![\"\"](\"https:\/\/grist.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/umbra-fashion-divider-yellow.png\")
Neumann didn\u2019t know it then, but she was one of a small handful of people forging a path that\u2019s now more of a six-lane highway: that of the \u201csustainability influencer.\u201d While she was most active on Blogspot, her successors thrive on YouTube, TikTok and Instagram, where they promote hiking gear made from recycled plastic bottles, organic maternity dresses, and secondhand Y2K-inspired looks. This relatively new cadre is susceptible to the same market forces that Neumann encountered \u2014 despite good intentions, influencers\u2019 financial dependency on brands can result in them amplifying skewed ideas about how to right fashion\u2019s environmental wrongs. And experts say that influencers’ paid recommendations often run counter to the most basic sustainability rule of all: we can\u2019t shop our way to a better world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Corporate spending on influencer marketing expanded by a whopping 42 percent in 2021 and is estimated to hit $15 billion<\/a> in 2022. Combine that with reports that fashion executives consider sustainability one of their \u201cbiggest opportunities for growth<\/a>,\u201d and it\u2019s not hard to see why the category has proliferated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cInfluencers are seen as credible sources, almost like friends, but marketers are not,” says Sevil Yesiloglu, senior lecturer in advertising and digital communications at the University of the Arts London and co-editor of the book Influencer Marketing<\/em><\/a>. \u201cSo, marketers are going, \u2018OK, I need to find those people who are seen as credible, who are not perceived as selling things.\u2019\u201d Marketers\u2019 underlying assumption, of course, is that influencers must in fact be quite good at selling things, regardless of perception, or they\u2019re not worth the cost.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like their mainstream counterparts, sustainability influencers\u2019 power comes from gaining followers\u2019 trust, Yesiloglu says. But the key difference is that sustainability influencers don\u2019t just have to convince their followers that they\u2019re cool; they have to convince them that they\u2019re sincere and knowledgeable guides on the topic of living sustainably. <\/p>\n\n\n\n For the most conscientious of sustainability-focused content creators, that means spending ample time trying to learn about a given issue or product before they share about it online. But whereas other information-sharing professions often come with accountability structures built in for catching and correcting misinformation \u2014 like scientists submitting their research for peer review, or newspaper journalists submitting to editors and fact-checkers before publishing an article \u2014 content creation rarely does. <\/p>\n\n\n\n That can mean that claims that sustainability scientists and other subject-matter experts might question, like the idea that making clothing from recycled water bottles<\/a> is an unequivocally good thing or the oft-repeated but unsubstantiated claim that fashion is the second most polluting industry<\/a> in the world, can spread unchecked online. Influencers don\u2019t necessarily deserve more of the blame for misinformation than traditional fashion magazines \u2014 a lack of rigorous inquisition of sustainability claims remains a persistent issue in fashion media at large, with many well-respected publications beholden to advertiser interests.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n But the problem persists on social media, where the emerging influencer economy has very little regulatory oversight. That is especially problematic when it comes to potential greenwashing, says Yesiloglu. As a result, maintaining credibility is based largely on vibes, for lack of anything more concrete. Groups like the Ethical Influencers<\/a> network, founded by UK-based sustainability-focused influencer Besma Whayeb<\/a>, try to get around that by encouraging influencers to \u201cdo plenty of research\u201d and \u201clisten to your gut\u201d about brands before agreeing to paid partnerships, and offering courses on how to properly label ads in a \u201cclear and trustworthy way.\u201d Even still, says Whayeb, it would be impossible for everyone in the network to say, \u201c\u2018We’ve never participated in greenwashing.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n These issues are partly a function of how social media works. \u201cWhat influencers do is regurgitate and reshare information. So at some point, messages can get diluted and attention can be pulled away from people or places where it’s really important,\u201d says Neumann. \u201cWe can’t equate consumption-focused content creation with activism or journalism.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Neumann eventually became so uncomfortable with the tension inherent in sustainability influencing that she decided to change course \u2014 she still wanted to be a part of fixing the fashion industry, but she was no longer convinced content creation was the best way to do it. Instead, she moved to the Philippines to head up a small garment factory<\/a> focused on low-waste production and living wages, where she lives and works today.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Still, for every Neumann type who\u2019s walked away from influencing \u2014 and she notes there are many formerly well-known figures from her peer group who have done so \u2014 there seem to be a dozen new content creators that have risen up to take their place<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Researchers most closely tracking the environmental impact of the fashion industry argue that the kinds of actions sustainability influencers tend to recommend, like eschewing virgin polyester leggings for recycled ones or even thrifting over buying new, will never be enough to bring the fashion industry within planetary boundaries if overall consumption doesn\u2019t decrease.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIf they say something about the use of \u2018sustainable fibers,\u2019 I start seeing red,\u201d says Ingun Grimstad Klepp, a professor of clothing and sustainability at Consumption Research Norway at Oslo Metropolitan University. \u201cBecause the differences between the [impact of] different garments are very, very small compared to the quantity you buy.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Klepp points out that for all the ways the sustainability conversation has become mainstream, a shift which influencers like Neumann may have contributed to, average utilization of individual garments is still falling \u2014 in other words, we all have more clothes than ever before, but we\u2019re wearing them less. That pattern alone ought to indicate that current strategies aren\u2019t working.