free, the International Labour Organization and the International Organization for Migration, 27.6 million workers were estimated to be in a situation of forced labour, across the world. These workers were in countries with high and low wealth, economic and developmental levels. According to Walk Free statistics, in 2021, 1.6 out of every 1000 people in Australia were living in modern slavery, meaning 41,000 individuals were living in modern slavery in the country.

The speakers acknowledged how some of these conditions have improved over the years. For example, the Modern Slavery Act (MSA) implemented in Australia in 2019 requires larger companies and other entities to report how they prevent and address modern slavery risks in their operations and supply chains. This notion is supported by 54% of Australians who say they exclusively support brands that are transparent about their supply chains based on a study commissioned by QIC Real Estate.

In addition, more companies have begun to allow maternity leave for their workers, and the International Labor Organization (ILO) adopted a code of practice on safety and health in textiles, clothing, leather, and footwear industries in 2021 to provide guidelines on risk management. Despite this progress, there is still a lot of work to be done, and transparency in the supply chain is one of the most significant barriers to change, significantly since the needs of fashion industry workers have evolved. With over 70% of victims of modern slavery, including forced marriage situations, nearly 30 million are estimated to be women and girls, with a majority of these women working in garment factories that create fast fashion. This equates to 1 in every 130 females (girls and women) around the world falling victim to modern slavery. 

The Fashion Transparency Index (2023) indicates that 99% of major brands and retailers do not publish the number of workers in their supply chains who are paid liveable wages. Many of them still choose not to disclose how they operate. Transparency is the only way for workers to have a voice, not only nationally but also internationally. Harriette Richards in her 2022 paper, Risk, Reporting and Responsibility: Modern Slavery, Colonial Power and Fashion’s Transparency Industry, analysed through the lens of the Modern Slavery Act to discover which fashion brands in Australia had modern slavery in their supply chain with annual revenue from A$0-99 million to A$1 billion and over. She discovered nine brands on the list which had labels such as The Cotton On Group, Country Road Group, Zara, Uniqlo, and THE ICONIC.

Addressing the issues

The panel speakers unanimously underscored the pressing need for more stringent regulations and the enforcement of existing policies. They stressed that local governments should mandate companies to report on every manufacturing activity, monitor the whereabouts of their workers in the production chains, and document their tasks. Additionally, they should focus on minimising existing risks in the workspace and effectively implementing risk management plans.

Governments can also play an essential role in helping sustainable and ethical businesses scale. As Kitto highlighted, the issue with ethical businesses is that they tend to operate at a smaller scale due to more limited resources and high competence from other fast fashion brands. That sometimes prevents them from being able to take on larger projects or clients. Governments can provide the resources to help ethical businesses reach the scale they need to produce at a higher demand.  They can also protect local industries from international concurrence on regional markets. Indeed, one of the principal issues for small ethical brands is that they cannot compete with giant international fast fashion companies that have mastered their cost/benefit ratio by using underpaid labour across the globe to achieve their mass production and artificially low product prices.

Krushel emphasised unions' critical role in providing a collective for workers to defend their rights. They are crucial to re-balance the status inequalities. Without them, workers are isolated and prone to exploitation, especially groups that are already at a high vulnerability status, such as women and refugees.

As consumers and citizens, we hold significant power in promoting responsible consumption by choosing ethical brands. However, despite the general public's concern for these issues, it can be difficult to discern which brands truly adhere to ethical standards. Opting for brands accredited by Ethical Clothing Australia is a reliable way to ensure the brand meets the necessary ethical criteria. Other reputable certifications include B Corp and Bluesign.

Furthermore, one of the most potent actions for the citizens to force the fashion industry to change is boycotting unethical brands such as Zara, H&M, Shein, Temu, Gap, etc. If enough citizens and consumers demand transparency and these brands see their profit margins decrease, there will likely be some form of change. There is a shared responsibility between the citizens and governments to take action for an ethical fashion industry. Individuals can start by making informed personal choices, advocating for change, educating others and demanding ethical clothing regulations from local and federal policymakers.

*Article by Martina Novajas and Maëlys Dunand.

Martina Novajas is passionate about social psychology and marketing, and their role in delivering creative and effective environmental communication strategies.

Maëlys Dunand is interested in combining law and politics for a broader approach to sustainability, as a viable pathway to making the world better for nature, humans and other living things.

