# data[].attributes.headline
Factory Exploitation and the Fast Fashion Machine

# data[].attributes.subject
Factory Exploitation and the Fast Fashion Machine

# data[].attributes.body
Vicki

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Factory Exploitation and the Fast Fashion Machine | Green America

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ultimately, retailers' decision to outsource to subcontracting Tier 1 companies is directly responsible for industry-wide exploitation of female garment workers who create fast fashion products. The defining characteristic of fast fashion - the constant cranking of new trends to consume - drives production targets that can never be met, putting female garment workers at risk of severe physical, emotional, and sexual abuse.

# data[].attributes.headline
Circular economy and sustainable consumption

# data[].attributes.subject
Circular economy and sustainable consumption

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Origin of the concept 'circular fashion' The concept 'circular fashion' was first coined and used in spring 2014 by two actors, almost simultaneously and independently of each other. One of these was Dr. Anna Brismar, head and owner of the Swedish consultancy firm Green Strategy.

# data[].attributes.headline
Sustainable consumption and a circular economy 

# data[].attributes.subject
Sustainable consumption and a circular economy 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Photos: MUD Jeans

What is the "life" of fashion? The life of a fashion garment? How was it made and what is it made of? What will happen to it when it's no longer on trend? Why should we even care?

All of these questions are probing new ways to think about alternative business models in sustainable fashion. Makers, buyers and researchers are exploring concepts of "circular fashion" and ways to "close the loop" in an effort to extend the lifecycle of clothing for a more sustainable world.

An Introduction To The Circular Economy

The nature of a circular economy is eco-friendly. A product is designed to last in society for as long as possible with little to no waste. It is made with minimal resources and environmentally friendly materials. When the owner is done with the product, it should be reused, rebuilt or recycled into a new product to keep it flowing through society.

Circular fashion stems from the circular economy model but with a sole focus of... fashion! Clothes, shoes, accessories, handbags. The entire lifecycle of these products is considered. Makers and designers create and source materials with purpose and intent. Products are made and transported in environmental and non-toxic ways and then marketed and sold offering reuse, repair and redesign. Finally, the product's end life (if there is an end!) is recycled or disposed of in a planet-friendly way.

The Principles Of Circular Fashion

Circular Fashion offers fifteen ways to support circular fashion as a maker and buyer of fashion. Here are three of them:

1. Design for longevity. For makers, design your garments to last. Consider the lasting years of a garment versus spring/summer and fall/winter seasons.

2. Source and product without toxicity. For makers, firstly, source materials for your designs that are not harmful to the environment: organic, raw, biodegradable. Secondly, produce your designs without harming the environment.

3. Consider rent, loan, swap, secondhand or redesign instead of buying new. For shoppers, appreciate the value of what you buy. And before you buy new, thinking about if you can rent, swap or purchase what you need (not what you want!) secondhand.

Who Is Using The Circular Fashion Model?

MUD Jeans in the first circular fashion brand in the world aiming for a world without waste. They have pioneered a "Lease A Jeans" business model that shows how circular fashion can be put into action.

Lease A Jeans is simple: lease a pair of jeans for a year. When your year is over, send the jeans back to MUD or lease a different pair. If you choose to send the jeans back, they are recycled and reused to create new products such as sweaters or jeans. On average, one new pair of jeans takes 7, 000 liters of water to produce. Through recycling the pairs sent back and using an innovative water filtration system, MUD cuts this water usage by 78%. MUD Jeans is creating denim in circular economy fashion for the "conscious explorer", or more appropriately, the MOCHNI.COM reader: the educated individual aware of the environmental issues in our world seeking planet-friendly brand and product alternatives.

Circular economic ways of thinking are alternative but also exciting in the world of eco-fashion. The circular fashion model allows companies and consumers to think deeply about how products in the fashion industry are made and bought in an effort for a more sustainable world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Clothing With A Flow: What Is A Circular Fashion Economy?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Photos: MUD Jeans What is the "life" of fashion? The life of a fashion garment? How was it made and what is it made of? What will happen to it when it's no longer on trend? Why should we even care? All of these questions are probing new ways to think about alternative business models in sustainable fashion.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sustainable consumption and production .:. Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"We (Countries) commit to making fundamental changes in the way that our societies produce and consume goods and services. Governments, international organizations, the business sector and other non-state actors and individuals must contribute to changing unsustainable consumption and production patterns, including through the mobilization, from all sources, of financial and technical assistance to strengthen developing countries' scientific, technological and innovative capacities to move towards more sustainable patterns of consumption and production.

# data[].attributes.headline
New study shows 'fast fashion' continues to risk garment workers' health and well-being

# data[].attributes.subject
New study shows 'fast fashion' continues to risk garment workers' health and well-being

# data[].attributes.body
Vicki

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New study shows 'fast fashion' continues to risk garment workers' health and well-being

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On the 24th November 2012, a fire in the Tazreen Fashions factory in Bangladesh led to the death of at least 112 workers, while the collapse of the Rana Plaza building just five months later killed 1,134 garment workers and ...

# data[].attributes.headline
How fast fashion is destroying developing countries

# data[].attributes.subject
How fast fashion is destroying developing countries

# data[].attributes.body
Vicki

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The following is a guest post from UK blog Forge Recycling.

It's a little-known fact that us Brits wear just 70 per cent of the clothes that we have stored away in our wardrobes, which leaves us with a total of 1.7 billion unused items. On average, a consumer keeps their garments for three years, but even more shocking than this is the fact that something might be frequently worn in the first year, and then phased into the stockpile of unworn clothes later on. That is why the average British closet is so overstuffed: we don't wear all of the clothes we own.

The spending habits of the average person in the West have changed dramatically over the last hundred or so years when it comes to buying clothing. Between 2002 and 2003, for example, people in the US spent, on average, four percent of their income on clothes, whereas back between the years of 1934 and 1946, clothing used up 12 percent of people's incomes. The current average expenditure per item in the USA is $14.60. Don't go thinking that we are all consuming less though. On average, just one person in the UK will produce 70 Kg of textiles waste per year - that is a lot of clothing. Cheap, fast fashion means we are spending less yet buying more.

The best way to rid your wardrobe of unwanted clothes is to donate them to a charity shop, as this generates revenue for the charity.

Donated garments are sold in charity shops, but any clothes that aren't sold will be resold to the used-clothing industry. These clothes are sorted into piles based on potential markets (type, condition of the clothes, and fabrics). The sorting process is actually quite labour-intensive because it is often done by hand. After sorting, the clothes will be distributed all over the world, but in fact, most of them end up in countries such as Poland, Ghana, Kenya, and Benin. So, what begins as a charitable donation can end up as a trading commodity.

