Vegan vs animal-based fashion: which one is more sustainable?

Vegan fashion is in. An indication for this is the first Vegan Fashion
Week, which premiered in Los Angeles in early February. But the boom is
calling on more and more critics, who accuse animal rights activists of
lacking sustainability, of all things.

Debunking the “myths” of vegan fashion

A week ago, the British Consumer Choice Center announced in a press
release the start of the #ChoiceInFashion campaign: “We want to inform
consumers about animal-derived materials and to debunk the myths and urban
legends about vegan fashion that are being spread by self-proclaimed animal
rights groups.” Consumers would be put under increasing pressure to avoid
animal products, laments the campaign. The CCC (which uses the same
abbreviation as the Clean Clothes Campaign) represents consumers in more
than 100 countries and is fighting for the preservation of a choice in
consumer products (not only in fashion) and against increasing regulations.
“We are closely monitoring regulatory trends in Ottawa, Washington,
Brussels, Geneva and other regulation hotspots and inform and activate
consumers in order to fight for the continuation of choice”, it adds. In
short: the demonisation of animal products should stop.

Fur has been criticised for decades

It all started with fur. At least since the ‘80s, every child knows
that real fur is pretty much uncool or at least questionable. Who dares
walk the streets of Germany in a mink coat should be prepared for
hostilities. Strangely enough though, this has, however, not prevented the
emergence of parka fashion with countless fur trims on hoods or fur
pompoms, often without the wearer’s knowledge: Surveys show that they
thought the fur was fake. Surely, the differences between real and fake fur
are hard to make out by now but textile labels should clear the doubts.
However, it seems to be a fact that although many consumers are against
fur, they do not necessarily act that way.

Animal rights activists become shareholders

To change all this, animal rights organisations have been
confrontational for years and have initiated media-effective activities in
city centres, in front of stores, company headquarters or trade fairs.
Often with prominent support. In Germany, branches of department store
Breuninger and luxury ski brand Bogner were attacked recently because of
their use of real fur. In the fall of 2018, Breuninger relented and
announced it would no longer offer real fur in its selections from 2020
onward. The news was even broadcast on TV channel RTL, and the increasing
success spurred on animal rights activists further. In addition, animal
welfare organisation PETA bought shares of numerous fashion houses to
influence them from the inside – as a shareholder – on the materials used
in the collections. This is how PETA became shareholder of Canada Goose,
LVMH, Prada, etc.

Vegans want to ban all animal-based fibres

By now, it is no longer only about fur. With the worldwide vegan
lifestyle – partly triggered by scandalous animal husbandry practices –
each animal-based or animal-produced textile raw material ends up on the
Red List – from leather via silk and wool to down feathers. Gruesome
reports about cruelty to animals have caused so much public pressure that
numerous fashion companies not only loudly banned the use of fur or exotic
leather but also of mohair, angora and silk.The list of brands is getting
longer and longer, reaching from Chanel to Esprit. At the same time, more
and more vegan collections are being bought, for example at Marks &
Spencer. Even trade fairs react: Helsinki Fashion Week banned leather last
summer.

Using exotic skins is animal welfare

Nowadays, however, some animal rights campaigners propagate the exact
opposite: Especially the economic use of certain animal products ensures
the continued existence of these breeds and prevents an uncontrollable
killing of wild animals, they argue. This applies, they say, for example,
to many types of exotic skins. These animals are bred on farms to produce
leather and are not yet threatened by extinction because of it.

When Chanel banned the use of reptile skins in 2018 due to public
pressure, it faced criticism too: “Instead of working on improvements,
Chanel chooses the lazy way out”, commented Dr. Rosie Cooney, Chair of the
IUCN Species Survival Commission’s Sustainable Use and Livelihoods
Specialist Group according to Business of Fashion. Thus, the label
“guilt-free”, which vegan fashion likes to claim, is turned into the exact
opposite.

Vegan fashion is bad for the environment

And that’s not all: To the extent that the vegan lifestyle has become
the new mainstream, accusations by environmentalists are increasing who
support animal welfare in principle but not the use of synthetic materials.
What is sold as vegan “leather” is often nothing but polyester or
polyurethane. In other words, a plastic fiber that first of all, is made
from crude oil and is therefore not renewable. Second, it is not
biodegradable and thus littering our planet and third, reaches the food
chain in the form of microplastics. And fourth: There is currently no way
to recycle shoes. Vegan wool substitutes are also problematic: The
synthetic fibre Polyacryl is used to achieve a wool-like look.

Vegan does not equal environmentally friendly

Thus, one can conclude that vegan fashion is not necessarily an
environmentally friendly or sustainable alternative. One has to
distinguish, which is important, and may actually often be overlooked.
Nevertheless, the tone of many current anti-vegan campaigns is irritating.
The common argument that vegan fashion relies on plastic and litters the
environment is as shallow as the vegans’ general accusation that animal
products originate from cruel animal breeding practices. Neither is correct
as not all animal fibers are per se more environmentally friendly than
synthetic fibers, nor are all animals kept in a cruel way. What is
irritating, therefore, is that ethical and sustainable arguments are
getting mixed up and exploited. Those who decide not to use animal products
usually do so for ethical reasons. And these do not necessarily have to do
with environmental protection.

This article was originally published on FashionUnited DE; edited
and translated by Simone Preuss.

Photo: FashionUnited / Regina Henkel