#WhoTookMySkin – And Just How Much Did They Pay For It!
Over the last decade a new area of consulting has emerged, with the players all working on developing a sustainable fashion strategy and promoting the transformation of the (luxury) fashion and retail industries.
This movement is asking many good questions about dealing with modern day slavery, how it can reduce the mindboggling levels of waste it produces, reduce its water usage and reliance on chemicals. However, one topic is missing from the industries evolving sustainable fashion strategy, namely its use of wildlife body parts, and endangered species more broadly.
In February 2019, the UK parliament published a report titled Fixing Fashion: clothing consumption and sustainability The report correctly states Fashion: it shouldn’t cost the earth. But it currently does. In a May 2019, IPBES published a report where, the trade in flora and fauna was confirmed as the second biggest threat to species survival.
So, it is disappointing that this UK parliamentary report contains only two mentions of the word ‘wildlife’ (page 9) and then only in relation to climate change. There is nothing about the legal supply of wildlife body parts (and endangered species more broadly) to the (luxury) fashion industry.
So, it is disappointing that this UK parliamentary report contains only two mentions of the word ‘wildlife’ (page 9) and then only in relation to climate change. There is nothing about the legal supply of wildlife body parts (and endangered species more broadly) to the (luxury) fashion industry.
Publications by the Copenhagen based Global Fashion Agenda highlight the same issue. In their 2017 Pulse Report, the word ‘wildlife’ features only once and in the 2018 Pulse Report the word ‘wildlife’ is not mentioned at all. A second of their publications, 2018 CEO Agenda highlights Supply Chain Traceability is top priority. For wildlife (and endangered species more broadly) supply chain traceability is impossible until the CITES permit system is upgraded from current 1970s paper based system it is currently, but the retailers using wildlife body parts in their production lines haven’t made a contribution to upgrading this system in the decade it has been discussed.
The Sustainable Apparel Coalition which states on its website that it “is the apparel, footwear, and textile industry’s leading alliance for sustainable production”.
Behind this statement is its development of the Higg Index which it defines as “a suite of tools that enables brands, retailers, and facilities of all sizes — at every stage in their sustainability journey — to accurately measure and score a company or product’s sustainability performance. The Higg Index delivers a holistic overview that empowers businesses to make meaningful improvements that protect the well-being of factory workers, local communities, and the environment.” Well not for wildlife and endangered species it doesn’t, because there can’t be supply chain traceability or transparency until CITES adopts a secure electronic permit system as the basis for trade in flora and fauna.
And given that the Sustainable Apparel Coalition has over 250 members, it is very telling that CITES is NOT one of them.
As a result of this, Nature Needs More’s Founder Dr Lynn Johnson was delighted to collaborate on an article, with Dr Catherine Kovesi University, a historian at the University of Melbourne; one of Catherine’s specialist subject areas is researching the discourses of luxury consumption. This peer reviewed article was published in the August 2019 issue of Fashion Theory,
The article, titled Mammoth Tusk Beads and Vintage Elephant Skin Bags: Wildlife, Conservation, and Rethinking Ethical Fashion, explores the fact that wildlife is not currently factored into the evolving sustainable fashion strategy.
Abstract
Recent years have seen marked consciousness-raising in the arena of ethical fashion. Despite inherent difficulties in tracing a complete ethical supply chain back to source, sustainable fashion movements have helped to highlight the need for prominent fashion industry role models on the one hand, and awareness of those who produce what we consume on the other. Yet, repeatedly in such discussions, one of the most fragile components of the luxury fashion business is left out of the conversation – wildlife and endangered species. To date there have been parallel discourses in ethical fashion and in wildlife conservation that rarely intersect and are indeed often in unintended opposition to each other. Even those who attempt to promote an ethical path, or who buy vintage rather than new fashion items of wildlife products, often unwittingly contribute to the accelerated demand for wildlife fashion products from present-day endangered species. The desire to be ethical can, in some instances, even contribute to illegal poaching activity. This article unravels for the first time some of the complexities of the conservation dilemmas involved in the wearing of ancient, vintage, and present-day wildlife products. In doing so it argues we should place wildlife center stage, as an equally important element, in rethinking what it is that we wear.