Although this process is good for the charity, it could be argued that this process destroys the textile industries of importing countries. In fact, as a result of this issue, over 30 African countries have actually prohibited import embargos of used clothes.

Destinations of end-of-life clothing ( Wrap)

From the sorting process, there will also be unwearable garments left over. These are sold to "shoddy industries".

These industries disassemble garments into shreds, fibre or rags. It is a mechanical process that breaks down clothes with carding machines into fibre components; producing less material than before. These materials are then used as a stuffing in coffins, mattresses, and upholstery. An innovative company, IRIS Industries, is currently using these shredded materials and converting them into furniture or countertops.

The average UK household spends more than £1,800 (£1,700 purchasing clothes + £130 on laundry) per year

Every household emits around 1.5 tonnes of CO2e (carbon dioxide = indicator of global warming potential) from their new and existing clothing - a carbon footprint that is equal to 6,000 miles travelled in an average modern car

90 per cent of the water footprint of UK clothing is made overseas

The CO2e emitted by us washing and drying our clothes in the UK equals 10 per cent of the amount of CO2e emitted from cars across the country.

The following table shows a summary of the waste, water, and carbon footprints associated with clothing in the UK each year:

As we all know, aluminium cans can be recycled and formed into new cans, but what about clothing? In fact, just three per cent of our old garments are sold for recycling and reclamation into textiles. It is a very complicated and difficult process, as synthetic fibres are melted (a chemical process) and respun to the same length as virgin fibres, with no loss in quality. This process creates nylon and polyester. Making rayon uses less energy than producing new synthetic fibres (80% less GHG).

The recycling and reclamation of wool or cotton clothing is even more complex, and it is sadly necessary to combine them with virgin fibres to achieve a marketable quality.

Clothing Life Cycle: Creation, Disposal & Reuse.

Textile waste around the world

China:

The demand for textiles keeps rising worldwide, especially in China - the country which produces much of the material that ends up in landfills.
According to Xue et al. (2014), around 3.5 to 4 per cent of the world's waste materials are waste textiles in China's cities. Furthermore, it is predicted in "The Twelfth Five Year Plan" that the production of waste textiles will exceed 100 million tonnes in China. This means that 70 million tonnes of chemical fibres and 30 million tonnes natural fibres will be used.

China has 26 million tonnes of textile waste annually, but utilises less than 2.6 million tonnes (that is 10 per cent) without even been reused.

But what about other countries?

Germany:
Germany collects and recycles 800,000 tonnes (42%) of waste textiles annually; 40% of these are second-hand clothes, and 25% are used as scrubbing clothes.

Japan:
Japan creates about 1 million tonnes of waste textiles every year, but only 120,000 tonnes (12%) are collected and recycled because they are unable to expand on their textile waste collection services.

USA:
It seems that people in the USA are generally very accepting of wearing second hand clothes. The USA creates 1.2 million tonnes of textile waste annually, which equates to 15% of total US clothing sales. More than 50% of this used clothing is donated to charity, and 226,000 tonnes of waste textiles are reused or recycled.
United Kingdom:
The below examples explain the different stages from upstream to downstream in the supply chain of clothes.

The impact of resources used in production:

Starting from the first stage in the supply chain, from raw material to end product: garment supply contributes 1/3 of the waste footprint; 3/4 of the carbon impact; and the water footprint.

Useful life of clothes:

Approximately 30 per cent of clothes in the average UK wardrobe are unused and worth a total of £1,000 per household, amounting to a massive £30 billion worth across the UK. If we wear items of clothes up to an extra nine months, it will reduce waste, carbon and water footprints by around 20 per cent to 30 per cent, and will reduce the cost of resources by £5 billion (20 per cent).

Environmental impacts of laundry:

Laundry produces 1/4 of a household's carbon footprint. If every household washed clothes at a lower temperature, less often, and in larger loads, it would save every home £10 a year and cut its footprint by 7%.

Reuse of clothing:

At present, just 50% of clothes items are reused, with 2/3 of these going overseas. However, statistics show that 2/3 of the UK public purchase or receive second hand clothes, which reflects a willingness to reuse.

Landfilling:

Britons are sending 1/3 of clothing to landfill that would otherwise generate £140 million for local authorities, charities and other organisations.

But what about clothing brands themselves?

ZARA:

Global production covers the worldwide flow of raw materials, all components, and finished products. These characteristics are essential for a fully integrated supply chain. Zara, the big fashion retailer, is a good example of an efficient global firm. The following procedure monitors the geographical integration of the fashion production network of Zara. Zara is one of the largest international fashion companies belonging to Inditex, one of the world's largest distribution groups. Zara itself has over 2,000 storesstrategically located in 88 countries, and its logistics hub is in Zaragoza (northern Spain). Inditex don't produce goods, but it is Zara's main supplier in India, China, and Bangladesh. Recent figures show sales reaching 18,117 million Euros, with 46 per cent of sales being in Europe (excluding Spain). It also has 6,683 shops in 88 markets; 137,054 employees, and a net profit of €5,510 million in 2014.

Relevant data of Inditex

These shops are receiving goods twice a week, including new items adapted to local demands. This is because capital intensive and value added intensive stages are performed internally (designing, purchasing raw materials, cutting, ironing, labelling, distribution, etc.), and less value added tasks such as sewing and labour intensive tasks are outsourced. The following figures indicate the regular weekly cargo movements to and from Zaragoza airport.

Weekly cargo received regularly at the Plataforma Europa in flights to Zaragoza airport

Weekly cargo sent regularly at the Plataforma Europa in flights from Zaragoza airport

This example looks at just one company, but what about the other big fashion retailers such as Nike, Adidas, H&M, and Marks and Spencer? Now you can imagine the level of cargo movement all over the world that occurs just for clothes.

Historical background of organic cotton

Until the early 20th century, the cultivation of cotton was organic, but the increased demand of a 'cosmetically perfect produce' caused the increased use of synthetic fertiliser and pesticides, which means that genetically modified cotton has emerged and rapidly grown to dominate the market.

