The life cycle analysis also led Levi’s to focus on increasing a products lifespan. Much in agreement with Patagonia’s belief that fast fashion will only serve to create more waste, Levi’s realized the importance of making clothing that would stay out of landfills. The life cycle analysis caused Levi’s to shift its attenion and innovations to the creation of a more durable product. The company openly expresses that disposable, fast fashion is the antithesis of sustainability. Recent efforts have been made to use stronger fabrics with reinforced seams and more resilience. The company has also looked towards the re-use of their clothing. Cotton is more easily re-usable than mixed synthetic materials. Levi’s has a renewed a focus on 100% cotton and only added materials that can be removed or recycled easily. This focus, combined with a partnership to donate used clothing to Goodwill has lengthened the lifespan of Levi’s products. The average U.S. consumer throws away 68 pounds of clothing and textiles per year, resulting in a total of 23.8 billion pounds of clothing that end up in landfills,[6] highlighting the importance of long clothing lifespan. This two-fold focus at the front end by using more sustainable processes, and at the back end by considering the reusability/recyclability of the product has made Levi’s an apparel company for other merchandisers to emulate.
It is important for all companies to hold themselves to standards much like those set out by Patagonia and Levi’s. Fast fashion is distinctly not sustainable, and creating a better product is good not only for the environment but for the consumer. If the actions of Levi’s and Patagonia can be held up as examples for other apparel companies it would be interesting to see the types advances that could be made. Before 2007, Levi’s was unaware of the large amounts of water it was consuming. By focusing on water use, Levi’s was able to create new processes that used less water and had less environmental impact. If other retailers applied similar analyses, possibly more clothing would be produced sustainably.
Read more…
_____
