A recent report from War on Want has reignited a critical debate inside the apparel industry: whether the current fast fashion, volume driven model is fundamentally extractive and whether true sustainability requires less production, not just cleaner production.
The report frames global fashion as an “extractive” system, drawing parallels to resource extraction industries that externalize environmental damage and labor risk onto the Global South while concentrating profits in Western brands and retailers. Its conclusion is provocative but clear: incremental improvements are not enough. Without structural change, sustainability efforts risk becoming cosmetic.
For brands, manufacturers, and sourcing partners, this is not an abstract critique. It is a signal that the rules of engagement are changing.
What the Report Gets Right
The War on Want analysis surfaces several realities the industry can no longer ignore:
Overproduction is systemic, not accidental. Excess inventory, cancelled orders, and margin pressure cascade downstream often landing on factories and workers with the least leverage.
Risk is unevenly distributed. Environmental compliance, wage volatility, and production uncertainty are routinely absorbed by suppliers, while brands retain flexibility.
Efficiency alone is insufficient. Faster lead times and marginal material improvements do not address the core issue of unchecked volume growth.
These observations align with what many responsible manufacturers see daily: sustainability claims that are disconnected from how orders are planned, priced, and committed.
Where Degrowth Meets Reality
The concept of “degrowth” is confronting for an industry built on scale. Yet, interpreted pragmatically, it does not mean abandoning growth altogether. It means growing differently:
Fewer SKUs, produced with intent
More reorders, fewer speculative buys
Longer-term factory relationships instead of transactional sourcing
Planning discipline that respects capacity, labor, and lead times
In practice, this shifts value from sheer output to reliability, repeatability, and accountability.
The Role of Nearshore and Responsible Manufacturing
One area notably absent from many degrowth conversations is how geography and supply chain design can reduce extractive behavior.
Nearshore manufacturing models particularly in compliant, trade-advantaged regions like Central America offer a viable middle ground:
Shorter lead times reduce forecasting risk, lowering excess inventory.
Smaller, more frequent orders enable demand driven production.
Closer collaboration improves transparency around costing, labor, and capacity.
Stable reorders support fair wages and operational consistency at the factory level.
This is not about perfection. It is about alignment ensuring that sustainability commitments are supported by sourcing mechanics that make them achievable.
From Rhetoric to Responsibility
Reports like this one challenge brands to move beyond sustainability marketing and confront operational truth. The question is no longer whether fashion must change, but where accountability truly sits.
The next phase of responsible sourcing will favor partners who can:
Produce closer to demand
Operate transparently and ethically
Scale responsibly without relying on exploitation
Support brands in making fewer, better decisions
Degrowth, reframed, is not a retreat. It is a reset one that rewards discipline, partnership, and long term thinking over volume at any cost.
For brands willing to engage seriously, this moment represents an opportunity to rebuild supply chains that are not only more sustainable but more resilient, predictable, and human.