Global chemical fibre production from 2000 to 2014, by fibre type (in 1,000 metric tonnes)

After more than half a century of the expansion of these un-organic crops, people have now begun to recognise the environmental impacts of these practises. In 1985, the first international regulations on pesticides were introduced. New ' organic pioneers' launched cotton as a rational crop on specialised organic farms. This is known as the first reawakening of 'organic cotton'. Since 1992, environmental awareness has become more intense within the fashion industry and the public in general, with some companies and apparel designers launching eco-friendly ranges. In 1994, a crisis in the market almost led to the death of the un-organic industry, especially in the USA. According to Ton, in 2002 the production fell by a staggering 50 per cent, hence the awareness of organic growing. In the early 2000s, a rekindling of sustainability and all the related products emerged, resulting in a huge expansion in design, range and quality of organic business. The Government, media and the general public became increasingly aware of the environmental impacts of human behaviour. This in turn boosted the organic cotton industry. Nevertheless, the demand of organic cotton fluctuated and in turn influenced the revenue of production.

Cotton production worldwide (in thousand tonnes)

From here, the production worldwide of organic cotton increased almost by 3000% between 1999 and 2007, and it is predicted that the demand will continue to grow, despite the fall in supply.

Supply and demand of organic cotton

In 2001, global retail sales of organic cotton stood at $245m, rising in 2008 to - representing only 0.1% of the total clothing market worldwide (all fibres).

Why do people prefer conventional cotton?

So, why do people still prefer conventional cotton, even though it damages and pollute s the natural ecosystem?

" As an example, it has been estimated that only 0.1% of applied pesticides reach the target pests, leaving the remaining 99.9% to impact the environment . Pimentel (1997) showed that the environmental costs of using pesticides in the US alone may be as high as $9 billion a year, and also calculated that for every $1 spent on pesticides, the achievable profits of $3-5 were counteracted by environmental costs of $3"

A Value Chain Analysis of the Organic Cotton Industry in India

This section presents the value chain of organic cotton industry in India in April 2007. Each stage will distinguish between organic cotton, certified organic cotton, and a conventional cotton T-shirt.

The farming stage:

As you can imagine, the farming stage is the most crucial stage in organic cotton fibre production. At this stage, direct costs of normal cotton crops involve the purchasing of equipment, farmland (fixed cost) and labour, and raw materials such as seeds, water, and chemicals (variable costs). Additionally, organic products need indirect costs such as promotion and politicising.

Using India as an example, many farmers don't have an educational background, and this makes experiences difficult to share. The worst 'costs' to conventional cotton farmers are the effects on health and wellbeing. Much of the time, farmers use pesticides to prevent pests, weeds, and diseases during production. According to People Tree agricultural chemicals can take up to 60 percent of a farmer's budget, and, as a result, in Punjab, between 1990 and 2007, 40,000 farmers committed suicide, because they could not pay back loans which they had taken out.
On the other hand, Indian organic cotton tends to use up to 65% less labour for pest management, although more labour hours are used for weeding and applying fertiliser. The variable costs are between 13 per cent and 20 per cent lower. Hence, incomes are ten to 20 per cent higher in organic production. India is the second largest producer of cotton worldwide, producing of the world's cotton.

The ginning phase

This process removes seeds from cotton fibres and there is no difference between organic and conventional cotton production at this stage. To get a full organic certification, the mill (producers) have to process and store organic cotton separately from non-organic crops. This process also creates by-products such as cotton seed oil and cattle feed, which is produced after the seed is separated from the lint, thus this could also be sold under an organic certificate.

The yarn manufacturing stage

This stage in production has sub-processes such as leaning, mixing, carding, combing, drafting, twisting, and winding. Again, there is no difference between methods for organic and conventional cotton.

The fabric manufacturing/knitting stage

The aim of this mechanical process is to create a fabric from the yarn. There is no difference between organic cotton knitting and conventional cotton knitting, except for certified organic cotton, which does not allow oils to be used that contain heavy metals or other contaminating materials in the knitting process.

The fabric finishing stage

This is the final stage before the cotton garment is cut and stitched; it involves dying, printing, and mercerising amongst other processes. There are no regulations or standards of finish in regards to organic cotton products, which is why independent organisations have their own standards and methods of finish. It could be argued that finished fabrics are not properly organic.

Garment cutting and stitching

This is the final production stage before finished clothes are sent to distribution retailers. Like before, there is no difference between organic and conventional cotton at this stage. This process produces a serious fabric wastage, which causes the price of organic cotton to rise, due to the higher cost of the raw material.

Conventional and organic cotton is separated when stored because normal cotton sometimes contains formaldehyde, which could contaminate the organic products, and therefore render them inorganic.

The retailing stage

Using an example from July 2007, an organic t-shirt could be bought for $4.71 (£3.30) and a conventional cotton t-shirt for $3.17 (£2.22) from UK intermediaries such as Poeticgem.

There are different categories of retailers who are offering organic cotton:

Category C: Such as H&M or Marks and Spencer; organic products are not their core range. They buy organic fabric and fibre and process it to their own standards. This means that the product is only certified at the farming stage. For example, a t-shirt costs around £21 (£9.50 more expensive than a normal cotton T-shirt).

Category E: Such as PeopleTree or Green Apple; organic products are their core range. All stages are certified. A t-shirt is priced at around £31 (£19.50 higher than normal cotton).

Organic VS Conventional Cotton

Value addition at each stage of cotton production

Do you see any difference? Probably not, despite the cotton difference: they look the same, and probably feel the same too.

Life Cycle Assessment

Life Cycle Assessment organic vs conventional

Conclusion

As shown in the previous examples, fast fashion is a common strategy in fashion retailing that produces tight schedules and short product life cycles. Cheaper clothing leads to a throwaway culture, or a situation where we have wardrobes full of clothes we no longer wear. Conventional cotton fits into this strategy well.

On the other hand, organic cotton adds value at each stage of the production process, and yields both environmental and social benefits. As shown in the above figures, organic cotton industries will affect the scope of retailing industries that is at the same time a benefit for the producers (as most of them are in developing countries).

In the long-term, organic farming will lower the pest management costs, which reduces farm debts and helps to increase yields. C&A and H&M lead the industry with long term commitments to organic cotton. Since 2014 the top 10 brands (such as C&A, H&M, and Tchibo) used 39,950 mt of organic fibres. Hence, Category C retailers might become the biggest consumers of organic cotton.
The next phase of organic movement worldwide is Organic 3.0, which breaks organic out of its niche status. Organic 3.0 is based on the principles of Health and Ecology with the adoption of organic farming, a sustainable environment, and animal husbandry carried out with care.

But nowadays there is another problem; the supply is significantly lower than the demand for organic, because the production is not keeping pace. That's why the next step of organic movement is absolutely necessary, before it is too late.

