The fast fashion industry has emerged as a dominant force in global markets, delivering affordable and trendy clothing at unprecedented speeds. While this business model satisfies consumer demands for low-cost fashion, it does so at a significant ethical cost. By employing practices that prioritize profit over human welfare, fast fashion exploits vulnerable workers, fosters social inequality, and contributes to unsustainable consumption patterns. Applying Jeremy Bentham’s utilitarian ethical framework, this article explores whether the industry’s actions can be deemed morally justifiable.
Utilitarianism according to Jeremy Bentham
Utilitarian ethics is a normative ethical theory that assesses the morality of an action based on its consequences rather than the intention or motivation behind it. John Bentham, the founder of classical utilitarianism, proposed several fundamental principles to evaluate human actions (Bentham, 1996).
The principle of consequence is one such principle, which posits that the rightness or wrongness of an action is determined by its consequences. The utilitarian principle is another fundamental principle that aims to achieve the greatest possible benefit for all concerned. According to Bentham’s formula, everyone’s preferences are equally important, regardless of social class or other distinctions. The social principle is yet another principle of Bentham’s utilitarianism, which requires actions to produce the maximum possible benefit for all parties involved. Under this principle, an action is deemed ethical if it leads to the greatest possible balance of benefits for all concerned when compared to other available courses of action. The hedonism principle is a fourth principle that outlines what constitutes the aforementioned benefits. According to Bentham, maximizing utility involves pursuing pleasure and minimizing suffering (Bentham, 1996).
These principles provide a useful framework for evaluating the morality of various actions, including those within the fashion industry, where ethical considerations have become increasingly relevant.
Fast Fashion Under the Utilitarian Lens
To evaluate the ethical justification of fast fashion from a utilitarian perspective, it is necessary to consider the consequences of the industry. It is also important to note that the negative consequences of fast fashion are not limited to environmental and social impacts. Bentham’s principle of consequence is a fundamental aspect of utilitarian ethics, and it requires that the consequences of an action are evaluated to determine if they are right or wrong (Bentham, 1996). In the case of fast fashion, the consequences are overwhelmingly negative, with negative impacts on sustainability and human rights, such as pollution and insufficient wages for factory workers. The focus on low-cost, quickly produced clothing also encourages poor quality and a lack of durability in clothing items. This not only contributes to the waste and disposal issue but also results in consumers needing to replace items more frequently, ultimately leading to increased spending on clothing over time. These negative consequences far outweigh any potential benefits, making fast fashion ethically unjustifiable considering the principle of consequence.
Additionally, the utilitarian principle requires that the benefits of action be maximized for the greatest number of people (Bentham, 1996). In the case of fast fashion, the benefits are primarily financial, with companies profiting from the low cost of production and consumers enjoying low prices. However, these benefits are only enjoyed by a small subset of individuals – namely, the owners and shareholders of fast fashion companies, as well as consumers who can afford to purchase new clothing frequently. The negative consequences, on the other hand, affect a much wider range of people, including factory workers, consumers who may experience health issues from low-quality clothing, and future generations who will inherit the environmental damage caused by fast fashion. Therefore, regarding the utilitarian principle, fast fashion is ethically unjustifiable.
Bentham argued that actions should be evaluated based on their impact on society rather than just on the individual (Bentham, 1996). From this perspective, the negative consequences of fast fashion disproportionately affect vulnerable populations, including factory workers who may not have other employment options and low-income consumers who may not be able to afford sustainable clothing options. This perpetuates social inequalities and reduces overall well-being in society. Additionally, fast fashion fosters health risks for consumers, and the negative impact on the environment affects all humans. Therefore, it can be concluded that fast fashion does not achieve the greatest possible benefit for all concerned, which is a requirement of Bentham’s social principle.
Finally, the hedonism principle emphasizes the importance of pleasure and pain in ethical decision-making (Bentham, 1996). While fast fashion may bring pleasure to consumers in the short term, the negative consequences – including environmental degradation, labor exploitation, and social inequalities – ultimately lead to pain and suffering for individuals and society. Especially the pain for garment factory workers and the harm to the environment contradicts the hedonism principle. Although fast fashion promotes pleasure through the acquisition of low-cost clothing, this pleasure is short-lived, as the garments quickly deteriorate and contribute to waste and pollution. The pain clearly outweighs any pleasure, making fast fashion ethically unjustifiable considering the hedonism principle.
In conclusion, a utilitarian evaluation of fast fashion reveals that the fast fashion industry is unethical, as the negative consequences outweigh any potential benefits. Fast fashion results in more pain than pleasure, especially for factory workers and the environment. Therefore, ethical considerations require a shift towards more sustainable and mindful practices in the fashion industry to minimize the negative consequences of fast fashion and achieve greater benefits for all concerned. This requires not only changes in production and consumption patterns but also broader societal changes to address the root causes of overconsumption and environmental degradation.
By Anabel Brandts
Sources:
Bentham, J. (1996). The collected works of Jeremy Bentham: An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. Clarendon Press.
„Fast Fashion Die Schattenseiten der Mode“, 27.09.2019 to 02.08.2020 Museum Europäischer Kulturen, Picture: David von Becker (https://luxiders.com/de/fast-fashion-dunklen-seiten/)
https://www.treehugger.com/are-these-unethical-fashion-brands-hiding-in-your-closet-4857096
