A Culture of Consumption: How the Pursuit of Thrift has Influenced our Shopping Habits
The purpose of a wardrobe can be construed as many things, but perhaps the most accurate assertion of its purpose lies in the dichotomy it creates between people: it can separate or includes one in society, depending on the level of conformity: it distances people from each other and also brings them together, given a shared taste in styles: It’s a way to communicate to the world who you are without having to actually meet people. You can use it as a proxy to interact with the world without ever participating it. And now more than ever, people have a vast array of choices when it comes to how they're going to be communicating in this way. A rise in the popularity of fast-fashion and consignment shops has led to a new type of purchasing behaviour; the pursuit of value leading to over-consumption.
Generally, thrift is a trait that is bred out of necessity. There is no disputing the fact that everyone loves a good deal, but the main objective of saving money is to leave a surplus left over to dedicate to other resources. It is different from stinginess in that it isn’t reluctant to participate in consumer culture, just in modicum amounts, and the pursuit of thrift can even come to define the experience of shopping itself; “Shopping is a form of self-expression. People define themselves through their shopping. How they shop, where they shop, and what they buy serves the purpose of letting people express their desires, their needs, and their personalities” (Pooler, 2003, p. 3). Understandably, people take pride in attaining his material desires with minimal expense, because one would assume this would leave them money left over for other luxuries. But when there are no other resources that the benefits of thrift need to be spent on, the result can be overconsumption. Given generally declining prices of household necessities, this is becoming more common than not. So while this thrift makes one economically sustainable, ending up with more luxuries than one can feasibly use as a result is not environmentally sustainable.
The incentive to save money has made thrift stores much more popular in recent years; the number of consignment stores has increased by 7% in each of the past 2 years, which Britt Beemer, founder and chairman of America’s Research Group, attributed to increased interest from young shoppers (Tuttle, 2012). Interestingly, it is not just young shoppers fueling the increase in popularity, as Beemer also notes a rise in thrift shopping from 14% in 2008 to 20% in 2012 in the whole population (Tuttle, 2012). According to Irma Zandl of consumer-tracking firm ‘Zandl Group,’this is because “people today take pride in being individual and unique, in setting trends vs. following them, and with so much sameness at malls throughout the country, one way to achieve this kind of originality is by buying retro and vintage items that are no longer in production” (Tuttle, 2012). But again, attempts at economic thrift can have environmental drawbacks. The value of those garments in the consumers eyes is less than it would be if they were buying the same item new, and the lack of monetary value associated with the garment not only makes it easier to discard but also replace unnecessarily (i.e. you are less likely to feel the urge to spend any money on a second-hand piece of clothing when you have one of better quality, whereas you would likely feel the urge to indulge in a more expensive replacement of a garment you already own strictly because the garment you have now is of lesser quality). So while consignment shopping allows for the continuation of the garments life cycle, it has adverse effects on overindulgence and thus sustainability. But thrift shopping is not the only source of cheap clothing; fast fashion companies hold a major stake in the world market for their price-savvy products, and thus have a more widespread impact on sustainability.
The nature of consumerism has changed as the world has become more and more fast-paced; disposable products are now more prevalent for their ease-of-use and low cost. “In decades past, economy and thrift were the order of the day,” asserts Jim Pooler in his book ‘Why We Shop: Emotional Rewards and Retail Strategies;’ “Today, products are less durable and meant to be disposed of…. similarly, clothing and accessories are perishables in the sense that once they are out of style their usefulness expires” (10). This is largely due to the nature of the market being catered to. “Young people of the population that constitute Generation Y would prefer a higher number of low-quality, cheap and fashionable clothes as compared to baby boomers, who would prefer to purchase fewer number of higher quality clothes” (Bhardwaj & Fairhurst, 2010). Bariel is no exception, and he admits that he subscribes a little too often to the cost-effective fast-fashion styles. But the global result of similar purchasing patterns has been vast over consumption with little regard for the impact on the environment. Commodities that are cheap are, by the laws of economics, higher in demand. But in order to first be cheap to sell, it must be cheap to produce. The consequences of that cost-efficiency, from a sustainability point of view, are dire. A study aimed at uncovering the motivations behind a consumer's decision to purchase a pair of jeans found that “fit of denim jeans was the most important cue followed by style and quality, whereas brand names and country-of-origin were relatively insignificant” (Rahman, 2011). This indicates more than just a consumer’s preference in jeans; the conclusion of this study has implications on the entire fashion industry, and it’s already being realized in the execution of its business as more and more goods are being imported from overseas due to lower costs. Essentially, so long as the fit and and style are satisfactory, producers face relatively few drawbacks from consumers by utilizing lower-price manufacturing overseas. This has huge implications on the environment due to the transportation of goods involved. Furthermore, as lower costs devalue the product being purchased in the eyes of the consumer, it makes it easier to dispose of. In fact, fast fashion companies such as H&M, Zara, and Topshop sell garments with the expectation that they will be worn no more than 10 times (Birtwistle & Moore, 1990) before they end up in a landfill. In order to maintain lower prices, companies utilize economically efficient means of production. But cost-efficient means of production are more common overseas, where consequently most manufacturing occurs. The continued aims of cutting costs in order to make products cheaper destabilizes the supply chain, which can culminate in accidents such as the Bangladesh factory collapse in 2013, where building codes were blatantly ignored due to the economic incentives (Yardley, 2013). Ultimately fast-fashion and its popularity are a result of western demand for thrift, but when saving money isn’t saving lives or the environment, the meager benefits are overshadowed by the drastic potential consequences.