Banner Image: Shutterstock
Read this next: 1 Million Women is empowering women and girls around the world to lower their impact on the planet. If you love what we do, please support our work by donating a couple of dollars. For the price of a cuppa, you can help us inspire millions more! (click to donate )
10 ways to rework your wardrobe instead of buying new

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How fast fashion is destroying developing countries | 1 Million Women

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The following is a guest post from UK blog Forge Recycling. It's a little-known fact that us Brits wear just 70 per cent of the clothes that we have stored away in our wardrobes, which leaves us with a total of 1.7 billion unused items. On average, a consumer keeps their garments for three years, but even more shocking than this is the fact that something might be frequently worn in the first year, and then phased into the stockpile of unworn clothes later on.

# data[].attributes.body
Vicki

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Engage with Ethical Fashion | Clara Vuletich | TEDxSydney

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This piece was first published by Food Tank
Have you ever thought about what your clothes are made of? About who makes your clothes, or what happens after you donate them or throw them away? The truth about the fashion industry is actually pretty ugly.

A recent study by the Ellen McArthur Foundation found that one garbage truck of textiles is wasted every second. And the Copenhagen Fashion Summit reported that fashion is responsible for 92 million tons of solid waste dumped in landfills each year.

The fashion industry is also the second-biggest consumer of water, producing 20 percent of wastewater while also generating more greenhouse gas emissions than all international flights and maritime shipping combined.

Ahead of World Environment Day on June 5, themed "Beat Plastic Pollution," it's worth remembering that synthetic microfiber pollution is washing up in our oceans at alarming rates. Around 100,000 marine animals are killed each year by plastic waste, including microfibers.

We need to rethink our fast-fashion habit-we can't continue to make clothes that do not consider our environment.

First, it's up to apparel brands to take responsibility for the waste they're creating. Brands need to address chemicals, use of textiles waste and synthetic fabrics that don't break down, and unfair working environments in the clothing industry head-on.

The no-waste economy must be applied to fashion, just as it is in the food industry. We need action at each stage of the supply chain, starting with sustainable sourcing of fabrics, through to design, exploration of possible alternatives to distribution, and recovery and recycling of clothing.

Big brands are starting to take notice: Nike, H&M, Burberry, and Gap have all recently signed up to the Make Fashion Circular initiative. It aims to improve the industry's record on sustainability and reduce global waste from fashion by recycling raw materials and products.

While recycling is certainly one solution, it is by no means the only solution. In fact, we should be asking a different question: how can we eliminate the need for recycling altogether? How can we design with the end in mind?

I'm developing a take-back program for my sustainable apparel brand, NOVEL SUPPLY CO., where we accept back our apparel at the end of its life and find alternative ways to use, recycle, and compost it. But as a global community, we also need to shift the way we consume fashion.

I currently source my fabrics from a Fair Ware mill in China, but this is not ideal. In general, richer countries are consuming fashion that is made and produced in poorer countries. But all countries are involved in the value chain.

In countries with emerging economies, there are an estimated 2 billion new consumers waiting to buy the latest trends. We are racing against the clock to include poorer countries in more sustainable manufacturing models, so they can produce clothing locally and more sustainably.

To shift typically linear take-make-waste fashion towards a circular model with no waste, we all need to be part of the movement to innovate and redesign our fashion industry. We can start by buying clothes with the circular economy in mind.

It's up to us as consumers to trigger change by voting with our wallets. The average number of clothing collections in Europe more than doubled between 2000 and 2011: we are buying more clothes and wearing them less.

Our fast-fashion habit is expensive. More than US$500 billion in value is lost every year due to under-utilized clothes and lack of recycling. We as consumers need to educate ourselves about Circular fashion: we need to buy less clothing and when we do, we need to make sure that is more sustainable and higher quality. We also need to demand transparent sourcing.

It will take time for the fast-fashion industry to slow down. The trends already set in motion by the Make Fashion Circular initiative and others are starting to gather steam. But to stop stretching our planet, we all need to play our part.

Consume consciously and responsibly by reading the labels before you purchase. Be sure to look for natural and organic fibers, non-toxic dyes, take-back programs, and ethical production.
The Young Champion of the Earth Prize 2018 finalists have been announced! Vote here, to help protect our environment and bring someone's dream to life. The Young Champions of the Earth Prize is powered by Covestro.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This piece was first published by Food Tank Have you ever thought about what your clothes are made of? About who makes your clothes, or what happens after you donate them or throw them away? The truth about the fashion industry is actually pretty ugly.

# data[].attributes.headline
Katharine's Article. How fast fashion damages the environment and how ASU students and staff are fighting it. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Katharine's Article. How fast fashion damages the environment and how ASU students and staff are fighting it. 

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.statepress.com/article/2018/11/spmagazine-fast-fashion-and-college-students
https://www.mapsofworld.com/usa/states/arizona/
Location: Arizona
The article talks about how Arizona State University staff and students are trying to stop fast fashion from hurting the environment even more. The article states "In frequenting stores like Forever 21, H&M and Zara, there is an undeniable shopping high. Luxury doppelgangers come at a fraction of the price, and by staying on trend, one can fulfill the constant desire for the new and shiny." The article is saying that people are just buying new clothes that they don't need and that will go to waste just for the fun of it. And that society I the reason for this, that new fashion trends are changing every week so people feel the need to buy new s=clothes to meet those standards.
In addition those clothes being cheap excentuates the appeal for them. People are more likely to buy something the don't necesarily need if it is affordable. The article informed me that the fashion industry is responsible for 5% of all greenhouse gas emissions. the fashion industry exceeds the emission rates of international flights , maritime shipping and the entire country of Russia. Fast fashion, born out of consumerism is the second dirtiest industry after big oil. Solution: we need the federal government to create a policy change because that'll force these stores to change the way they produce their clothes, instead of just expecting those stores to do it themselves. In addition lack of education about fast fashion allows for the consumers to remain ignorant and continue buying. ASU has began integrating fast fashion education into some of their classes. The article states "If we stop buying fast fashion and focus on investing in quality clothing, we are already reducing waste."

# data[].attributes.headline
Inside the fight to end the silence on waste (Emma)

# data[].attributes.subject
Inside the fight to end the silence on waste (Emma)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Northern Europe Map, Northern European Countries

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Northern Europe Map - The Map of Northern Europe showing the location of countries belonging to the region. Also find the list of Northern European countries and their capitals.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Pioneering solutions to address environmental challenges will be at the heart of the fourth UN Environment Assembly next March. The meeting's motto is to think beyond prevailing patterns and live within sustainable limits-a message that will resonate with fashion designers and retailers seeking to reform their industry.

