Redefining ‘Sustainable Fashion’ – The New York Times
That’s before you start trying to go through acronyms and abbreviations; In addition to the above, there are GOTS (global organic textile standard) and CCS (carbon capture and storage) and NFFO (non-fossil fuel obligation) and TPH (total petroleum hydrocarbons). To name a few.
We need a better way to frame the discussion.
That’s why we use “responsible trend”: a term that refers to a world where all players, from the consumer to the CEO, the producer and the farmer, are responsible for their part in the supply chain. and in the process of creation, and for the choices they make.
It may sound semantic, but it’s the difference between a goal that ultimately appears impossible, perhaps exhausting, unattainable, and the process of at least trying to get there: step by step, step by step, step by step. , decision to decision.
Because there is no simple answer to address the role of fashion in climate change. Even the obvious – don’t make, or buy, anything new, and don’t throw away anything old – has negative implications for work, knowledge and self -understanding. (After all, people have adorned themselves to express themselves for so long that they have understood themselves as “self.”) The important issue for each of us, no matter where. part of the equation we are in, thinking about and understanding the effects of the choices we make, so that we can do better in the future.
And yet, perhaps, see these challenges as creative opportunities, rather than burdens. Especially for brands: Limitations are always creating new ways of thinking and designing.
To give life to what is meant by clothing – especially when we start coming into the world after a two -year period of quasi -hibernation, and begin to rethink sleeping wardrobes – we bring you the stories of a group of smaller brands and manufacturers as they seek to act responsibly, evaluate the trade-offs involved, and try to make choices that do not balance zero, but a positive results.
