WRAP calls for longer lived clothes

WRAP has published new research into the environmental impacts of clothing and expressed concerns that people are purchasing too many items which are too short lived. They lament the fact that people's wardrobes contain garments which haven't been worn for at least a year and suggest that people should try to extend the lives of their clothing.

Their research tells them that consumers would be willing to explore new options for repair, buying pre-owned clothes, and other ways of extending their clothing lives. This same research though tells them that the main reason people stop wearing clothes is that they no longer fit. Presumably WRAP believes that these clothes should be altered, rather than replacements purchased.

This however runs into the modern resource conundrum: while resources are supposedly running out and are apparently incredibly expensive/valuable, in reality their relative prices are low (despite the biggest commodity boom in history), particularly when compared to labour. Clothes are cheap and so the average person can afford plenty of them.

WRAP estimates that the global carbon footprint of UK clothing consumption is 1.5 tonnes per household per year. Even if we make consumers pay these carbon costs, that would only amount to around £45/household/year (using government assumptions). This is around 2.5% of what WRAP suggests UK households spend on clothing. Not enough in my view to make much of a difference to consumption patterns, even if fully internalised.

WRAP seems to think that if consumers are given better information about the environmental footprint of their clothing, their consumption patterns could change. I am not convinced. WRAP's research may indicate that people aren't interested in fashion and updating their wardrobes constantly, but consumers' revealed preferences - from their actual consumption behaviour - tell us a different story.

It is likely that the costs of clothing as a proportion of consumer expenditure will remain small over time, which in turn means that we are unlikely to see a dramatic reduction in consumption. Unless WRAP advocates punitive taxes on clothes or wardrobe rationing, I think this is unlikely to change much and WRAP's focus should instead be on production processes (which to be fair are also examined in the report).