Photo by Reuters

At the March meeting, UN Environment will formally launch the UN Alliance on Sustainable Fashion to encourage the private sector, governments and non-governmental organizations to create an industry-wide push for action to reduce fashion's negative social, economic and environmental impact and turn it into a driver for the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals.

Across the United Nations, agencies are working to make fashion more sustainable, from the Food and Agricultural Organization protecting arable land, to the Ethical Fashion Initiative set up by the International Trade Centre to the work of UN Environment in fostering sustainable manufacturing practices.

And some entrepreneurs are already designing the fashion of the future:

Spain's Ecoalf creates shoes from algae and recycled plastic as part of its Upcycling the Oceans collection. Founded by Javier Goyeneche in 2012, Ecoalf collects ocean plastics from 33 ports and turns the trash into shoes, clothing and bags.

In Amsterdam, GumDrop collects gum and turns it into a new kind of rubber, Gum-tec, which is then used to make shoes in collaboration with marketing group I Amsterdam and fashion company Explicit. GumDrop says around 3.3 million pounds of gum end up on Amsterdam's paths every year, costing millions of dollars to clean. It takes around 2.2 pounds of gum to make four pairs of sneakers.

Outdoor gear retailer Patagonia, based in California, has been producing fleece jackets using polyester from recycled bottles since 1993, working with Polartec, a Massachusetts-based textile designer. Patagonia also encourages shoppers to buy only what they need, and mends and recycles older items.

Gothenburg-based Nudie Jeans uses organic cotton for its jeans and offers free repairs for life. Customers also get a discount if they hand in their old jeans.

Cambodia-based Tonlé uses surplus fabric from mass clothing manufacturers to create zero-waste fashion collections. It uses more than 97 per cent of the material it receives and turns the rest into paper.

In the Netherlands, Wintervacht turns blankets and curtains into coats and jackets. Designers Yoni van Oorsouw and Manon van Hoeckel find their raw materials in secondhand shops and sorting facilities where donations are processed. San Francisco- and Bali-based Indosole turns discarded tyres in Indonesia into shoes, sandals and flip-flops, while Swiss firm Freitag upcycles tarpaulins, seat belts and bicycle inner tubes to make their bags and backpacks.

In New York, Queen of Raw connects designers, architects and textile firms with dead stock of sustainable fabrics from factories, brands and retailers. Queen of Raw says more than US$120 billion worth of unused fabric sits in warehouses, waiting to be burned or buried.

Novel Supply, based in Canada, makes clothes from natural and organic fabrics and is developing a take-back programme to find alternative ways to use garments at the end of their life. For founder Kaya Dorey, winner of UN Environment's Young Champion of the Earth award in 2017, the aim is to create a zero-waste, closed-loop fashion model.

Retailer H&M has a successful garment collection scheme and in October, lifestyle brand and jeans manufacturer Guess said it was teaming up with i:Collect, which collects, sorts and recycles clothes and footwear worldwide, to launch a wardrobe recycling programme in the US. Customers who bring in five or more items of clothing or shoes, will receive discounts. Wearable items will be recycled as secondhand goods, while unwearable items will be turned into new products like cleaning cloths or made into fibres for products like insulation.

Kaya Dorey Photo by UN Environment

Some argue that recycling is itself energy intensive and does not address our throwaway culture-the number of times a garment is worn has declined by 36 per cent in 15 years. An alternative might be found in a viable rental market for clothes. Pioneers in this field include Dutch firm Mud Jeans, which leases organic jeans that can be kept, swapped or returned, Rent the Runway, Girl Meets Dress and YCloset in China.

"The rental model is clearly a winner for the higher end of the market where consumers may have no intention of wearing an occasion dress more than once... but at the lower end, it's all too easy to go online and be able to buy outright any trend or item," says Perry. "For rental to be a success at this market level, companies need to offer sufficient choice of brands and styles that would engage consumers and tempt them away from outright purchase, and the rental service needs to be smooth and faultless."

Her best fashion advice? Less is always more.

"Keep your clothing in use for longer to reduce its environmental footprint, as well as reducing the amount of new stuff you need to buy and the consequent use of resources. This also reduces the impact of the disposal of perfectly good but unwanted clothes."
Ahead of the United Nations Environment Assembly next March, UN Environment is urging people to Think Beyond and Live Within. Join the debate on social media using #SolveDifferent to share your stories and see what others are doing to ensure a sustainable future for our planet. The story was updated on 28 June 2021 to take into account new research.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pioneering solutions to address environmental challenges will be at the heart of the fourth UN Environment Assembly next March. The meeting's motto is to think beyond prevailing patterns and live within sustainable limits-a message that will resonate with fashion designers and retailers seeking to reform their industry.

# data[].attributes.headline
Inside the fight to end the silence on waste (Emma)

# data[].attributes.subject
Inside the fight to end the silence on waste (Emma)

# data[].attributes.body
(This is occurring around the world but this article narrows in on the news in the UK).The problem is that fashion companies are producing tremendous amounts clothes, only to throw away or burn unsold items. This causes a harmful amount of air pollution as well as waste.  To help solve the problem, the UK government will be investigating the effects of fast fashion. Other solutions include finding new materials to use to make clothes such as recycled plastic. In addition, people are being encouraged to donate clothes rather than throwing them away.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"Torture yourself a little bit! Because actually waiting for something, waiting to see if you really, really want it, waiting to see if it has a function in your life and then buying it is beautiful."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fast fashion: Inside the fight to end the silence on waste

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We asked major labels if they destroyed their excess stock. They weren't all forthcoming.

# data[].attributes.headline
How can we make our shopping more ethical? (Vicki)

# data[].attributes.subject
How can we make our shopping more ethical? (Vicki)

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.mapsofworld.com/ireland/
Ireland
Purchasing clothes, even ones we don't need, has become much easier because of fast fashion which leads to environmental effects that are harmful. The fashion industry generates greenhouse gas emissions of 1.2bn metric tons a year, which is more than international flights and maritime shipping combined. These greenhouse gases not only effect the workers, but also innocent civilians. This year marks five years since the Rana Plaza collapse where 1,134 garment factory workers died in Bangladesh because of structural issues that were ignored. Creating fashion companies that focus on ethics will both help the environment and lower the number of casualties relating to the fast fashion industry. Having fewer clothes that are more expensive but better quality helps the environment and the workers more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
There's no two ways about it - the fashion industry is in crisis.

Thanks to fast fashion, the ease of online shopping and low price points, we're buying more clothes than ever, and this is having a serious effect on the environment.

