“The fact remains, however, that innovation in the way clothes are made has not kept pace with the acceleration of how they are designed and marketed.”

Fast fashion is gobbling up resources and producing waste faster than we can keep up. The quote above, from a report by McKinsey, details the juxtaposition between a booming, mass consumption industry and its low-tech, unsustainable manufacturing practices. Can fast fashion ever be sustainable?

I think the industry is inherently unsustainable, largely in part to the sheer volume of output. Additionally, the notorious poor treatment of the workers making the clothing must be completely revamped, probably driving costs up.

The issues surrounding fast fashion continue after a consumer picks up a t-shirt at the local H&M. How a consumer washes their garment or whether they throw it out or donate to a local Goodwill affects the environment too.

The Sustainable Apparel Coalition created the Higg Index, a self-assessment tool to identify a brand’s impact on the earth. I thought this was an interesting, easy way for a retailer to assess its true impact. By realistically gauging the impacts made, further steps can be taken to reduce them/

Historically, women bear the role of caregiver- especially to their children. This results in years and years of women dropping out of the labor force, many to never enter again. For some, its a choice happily made. For others, its a pressured decision based on decades of male-centered socialization.

I pulled some great quotes to summarize a report on the relationship between gender and sustainability based on the 3 pillars of sustainability. Let me know what you think in the comments!

This course has made me think more critically, more creatively, and more often. Often, our class discussions leave me unsettled. There is always more to do. At times, its overwhelming.

I came into this class with an “all or nothing” mentality. You either live sustainably or you don’t. In essence, this is true. Yet, we have to pick and choose our battles (probably my biggest lesson from university thus far). Understanding that I can’t snap my fingers, change every behavior and bad habit, and fix the world’s problems made me think more long-term and solution-focused.

“I change myself, I change the world.” -Gloria Anzuldua

Changing the world is a big task. At times, I feel like my actions don’t matter. But that’s not true! It’s a ripple effect. If I make composting the norm at home, that’s 3 more people who will catch on. Little actions soon turn into sweeping changes that have the power to change the world. As a consumer, I make conscious choices about who I give my money to and why. Supporting local, sustainable businesses instead of saving a few bucks speaks volumes when money talks. Taking the extra few minutes to learn where my food and clothing are coming from- especially who it impacted to end up in my fridge or closet- is worth it.

Sustainability must be the norm. Soon it cannot be a point of difference, it has to be automatic. I’m excited to see where we, as a society, are in a few years. I hope we make big strides toward saving the earth from complete destruction. We have the power, after all!

An article in the Georgia Straight reported that the Vancouver city council passed a motion to include culture as a pillar of sustainability, alongside environment, economy, and society. Integrating arts and culture as a core pillar of a city, rather than a fringe culture, increase the economic success and social inclusion of its citizens.

Sustainability’s link to culture and art is further discussed in the 10-year-old report  An Approach to Cultural Policy in Vancouver. My quick synopsis:

The Easterlin Curve shows that once a country’s income per capita surpasses $12,000, happiness no longer maintains a direct relationship to income. Countries below this threshold are considered “industrial” or “survival economies”. More income translates to more accessible goods and services. Once that $12,000 threshold is broken, a country turns into an identity economy.

Source: http://www.theholmteam.ca/votewendy/media/PowerOfTheArts.pdf

Identity is built through objects or experiences (though not mutually exclusive). Identity through Experience, such as attending a cultural event deemed relevant to one’s past experiences or desired identity, cultivates social collaboration. The following quote eloquently sums it up:

…it does not urge individuals to lock into self-defeating identity building strategies of the “arms race” type but may rather foster genuine interests for diversity and communication and, on the other side, does not require individuals to unconditionally increase their demand for exclusive, identitarian goods that makes politically unfeasible any attempt at a reasoned limitation of the ecological footprint of our social and economic systems.

Source: http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/632493/19882780/1344980130697/Support+the+Arts+sticker.jpg?token=5au%2Bn07k7XsNTWAQ%2FepNJqiGQKM%3D

The arts have so many benefits beyond just individual creative expression. Art creates communities, economic opportunities, and identity: cornerstones of a sustainable city.

With the upcoming inauguration of Donald Trump as President of the United States, many are still wondering how this happened. Much of Trump’s success in the election, aside from Russian involvement, is due to automation taking over jobs and industries once supported by working-class White America. Automation can complete tasks more efficiently, both cost-wise and environmentally. Technology allows firms to conserve energy, reduce resources, and minimize overall impact.

Jobs are moving from doing to overseeing. This comes at a price. The implementation and overseeing of a new automation system requires more knowledge and education than simply doing the intended job itself. Those losing their jobs to automatic systems may not be qualified to work on the systems.

How does a firm or industry reconcile the future of automation with the loss of millions of jobs?

In June 2016, a convoy of digitally-connected, semi-automated trucks led by one driver traveled across Europe as an experiment in a new, sustainable model for transportation companies. According to an article from UPS.com, the platoon model is more feasible than complete automation, reduces fuel usage and emissions, and is more cost-effective. The trade-off of full automation to save jobs is a worthy compromise.

Automated truck, source: http://techbleach.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/self-driving-freightliner-truck.jpg

This brings up the question of responsibility. Who is responsible for ensuring adequate jobs? If the responsibility lies on individual firms, then entire restructuring of business models would have to ensure that capital costs to increase sustainable practices do not cut jobs. If government is responsible, then legislation must consider the long-term social and environmental effects of pushing against computerization.

North America still treads lightly when it comes to complete reliance on technology. These small steps spark fear of the unknown, but there is more than enough time to come up with solutions.

Sources:

https://longitudes.ups.com/truckings-new-era-of-sustainability/

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/donald-trump-and-the-twilight-of-white-america/482655/