Towards the end of last year an investigation reported that a Swedish power plant had burnt discarded H&M clothes. After it happened H&M issued a statement explaining that only clothes containing mold or not complying with the strict restrictions on chemicals are usually destroyed. The practice is obviously questionable: fast fashion companies usually over-produce garments and accessories polluting the environment, but burning discarded designs isn't certainly a safe practice as well since toxic substances may be released in the air.
Yet it looks like fast fashion retailers are not the only ones prone to the destroying practice: according to Bloomberg, the same source that reported about H&M last November, Burberry's 2017-18 annual report included the cost of finished goods "physically destroyed in the year" that amounted to $37.8 million (the annual revenue was $3.61 billion).
The previous year the brand provided a slightly lower figure - $35.6 million of destroyed goods - and, if we go back in time, we realise that the amount of destroyed goods has actually dramatically increased (the cost of destroyed goods compared to 2014 has indeed tripled).
The 2018 figure includes ready-to-wear garments and accessories, but also $13.76 million in "Beauty inventory", caused by the fact that Burberry's beauty line was acquired by Coty.
Burberry is not the only luxury company that destroys unsold items: Louis Vuitton has been reported to do that while Richemont dismantles its luxury watches to recycle diamonds and assorted spare parts (there are also ready-to-wear companies such as sportswear giant Nike that use this practice).
There are obviously reasons behind the process of destroying goods (reasons that ordinary people may deem as simply illogical...): if the goods are destroyed rather than sold at discounted prices they are not tampered with by other companies, they are not copied or sold on the black market and do not re-enter the marketplace. The value of the brand, its quality and heritage remain therefore unchanged and protected.
Apart from that, in the US there are other rewards: importers can ask for a refund of certain duties, internal revenue taxes and certain fees (Drawback) paid when the products were imported into the U.S. (the U.S. Customs and Border Protection states: "If imported merchandise is unused and exported or destroyed under Customs supervision, 99 percent of the duties, taxes or fees paid on the merchandise by reason of importation may be recovered as drawback.").
According to the Bloomberg report, Burberry shareholders had environmental concerns about the practice and some also asked why they are not allowed to buy the unsold items. Maybe apart from considering the personal requests of the shareholders the company should start a recycle/upcycle programme: while Burberry claims it donates leftover leather to Elvis & Kresse, a fashion company that recycles castoffs, it could also organise other projects involving maybe students and design universities and donating them materials to experiment with (certain beauty products could even be used for art projects, why destroying them?).
Apart from that, maybe the time has come to start considering the possibility of discounting items. Some luxury brands and retailers (Nordstrom and Saks Fifth Avenue) have started doing so, considering also the fact that consumers desire high quality and exclusive luxury items, but they also long to find the best deals.
And if luxury companies complain that discounting prices diminish brand value, continuing the reckless practice of destroying goods will contribute to diminish natural resources especially if we consider the waste offloaded to landfills and oceans every year.
Such practices are also controversial on another level: in the last few years many fashion companies have been using the word sustainability, releasing "sustainable" collections, taking part in conferences about a green economy or even organising awards about sustainable fashion. In Burberry's case the news about destroying the goods are even more controversial when considering that the brand recently announced on Instagram that it will be collaborating with an environmentally-conscious brand like Vivienne Westwood.
Looks like Burberry should start considering sustainability as more vital than exclusivity and profitability and think also about the ethical importance of recycling different products and materials, after all the real luxury in our lives stands in our planet and our health and not in products that very few people can buy.
Comments