ESG Investing (the basics)

ESG investing

ESG investing stands for Environmental Social Governance investing and is also commonly referred to as impact or socially responsible investing. According to Forbes “investing via an ESG fund is an easy way to gain exposure to a number of businesses with ethical practices”. Companies are analyzed based on three main parameters which, as you may be able to guess, are: Environmental, Social, and Governance metrics. Environmental parameters take into account how companies are combating and preparing for climate change through business practices. Environmental efforts could look like emissions reductions, participation in the circular  economy, or regeneration and restoration of nature and sustainability practices. The social aspect explores how companies are integrating diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts into the organization on all levels.  Finally, governance refers to fair and transparent promotion and hiring decisions and accounting practices. Ways that social and governance could manifest is through ethical supply chain practice, human rights compliance, diverse staff and leaders, and accessibility.  

According to Bloomberg Intelligence, ESG assets surpassed $30 trillion in 2022 and are projected to surpass $40 trillion by 2035 making up over 25% of projected assets under management. As ESG’s market share grows, prospective investors need to understand what ESG investments entail.

The quandary of ESG investing

From a bird’s eye perspective, ESG looks ideal because it is a way of growing capital through investment while also not having to sacrifice your moral values in the process. However, one main issue with ESG investing is that there are not universal guidelines as to how a company can be considered compliant with ESG standards. Instead, indexes, NGOs, consulting forms, and even government groups have individual ways of determining the standards for an ESG investment. This in turn causes rating systems to have “incompatible structures” which can disincentivize companies from working to improve practices because it may not have a significant impact on their ratings across the board. The main divergences are the difference in ranking of relative importance of attributes, the difference in measuring indicators of an attribute, and what attributes are considered when determining a ranking. The difference in how indicators were measured created the largest divergence between rating systems. This is problematic because a measurement should be an objective way of understanding a company’s commitment to ESG initiatives.

In order to combat this, the International Sustainability Standards Board, led by the European Union, has produced standardized recommendations to increase the rigor of ESG obligations. After review,  these standards went into effect for annual reporting on January 1, 2024. This is an indicator that despite the current divergence of ranking systems, hopefully in the future ESG rankings and measurements will become more standardized and allow for greater trust in ESG compliant portfolios and companies.

Profitability

Beyond the rating system and impacts, the bottom line for investing will always be profitability. So, the question for prospective investors is: Is ESG investing worth it? In an aggregate study of over 1,000 papers analyzing the relationship between ESG and financial performance, researchers found  57% of corporate studies on climate change documented a positive correlation between ESG and financial performance, 29% found a neutral impact, 9% mixed, and 6% negative. Researchers concluded that sustainability practices are correlated with corporate financial performance because of improved risk management, increased innovation, downside protection in the event of a crisis, and enhancing potential growth over the long-term.  

Due to politicization of the climate crisis, ESG investing has acquired a fair few opponents that see impact investing as a money sink. In reality, ESG investing can provide the opportunity for investors to experience more long-term returns. Companies that integrate ESG principles into their organization have revenues 19% higher than those who do not and experience a 5.79% increase in stock price impact. Additionally, in a study conducted by Bloomberg Intelligence stated that 85% of investors found ESG led to better returns and resilient profiles, consistent with the conclusion of the previous study discussed.

 Investing wisely

For ethical investing, it’s important to use an index that is thorough with their assessment of potential ESG investments. When looking at different ranking systems, it’s essential to look for ones that utilize both positive and negative screening methods meaning they ensure that the company does not partake in ethically and environmentally destructive behavior and that the company has a net positive impact on the world.

World GDP is forecasted to decrease by 18% by 2050 if no climate mitigating measures are taken. With this in mind, even if ESG regulations are not uniform across the board, I believe investing in ESG compliant companies rather than non-compliant companies is wise due to their profitability, positive impact on the world, and resilience.

Article by Ava Albracht. Ava is passionate about sustainable development, fashion, traveling, and media.

How to reduce your fashion waste and environmental impact

Photo by Tamara Bellis

Over recent years the fashion industry has changed drastically; fast-fashion is now leading the growth in clothing consumption with clothing production doubling between 2000 and 2015 whilst the lifetime of the garments is decreasing. Mass produced clothing focusing on fast inventory turnarounds to capture everchanging trends. Let’s talk about figuring out the carbon footprint of your clothing consumption and a few tips for lowering it.  