Just think; the fashion industry generates greenhouse gas emissions of 1.2bn tonnes a year, according to a recent report, which is more than international flights and maritime shipping combined. We're struggling to keep up with it all - the UK government apparently puts £82m a year towards sending clothes and textiles to landfill.

It's easy to disassociate yourself from the impact the industry has - after all, buying a t-shirt you wear once doesn't really feel like much of a burden on the environment, nor do you think about the workers who made it.

However, it is these small decisions that add to the problem, and clothing production has doubled in the past 15 years to the detriment of the environment and working conditions. It's by no means a lost cause, and there are some things you can do to make sure you're shopping as ethically as possible.

Put pressure on companies

In many instances, the most ethical business decisions aren't the cheapest. That's why we as consumers need to put the pressure on companies to do better and be more transparent. This year marks five years since the Rana Plaza collapse where 1,134 garment factory workers died in Bangladesh due to structural issues that were ignored. The factory made clothes for the likes of Mango and Matalan, which shows that brands need to be aware of the working conditions across their supply chain, even if they're not directly in charge the facility.

This pressure will hopefully make brands go for the more ethical decisions to help both the labour force they use and the environment through their production.

Millions of people make our clothes. Too many live in poverty, exploitation or danger. We can change that. Join the #FashionRevolution and demand a fair, safe and more transparent industry. Ask brands #whomademyclothes? WATCH: https://t.co/bpPmvk4UZt#TradeFairLiveFair
- FashionRevolution (@Fash_Rev) April 23, 2018

Director of ethical shoe company Two Degrees, Plum Turner, says: "Only buy from brands that are totally transparent throughout their supply chain and are not just 'greenwashing' [a term that refers to brands using PR to look like they're environmentally friendly, when actually they're not].

"When buying through a website customers should look for an impact assessment and total transparency about which areas the brand/company is good and where they need to do better."

Putting pressure on companies means you need to ask questions. Where has the product come from? How was it produced? What is the environmental impact of its production?

Turner urges customers to "ask the awkward questions" in order to encourage transparency. There are two types of queries you need to make - about the workforce and the environment, to really know what the company is about.

Define what ethical means to you

PETA activists demonstrate at London Fashion Week (Isabel Infantes/PA)

"Ethical will mean something different to everyone and that's OK," Turner says.

"Ethical is a very broad term which encompasses many different elements from the sourcing and manufacturing processes to the working conditions and impact on local communities whilst at all times ensuring minimal impact on the environment. There's a lot here and so it is inevitable that different aspects are going to resonate more with certain people than others."

Turner gives the example that one person might prioritise buying vegan products, whereas someone else might think that working conditions are more important.

Online shopping has made buying more stuff even easier (John Stillwell/PA)

Doing some reading and research will help you on this journey to figuring out what ethical means to you, and what you are looking for in a fashion brand.

If you're not quite sure where to begin, have a look at this report by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation on the state of the fashion industry and its future.

If you want to see how some of your favourite brands have fared in terms of ethics, have a look here.

Buy less

Although I won't be doing as much constant shopping (an insane habit of mine), investing in pieces that will last longer, although pricer, seems to be the most ethical thing to do. This is a transition I never gave much thought to.
- 𝒟 🦢 (@DiorsCherie) May 7, 2018

Apologies to any shopoholics out there, because you're not going to love this one.

Unfortunately, shopping ethically means you have to think about buying less. This doesn't just mean your wardrobe is going to be severely depleted, it just means you have to be a bit smarter with your purchases.

Focus on quality over quantity - buy things that you think will last a lifetime, rather than just one season. Turner says: "The days of fast consumerism are over. The focus is now on high quality items and sustainability through durability."

This provides a good opportunity to think about timeless fashion rather than items of clothing that are trendy now but will be out of fashion in a season. It's worth noting that shopping ethically is often seen as a class issue, because investing in better quality clothes from reputable companies tends to be more expensive. But hopefully, with more pressure put on them, brands will be able to open up ethical shopping to everyone.

Go vintage

Yay to getting into old pairs of vintage jeans that I thought were too small 🙋🏻 Just saved myself monies and dreaded jeans shopping, not to mention the environment! 🤘🏻💃🏻🔥
- Isabelle Hardy (@izzie_hardy) May 4, 2018

Shopping in more vintage stores and buying less fast fashion is an easy way to help the sustainability of the industry.

Luckily, browsing charity shops or second-hand stores is by no means a bum deal. Nowadays, they've shed a reputation for being fusty and full of old lady's clothes, and you can actually find some great pieces.

If the idea of cutting down your shopping habit sends you into a cold sweat, scale back the amount that you shop in high street or online brands that don't have particularly ethical credentials, and head to more vintage shops. Once you get used to this way of thinking, you might even begin to like the fact that your wardrobe is full of unique pieces that no one else has.
- Press Association

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How can we make our shopping more ethical?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There's no two ways about it - the fashion industry is in crisis. Thanks to fast fashion, the ease of online shopping and low price points, we're buying more clothes than ever, and this is having a serious effect on the environment.

# data[].attributes.headline
Fast Fashion Retailers defend practices in parliament (Kate)

# data[].attributes.subject
Fast Fashion Retailers defend practices in parliament (Kate)

# data[].attributes.body
Retail brands ASOS, BooHoo, and Misguided, where called to defend their brands in Parliament after news spread of illegal wages and unethical working conditions. All three brands became very defensive when called a "Fast Fashion" brand.  The solution to this is parliament requiring these companies to have ethical working conditions and wages for their factory workers. https://www.mapsofworld.com/united-kingdom/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The environmental audit committee chair, Mary Creagh, held the hearing today (27 November). Nick Beighton, chief executive of Asos; Carol Kane, joint chief executive of the Boohoo Group, who represented both Boohoo and PrettyLittleThing; and Paul Smith, head of product quality and supply at Missguided, attended. Missguided CEO Nitin Passi declined the invitation.

The committee pushed the three companies on their manufacturing presence in Leicester after it heard evidence on 30 October about illegal wages and unethical conditions for garment workers in the area.

In the UK, Missguided sources from Leicester only but Smith said it had reduced its presence because of an inability to satisfactorily audit the factories it was using: "We started this year working with 35 suppliers representing around 80 manufacturing sites in Leicester. We have rationalised that down because it was too unwieldy and we couldn't get around to them all enough to be confident in their practices."

It now uses 12 suppliers based in 20 factories in Leicester.

Beighton said he is happy with the standards in the factories Asos uses: "I've got an aspiration of tripling our sourcing in the UK, and Leicester is an area where I want to do more.