The problem is that the consumer culture driving producers to lower prices do not feel the adverse effects that over consumption has on the world, making unsustainable business and purchasing practices more common than not. While consumers were generally unaware of how clothing was disposed of, Birtwistle and Moore found that they were aware of this deficiency, and would alter their buying and disposing habits should the topic receive more attention (2007). But this lack of awareness has consequences; 50% of all garments we throw away are recyclable, and their chemical composition either prevents them from decomposing or producing methane in the process, contributing to global warming (Birtwistle & Moore, 2007). This push by producers to cut costs on behalf of consumers consequently generates a business model which fuels over consumption, operates under hazardous production methods, and lacks consideration for sustainability.
Annotated Bibliography:
Davis, F. (1992). Flaunts & Feints. In Fashion, Culture, & Identity (p. 69-78). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Davis explores the multifaceted fashion industry and the role it plays on everything from society at large to the grouping of adolescents in school. He covers the history and development of different styles, fads and movements, the different influences on personal style, and how androgyny and gender ambivalence play a role in fashion now. The assertions of Davis are founded on logically constructed and organized arguments, and take into account any relevant information pertaining to the matter at hand. It is this overlap of fact-based knowledge and consideration of gender that makes it particularly relevant to my critical analysis in regards to the historical connotations of overalls between men and women. Personally I found the information was presented in a way that would make a topic that could be boring for some immersive and informative.
G. Birtwistle C.M. Moore, (2007),"Fashion clothing – where does it all end up?", International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 35 Iss: 3 pp. 210 - 216
This study analyzes the impact fast fashion has had on the habits of the consumer. Of particular focus is the mindset of disposability that has accompanied the growth of fast fashion companies. It goes about this with in an effective manner of fact analysis and expands progressively on what is established as a result. The relevance to my paper cannot be overstated, as it offers critical insight into the impact fast fashion has had on the attitudes and habits of the common shopper, and goes into detail about the global consequences of those changing practices in consumer culture. Ultimately the information was very insightful, providing crucial coverage of issues concerning sustainability.
Bhardwaj, V., Fairhurst, A. (2010). Fast Fashion: Response to Changes in the Fast Fashion Industry. The International Review of Retail, Distribution, and Consumer Research, 20(1), 165-173. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/576035/Fast_fashion_response_to_changes_in_the_fashion_industry
Vertica Bhardwaj and Ann Fairhurst assess the evolution of the fast industry and how it has impacted the fashion industry as a whole. They also delve further into the habits of the population which drives fast fashion, concluding that the popularity of fast-fashion has been a result of the speed at which our society operates increasing in also every way. They do not overlook the impact on sustainability, noting that fashion now encompasses numerous foreign nations of the process of our production, adversely affecting distribution and profits. This complete coverage of sustainability and consumer culture makes it an abundant source of ideas and quotations. It speculates and then supports its assertions on the conclusions of numerous studies and statistics. It concludes that while more research can be put into the supply-side of fashion, it will become increasingly more important to study the behaviour of the consumers the suppliers of fashion are catering to.
Hyun-Mee Joung , (2014) "Fast-fashion consumers’ post-purchase behaviours", International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 42 Iss: 8, pp.688 - 697
This study explores a consumer post-purchase behaviors and their impact on the environment, as well as the widespread influence of the fast fashion business model has on the larger industry and how that is reflective of our culture. It concludes that fast-fashion nurses tendencies of hoarding and over-disposal, while negatively contributing to fabric recycling. It showed that fast-fashion shoppers have a positive attitude towards environmental sustainability, but don’t participate personally in assuring that their own shopping practices are sustainable. This contradiction provided an interesting source of relevant information that proved very useful in the understanding of my own arguments.
References
References:
Frank, B. (2015, March 14). Meaning of the Wardrobe [Personal interview].
Tindall, G., & Shi, D. (2013). The Second World War. In America: A Narrative History (9th ed., pp. 888-937). New York: W.W. Norton.
Tuttle, B. (2012, July 10). The Thrift Store: Not Just for Penny-Pinching Grandmas Anymore. Retrieved March 23, 2015, from http://business.time.com/2012/07/10/the-thrift-store-not-just-for-penny-pinching-grandmas-anymore/
Yardley, J. (2013, April 25). Building Collapse in Bangladesh Kills Scores of Garment Workers. New York Times, pp. A1
Rahman, O. (2011). Understanding Consumers' Perceptions and Behaviors - Implications for Denim Jeans Design. Journal of Textile and Apparel, 7(1), 1-16. Retrieved March 21, 2015, from https://www.academia.edu/3519001/Understanding_consumers_perceptions_and_behaviours_-_Implications_for_denim_jeans_design
Pooler, J. (2003). Introduction: Why We Shop. In Why We Shop: Emotional Rewards and Retail Strategies (pp. 1-14). Westport, Conn.: Praeger.
Bruce, M., Daly, L. (2006),"Buyer behaviour for Fast Fashion", Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 10 Iss: 3 pp. 329 - 344