The circular economy model stems from the idea of keeping resources in a loop to optimise their use and value. The clothing industry is globally one of the most dominant industries and highest value industries due to its product value, employment and market size, and it has doubled in production size in the last two decades. Each year, 150 billion fashion items are produced globally, making the textile sector a considerable polluter with a detrimentally significant carbon footprint that many consumers are unaware of. The carbon footprint of the clothing industry is something that must not be ignored and with the increase in fashion overproduction and overconsumption, it’s necessary to stay informed on ways to curate a sustainable wardrobe that can also be very stylish. Something as simple as "extending the life of clothes by an extra nine months of active use would reduce carbon, water, and waste footprints by around 20-30% each".

What makes up the clothing carbon footprint?

Photo by George Evans

Extraction and manufacturing 

The most significant contributor to the clothing carbon footprint is from the production of clothing fibres, their production requires a substantial amount of water, energy, fertilisers, and land use. As well as this, there is the manufacturing process; consisting of the weaving, dyeing, cutting, and sewing which all use large amounts of energy, chemicals, and also the disposal of the fabric offcuts. With many companies having a global presence and reach, another significant contributor is transportation - the raw materials and the final clothing products often travel extensive distances all around the world. Packaging of the products also contributes to the industry's carbon emissions. 

Consumption impacts

Once the consumer has received their items there is then the energy usage of washing, drying and ironing the clothes. Lastly, when people eventually dispose of the clothing that they no longer want, around 87% globally, goes into landfills despite the clothing still having 70% of its useful life left. Clothing made from synthetics such as Polyester “accumulate in landfills because conventional PET is non biodegradable” which can release harmful additives and microfibres which pollute the land, water and air.

Calculating your carbon footprint 

This might seem daunting but there are many ways you can mitigate your impact and reduce your clothing footprint. To make a start there are many online resources that you can use to calculate your clothing carbon footprint, I would recommend Thredup. It asks you various questions about your clothing consumption and habits and then provides you with tailored suggestions on ways you can reduce your fashion footprint. 

What else can you do?  

• Upcycle your clothes - this includes repurposing clothes such as transforming unwanted clothes into something else and clothes customisation. 

• Support circular fashion - utilise brands that offer schemes where they accept old clothes back and buy second hand items to keep existing clothes in circulation. Ensure that brands with take back schemes are reusing or recycling the clothing in the right ways and not burning them or sending the clothes to landfill. 

• Donate or sell your unwanted clothes - donating and selling your clothes gives them a second life and reduces the demand for brand new items.

• Buy less clothes - when you are wanting to buy a new item question how much you need this or how often you will wear it.

• Trade clothes - swap clothes with friends and family and host and attend clothes swaps. Clothes Swap & Style have free monthly clothes swap events in Sydney, Australia. You can get free tips from them on how to host your own clothes swap.

• Repair your clothes - rather than replacing damaged clothes with minor problems, you can repair them, this extends the life of your garments.

• Rent or borrow clothes - instead of buying new clothes for one off special events you can rent them, it is a fraction of the cost and helps optimise the usage of an item of clothing.

• Educate yourself and others - share your knowledge with friends and family and stay connected with developments in circular fashion. Support sustainable brands - when you need new clothing, support the companies that prioritise sustainability and are making clothes designed for long term wear. You can know if a brand is not greenwashing when they are not transparent about how many garments they manufacture each year and refuse to disclose their information about their supply chain. 

• Avoid fast fashion - Instead you could try shopping for preloved clothing. Fast fashion produces clothing at artificially low costs using unsustainable factors such as modern slavery, planned obsolescence and poor-quality materials. Their low quality encourages short-term wear. These clothing items have also been proven to have toxic chemicals such as pesticides and flame retardants in the manufacturing process which can seriously impact your health as prolonged contact with the skin can absorb the chemicals into your body.

• Restyle your clothes - this is using your creativity to wear one item of clothing in a variety of different ways through layering and accessorising, for different types of occasions which is demonstrated in this article.

Photo by Tamara Bellis

Article by Talisa Sharma. Talisa has a passion for business and enjoys educating and promoting sustainability and carbon friendly initiatives.

Are ecocide laws an antidote for offset and carbon markets?

We need to talk about the travesty that is the carbon credit and offset market. Perhaps ecocide laws might be an antidote to this fallacy.

The irreversible damage done to ecosystems, pollution and biodiversity loss should not be commercialised and traded in a capitalistic way on a market.

It's been reported that the earth is facing its 6th mass extinction driven by human activity, primarily (though not limited to) the unsustainable use of land, water and energy use, and climate change.

