Luxury fashion brands seem to contradict sustainability. The values of sustainability are commonly associated with terms such as sharing, collaboration, austerity, and collective thinking. Luxury, however, is associated with excess, self-indulgence, delight and decadence (Kapferer & Bastien, 2012:360). Further paradoxes exist where the apparel of the luxury consumer is often manufactured by labourers in low wage-paying producing countries. High wastage is evident in the seasonality of the fashion industry. However, work opportunities are created by the fickleness of the fashion industry and the constant need to own the most current designs (Black, 2012:8). Owing to the high visibility of luxury fashion and the contractions between one -- on the one hand -- supplying income to families by way of employment and -- on the other hand -- not complying to sustainable international human resource practices, fashion brands are the focus of many non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that use the mass media to expose any social wrongdoing in the industry. Luxury fashion brands are constantly in the spotlight, as highlighted in articles posted by the Clean Clothes campaign, a custodian for employees in the global garment industries; Greenpeace; and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). An example of such practices was when Greenpeace reported in 2009 that shoe brands such as Timberland and Clarks were manufactured from leather sourced from the hides of cattle in illegally deforested areas in Brazil. This provided negative publicity for these luxury shoe brands as well as for the Brazilian government that was financing this project (Vurro, Russo & Perrini, 2009:609). The luxury fashion brand industry, as well as the consumers of luxury fashion labels, are accused -- often only for the sake of sensationalism -- of living in the lap of luxury whilst maintaining a supply chain that is riddled with unsustainable practices. The social structure and hierarchy of patrons within a community have, since the Middle Ages, been signalled by the clothes they wore. Social class was a birthright. Today, sporting luxury brands continues to serve as status symbols, but unlike mediaeval times, it is not limited to people with a high social standing at birth as one can work for status, and purchase the items because one deserves them. (Han, Nunes, & Drèze, 2010:15). In 2009, during the International Herald Tribune (IHT) Suzy Menkes, the fashion editor at The Herald, called for “luxury”’ and “fashion” to be separated. Luxury prides itself in its handcrafted garments manufactured by respected tradesmen in the industry. The outcome is that the manufactured goods are made to last a lifetime (Gibson, 2012:23).
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:nmmu/vital:27902 |
| Date | January 2017 |
| Creators | Colesky, Yolanda |
| Publisher | Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Faculty of Business and Economic Sciences |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis, Masters, MBA |
| Format | xiv, 102 leaves, pdf |
| Rights | Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University |
Page generated in 0.0022 seconds