"I'm working with the Leicester council and local agencies to get greater assistance in checking standards, and we've pulled out of 23 factories in Leicester because standards weren't adhered to."

Kane defended allegations from the previous hearing that Boohoo's £5 dresses were responsible for underpaid workers and promoting unsustainable and non-environmental consumer buying patterns.

"We have 80 dresses from over 60,000 styles that are £5. They are loss leaders and we don't make any money on them, but it's a marketing technique to drive people to our website."

Beighton maintained that Asos does not have a fast fashion business model: "We don't promote single use or design our products for that. I am commercially incentivised to get this right, because unless we demonstrate responsible behaviour, our customers will buy less from us."

The retailers detailed plans to use their extensive social media platforms to educate consumers on the importance of re-use and recycling.

Kane said: "We have a brand responsibility and have been doing 'how to wear' videos that encourage multiple use of items, but the government can play a part for consumers to be more sustainable."

Beighton cited Germany, where local authorities offer curb-side collections for textiles, as a good example of re-use: "There are great opportunities for businesses and authorities to make recycling easier for consumers, but we should also start talking more responsibly to our customers."

The committee also heard from high street retailers.

A separate panel consisted of Mike Barry, director of sustainable business at Marks and Spencer; Paul Lister, head of ethical trade and environmental sustainability team at Primark; Jamie Beck, head of supplier management at Arcadia Group; and Leanne Wood, chief people, strategy and corporate affairs officer at Burberry.

Wood expressed the need for government support to "stimulate investment in innovation for recycling technology".

She added: "There are certain fibres that are very difficult to find recycling solutions for and the UK could lead the way."

When asked how they would advise the government to move forward in combating sustainability across the industry, the retailers called for further access to company transparency statements.

Barry called for better access to the Modern Slavery Act and asked the government to launch a similar initiative for fibre transparency: "The government should be asking us to declare where it's from. Giving people access to databases drives change without you having to micromanage every area of the market place."

Lister agreed that being able to compare the Modern Slavery Statements properly would "shed light on the next step" for the industry.

The high street retailers all noted an effort to implement take-back schemes, where customers can drop off unwanted clothes to be reused or recycled properly.

Primark will launch a new take back scheme in 2019 after trialling it three years ago. All money will be donated to local charities depending on the countries in which it operates.

All of the high street and online retailers admitted that there was much to still be done to tackle ethical trading and sustainability in the industry.

Wood said: "This is a responsibility for all of us to inform customers and find a role for government here as well."

Creagh said: "Evidence we heard today justifies our concerns that the current system allows fashion retailers to mark their own homework when it comes to workers' rights, fair pay and sustainability."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fast fashion retailers defend practices in parliament

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The environmental audit committee chair, Mary Creagh, held the hearing today (27 November). Nick Beighton, chief executive of Asos; Carol Kane, joint chief executive of the Boohoo Group, who represented both Boohoo and PrettyLittleThing; and Paul Smith, head of product quality and supply at Missguided, attended. Missguided CEO Nitin Passi declined the invitation.

# data[].attributes.headline
Assignment: Incorporating Global Perspectives into Your Project

# data[].attributes.subject
Assignment: Incorporating Global Perspectives into Your Project

# data[].attributes.body
10 pts. Due Mon. Dec. 3, 2018

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Incorporating Global Perspectives into Your Project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's tough to love our clothes and keep wearing them for longer when we are faced with a tempting array of newness on offer in the shops. But before you head out into the January sales for those irresistible deals, spare a thought for the impact of fast fashion on the environment.

Fast fashion focuses on speed and low costs in order to deliver frequent new collections inspired by catwalk looks or celebrity styles. But it is particularly bad for the environment, as pressure to reduce cost and the time it takes to get a product from design to shop floor means that environmental corners are more likely to be cut. Criticisms of fast fashion include its negative environmental impact, water pollution, the use of toxic chemicals and increasing levels of textile waste.

Vibrant colours, prints and fabric finishes are appealing features of fashion garments, but many of these are achieved with toxic chemicals. Textile dyeing is the second largest polluter of clean water globally, after agriculture. Greenpeace's recent Detox campaign has been instrumental in pressuring fashion brands to take action to remove toxic chemicals from their supply chains, after it tested a number of brands' products and confirmed the presence of hazardous chemicals. Many of these are banned or strictly regulated in various countries because they are toxic, bio-accumulative (meaning the substance builds up in an organism faster than the organism can excrete or metabolise it), disruptive to hormones and carcinogenic.

Polyester is the most popular fabric used for fashion. But when polyester garments are washed in domestic washing machines, they shed microfibres that add to the increasing levels of plastic in our oceans. These microfibres are minute and can easily pass through sewage and wastewater treatment plants into our waterways, but because they do not biodegrade, they represent a serious threat to aquatic life. Small creatures such as plankton eat the microfibres, which then make their way up the food chain to fish and shellfish eaten by humans.

The devastating impact of toxic chemical use in agriculture, for growing cotton, was shown in a documentary called The True Cost, including the death of a US cotton farmer from a brain tumour, and serious birth defects in Indian cotton farmers' children. Cotton growing requires high levels of water and pesticides to prevent crop failure, which can be problematic in developing countries that may lack sufficient investment and be at risk of drought.

Most cotton grown worldwide is genetically modified to be resistant to the bollworm pest, thereby improving yield and reducing pesticide use. But this can also lead to problems further down the line, such as the emergence of "superweeds" which are resistant to standard pesticides. They often need to be treated with more toxic pesticides that are harmful to livestock and humans.

There is growing interest in organic cotton, with H&M and Inditex, the parent company of Zara, featuring among the world's top five users of organic cotton by volume in 2016. But overall use of organic cotton represents less than 1 per cent of the world's total annual cotton crop.
Hunger for newness
Textile waste is an unintended consequence of fast fashion, as more people buy more clothes and don't keep them as long as they used to. The international expansion of fast fashion retailers exacerbates the problem on a global scale. Wardrobes in developed nations are saturated, so in order to sell more products, retailers must tempt shoppers with constant newness and convince them the items they already have are no longer fashionable.

Increasing disposable income levels over recent generations means there is less need to "make do and mend", as it's often cheaper and more convenient to buy new than have an item repaired. Busy lifestyles make many people more time-poor than previous generations, and with the loss of sewing and mending skills over time, there is less impetus to repair our garments. The rise of supermarket fashion that can be purchased alongside the weekly shop and the regular occurrence of seasonal sales make clothing seem "disposable" in a way it didn't used to be.