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Kate Fletcher, a research professor of sustainability, design and fashion at the Centre for Sustainable Fashion<\/a> in London, agrees.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIt seems logical to endorse one brand over the other, but that will always be fundamentally limited by the original ideas and principles of capitalism,\u201d she says. \u201cDespite our best efforts over the last 30 years of trying to tweak that system, things are getting worse, not better, simply because the cumulative scale of the sector outpaces any benefits derived from our greener strategies.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The only solution, Fletcher thinks, is a fundamental paradigm shift away from the growth model that undergirds the influencer economy and fashion itself. Fletcher\u2019s book Earth Logic<\/em><\/a>,<\/em> co-authored with Mathilda Tham, tries to offer solutions to fashion\u2019s ecological problems through the application of systems thinking, a discipline that approaches complicated problems holistically rather than fragmenting them into smaller parts. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The conclusions they come to are stark: The fashion sector will have to shrink; no ifs, ands, or buts. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Paralleling their colleagues in the degrowth movement, Fletcher and Tham argue that even circularity, fashion\u2019s favorite buzzword of the moment, will not be enough to halt fashion\u2019s contributions to climate change and ecosystem destruction if the scale of the industry itself isn\u2019t reduced.<\/p>\n\n\n\n To Fletcher, that means also moving away from one of the defenses that sustainability influencers frequently employ: The money they make selling \u201cgreen\u201d products is justified, they say, because it helps fund their other environmental work. But she thinks the logic of this oft-repeated sentiment can obscure the urgent shift that needs to take place if the fashion industry is ever going to become compatible with a livable planet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI find it a very cynical argument,\u201d Fletcher says. \u201cWe’ve known for a long time that \u2018green\u2019 products do little to change behavior, if anything at all. It seems impossible to say that you can just keep promoting better alternatives, but stick with the growth-focused ideology that underpins it all, because that’s not going to change anything.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n In an era where the odds are stacked in favor of those who uphold the status quo, that means that influencers and followers alike might have to start holding themselves to a higher standard.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For the casual Instagram scroller, that may mean asking more questions of influencers and their content. These might include: What does this person stand to gain by sharing this information or product recommendation? Is there a subject matter expert who doesn\u2019t have a financial stake in this who I can cross-check these claims with? Did this influencer get their information from a primary source, like a scientific study, or from a secondary source, like a blog post they found online? And the most important reflection of all: Does following their account make me want to buy more stuff I don\u2019t need? <\/p>\n\n\n\n On the deepest level, it will almost certainly mean making the mental shift from consumer to citizen. That starts with an acknowledgement that better shopping will never be adequate to fix the fashion industry. The system needs to transform in a fundamental way that will only be achievable through political action and regulation.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The good news is that there\u2019s a growing coalition of people trying to do just that. After nearly three decades of trying to fix the fashion industry through better buying, some advocates have started to see changing policy as more effective, and are creating ways for citizens to be a part of bringing about that shift. A recent example came in the form of SB62<\/a>, a California law meant to protect garment workers from wage theft, which went into effect on January 1. Passing the bill took years of organizing by garment workers, activist groups, and concerned citizens \u2014 many of whom got connected to the movement by hearing about it on Instagram. Proponents of the New York Fashion Act<\/a>, a bill introduced earlier this year, hope to follow a similar pathway to ensuring better regulation of the industry\u2019s environmental impact.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It\u2019s this shift that gives clues as to what hypothetical \u201cEarth Logic influencers,\u201d as Fletcher calls them, might look like in the future. From her perspective, such \u201cinfluencers\u201d would need to pioneer new business models that don\u2019t require them to help brands sell clothing to stay financially afloat. But some of the other things sustainability-focused content creators bring to the table, like the ability to \u201celucidate or give visual form to other ways of living and doing things,\u201d will continue to be useful in shrinking the footprint of the fashion industry to a size well within planetary boundaries, she says.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Politicians, scientists, business executives, and climate activists have spent decades engaged in a deadlock over the societal consequences of making and selling less stuff. The choices that the fashion industry finds itself facing are simply one component of a greater economic conundrum<\/a>, which Fletcher recognizes \u201chas complicated implications, especially in the short term.\u201d But something simply has to give.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAt the end of the day,\u201d she says, \u201cperhaps the only thing we’ve got is our integrity.\u201d<\/p>\n This story was originally published by Grist<\/a> with the headline The great conundrum of the sustainability influencer<\/a> on Mar 2, 2022.<\/p>\n![\"illustration:](\"https:\/\/grist.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/clog.png\")
![\"illustration:](\"https:\/\/grist.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/jeans.png\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/grist.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/umbra-fashion-divider-green.png\")
![\"Illustration:](\"https:\/\/grist.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/dress.png\")
![\"illustration:](\"https:\/\/grist.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/coat2.png\")