I’ve been blogging a lot about “locally grown” clothing, the “100 mile closet“, and other ways the apparel industry can mimic what’s been happening with food systems for several years. The provenance of our clothes—where they came from, through what processes and systems—is just as important as the provenance of our food.
Monocle magazine makes a good business case for why provenance is something businesses should pay attention to (via PSFK):
Provenance became a big issue for brands low, medium and high in 2007. A spate of scares involving Chinese-made products saw the world’s largest toy maker, Mattel, recall 21 million toys due to concern over lead paint. Gap was stung when it was found that children in India were employed to make garments for their Western peers. In the showrooms of many luxury brands, buyers were starting to question if the clothes and accessories were really made in the UK, France and Italy.
In 2008, provenance is going to become more important at luxury goods companies as CEOs decide whether to downgrade their brands (they wouldn’t call it this, but we would) by shutting workshops and moving the work to Asia to improve margins, or take a long-term view and keep investing in craftsmanship, education and maintaining manufacturing facilities above the shop.
The decision should be a simple one. The fake handbag might be made in China, but if 90 per cent of the real thing is made there as well, where’s the point of difference other than price? Against this backdrop, a growing movement for authenticity, craftsmanship and heritage is creating greater opportunities for artisinal companies.
When we start paying attention to ‘provenance’—where stuff comes from—what changes will we demand from the fashion industry? How will we vote with our dollars?
- BROWSE / IN TIMELINE
- « “Sound is Touch” and Beijing Opera
- » Daniel Cramer x Karen Dalton =
- BROWSE / IN 100milecloset branding business economics ethics
- « [and clothing]
- » “as the world falls down”