There is interest in moving towards a more circular model of textile production which reuses materials wherever possible, yet current recycling rates for textiles are very low. Despite a long-established national network of charity shops and increasing numbers of in-store recycling points in UK high-street stores, three-quarters of Britons throw away unwanted clothing, rather than donating or recycling it.
What shoppers can do
So, can consumers reduce the environmental cost of fast fashion when out shopping? Choosing an eco-friendly fabric is complex as there are pros and cons to all fibre types. Garments which are labelled as being made from natural fibres are not necessarily better than synthetic, as fibre choice is only one part of a complex picture. Fibres still have to be spun, knitted or woven, dyed, finished, sewn and transported - all of which have different environmental impacts.

For example, choosing organic fabrics is better than choosing non-organic fabrics in terms of the chemicals used to grow the fibres, but organic cotton still requires high amounts of water and the impact of dyeing it is higher than the impact of dyeing polyester.

Recycled content is often best of all, as it reduces the pressure on virgin resources and tackles the growing problem of waste management. For example, Patagonia was the first outdoor clothing brand to make polyester fleece out of plastic bottles. In 2017, it decided to rationalise its T-shirt ranges and from spring 2018, will offer only two fabric options of either 100 per cent organic cotton or a blend of recycled cotton and recycled polyester, recognising that even organic cotton has a negative environmental impact.

The Love Your Clothes initiative from the charity Wrap gives information for consumers on each stage of the purchase process, from buying smarter, to caring for and repairing items, to upcycling or customisation and finally responsible disposal. Ultimately, the best thing we can do is to keep our clothing in use for longer - and buy less new stuff.
Patsy Perry is a senior lecturer in fashion marketing at the University of Manchester. This article first appeared on The Conversation (theconversation.com)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's tough to love our clothes and keep wearing them for longer when we are faced with a tempting array of newness on offer in the shops. But before you head out into the January sales for those irresistible deals, spare a thought for the impact of fast fashion on the environment.

# data[].attributes.body
Vicki

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Pressure to meet fast fashion deadlines is leading to women working in Asian factories supplying Gap and H&M being sexually and physically abused, according to unions and rights groups.

More than 540 workers at factories that supply the two retailers have described incidents of threats and abuse, according to two separate reports published last week by Global Labour Justice on gender-based violence in Gap and H&M's garment supply chains.

The reports claim that these allegations, recorded between January and May this year in Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia and Sri Lanka, are a direct result of pressure for quick turnarounds and low overheads.

Publication of the reports comes as negotiations are being held this week at the International Labour Organisation (ILO) to tackle workplace harassment.

Tola Moeun, director of Central Cambodia, an NGO involved in the research, said abuse was a daily reality for female garment workers driven to meet unrealistic targets in H&M and Gap's supply chains. "Most of these cases are not reported due to fear of retaliation in the workplace."

Gap and H&M both told the Guardian they would investigate the allegations and that they welcomed initiatives to tackle violence, including an ILO convention.

Jennifer Rosenbaum, US director of Global Labour Justice, said: "We must understand gender-based violence as an outcome of the global supply chain structure. H&M and Gap's fast fashion supply chain model creates unreasonable production targets and underbid contracts, resulting in women working unpaid overtime and working very fast under extreme pressure.

"Unions and many governments agree an ILO convention on gender-based violence is essential, although there is still opposition from some employers."

Global Dispatch: stories and hard-hitting features from Africa, Asia, South and Central America and beyond

H&M lists 235 Indian garment factories among its suppliers, the report says. In one dispute last month in a Bangalore factory over wages and working conditions, a female tailor said to researchers that she was grabbed by the hair and punched, then told: "You whore, your caste people should be kept where the slippers are kept."

One worker in another H&M supplier factory told researchers she was beaten as punishment for not meeting production quotas.

"[My] batch supervisor came up behind me as I was working on the sewing machine, yelling, 'You are not meeting your target production.' He pulled me out of the chair and I fell on the floor. He hit me, including on my breasts. He pulled me up and then pushed me to the floor again [and] kicked me."

At an H&M supplier factory in Sri Lanka, one woman complained: "When girls scold machine operators for touching them or grabbing them, they take revenge. Sometimes they give them machines that don't function properly. Then they don't come and repair it for a long time. After that, supervisors scold us for not meeting the target."

In a factory supplying Gap in Indonesia, a woman talked about daily being called stupid, mocked for not working faster and threatened with contract termination.

"They also throw materials. They kick our chairs. They don't touch us, so they don't leave a mark that could be used as evidence with the police," she said.

Debbie Coulter, of the Ethical Trading Initiative, of which both Gap and H&M are members, said: "These allegations are deeply concerning. Gender-based violence is unacceptable under any circumstances, and brands need to make sure that women working in their supply chain are protected.

"We expect H&M and Gap to investigate these allegations, and to work with supplier factories so that any women affected have swift access to remedy.

"ETI will be in regular contact with these members and will offer support where appropriate to ensure a swift resolution for all workers affected."

In an email, H&M told the Guardian: "All forms of abuse or harassment are against everything that H&M group stands for. Violence against women is one of the most prevalent human rights violations. Gender-based violence makes women all around the world suffer daily and undermines their health, dignity and security. This is why we welcome any initiative strengthening the human rights of women at work, such as the international convention against gender-based violence in the workplace being discussed within the ILO.

"We will go through every section of the report and follow-up on factory level with our local teams based in each production country."

Gap said it was "deeply concerned" about the allegations and was now conducting due diligence to investigate and address these issues.

"We are committed to making sure that the people who make our clothes work in safe conditions and are treated with respect. We've consolidated our supplier base to focus on partners that share our values and goals, and an increasing number of factories we source from are audited by ILO's Better Work programme.

"Our Code of Vendor Conduct, which closely aligns with our environmental and human rights policies, prohibits any form of discrimination. We conduct assessments of our branded apparel suppliers on a regular basis to ensure compliance, and when we encounter any discriminatory or retaliatory practices in our supply chain, we require that our suppliers promptly remediate the situation.

"Gap Inc agrees that gender-based workplace violence is a significant issue and an appropriate subject for ILO action."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Abuse is daily reality for female garment workers for Gap and H&M, says report

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pressure to meet fast fashion deadlines is leading to women working in Asian factories supplying Gap and H&M being sexually and physically abused, according to unions and rights groups. More than 540 workers at factories that supply the two retailers have described incidents of threats and abuse, according to two separate reports published last week by Global Labour Justice on gender-based violence in Gap and H&M's garment supply chains.