In the pursuit of extreme extraction of virgin materials for manufacturing and extreme capitalism that doesn't care about the impact that it has on the earth, whether directly or indirectly, the notion of taking another action that cancels the damage the company has done should not even exist.

Meanwhile, because of the harm done in the name of overproduction and growth, there are animal and plant species that we will never get back. Ever. And their habitats are in too many cases polluted, poisoned or destroyed. Same goes for the human lives, communities, their land and environments that have been destroyed and will continue to be ravaged unless we end deceptive concepts like carbon credit markets.

The EU has voted to introduce crimes that can be 'comparable to ecocide' in its revised Environmental Crime Directive. Ecocide as a standalone crime would mean the most senior board members or policy makers would be held legally accountable for decisions that lead to mass environmental harm, regardless of how that harm is caused!

Jojo Mehta, Co-founder and CEO of Stop Ecocide International, said:

“The historic vote from the EU to include ecocide-level crimes in its revised crime directive shows leadership and compassion, and will strongly reinforce existing environmental laws across the region. It will establish a clear moral as well as legal “red line”, creating an essential steer for European industry leaders and policy-makers going forward.”

Take action by signing a petition here.

We need this type of reform in countries across the globe.

Earth Day; the threat of plastics on human & environmental health

Image credit: Nick Fewings via Unsplash

Everyday should be Earth Day as she consistently blesses us with an abundant supply of everything we need to survive, thrive, have good health & wellbeing. However, it’s sufficient to say we continue to wreck many elements of this beautiful planet. What we often fail to realise is that as we destroy the planet, we’re destroying ourselves - our health in particular.

The amount of plastic waste produced globally is expected to nearly triple by 2060, with around half ending up in landfill and less than a fifth recycled, according to a 2022 OECD report. It projects that global plastics consumption will rise from 460 million tonnes in 2019 to 1,231 million tonnes in 2060 at the current rate of plastics production and use. The World Economic Forum estimates that by 2050, there will be more plastic in the ocean than fish. 

In Australia, 3.4 million tonnes of plastic is consumed each year which is equivalent to 72 Sydney Harbour Bridges. By 2049-50, this is expected to rise to 9.7 million tonnes. By 2050, the amount of plastic consumed in Australia will more than double. Only 14% of plastic waste is kept out of landfill.

Microplastics are ubiquitous - in the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the food we eat. Scientific studies estimate that humans ingest between 0.1 grams to 5 grams – which is equivalent to an entire credit card’s worth of microplastics every week. The microplastics are a vessel where these toxic chemicals enter our system and get into our bloodstream, tissues and digestive system. Microplastics are being found in the placenta of newborn babies. Plastics are associated with diseases such as birth defects, cancer, endocrine toxicity and lung cancer.

Majority of people in Australia and the rest of the world are unaware or it’s very much out of sight, out of mind for them and they just don’t care about the plastics waste and pollution crisis. For some, they are just trying to imminently survive economic and other life crises, therefore, the earth’s wellbeing is naturally less of a priority. For people with the bandwidth to take action, knowledge of health issues associated with microplastics can be a much stronger motivator towards action and advocacy than just pollution alone.

Health risks can affect everyone and therefore is a more relevant conversation to almost every individual. This is why circularity and environmental movements will likely have even more effective results in the plastics pollution discourse if the health aspect of it is the leading topic of educational and awareness campaigns and conversations. Of course this is not to be used as a scare tactic, so it it’s critical to verify any statistics and data used in these endeavours.

These are some statistics and information on plastics and human health from a workshop I attended by Minderoo Films / Minderoo Foundation:

• There are over 16,000 chemicals used in plastics. 4,200 chemicals are considered to be highly hazardous to human health, with 11,000 chemicals not yet assessed

• Due to the huge volume of plastics in everyday life, the impacts of these chemicals are almost unavoidable

• There is evidence that plastics may cause obesity, lower IQ and hypertension.

• Data shows a drop in male sperm count of 1% per year for 5 decades, future generations will likely experience infertility

• Significant increase in heart disease and stroke in people who have higher levels of micro and nano plastics

• If we stopped using these chemicals, we would see a rapid change in exposure (the chemicals are short lived in the body).

 I recommend learning more about the impact of plastics on health if you can. Minderoo has some great resources, and you can read up on from here.

The Australia Institute Plastic Waste in Australia report (page 4) from January 2024 covers some health risks.

As we celebrate the earth, we can remind ourselves that our bodies came from and will eventually return to the earth. It’s part of us and we are part of it. As we take care of the earth, it takes care of us.