Before we fully fire up our value judgement engines (labeling this fast fash phenomenon a race to the bottom, lacking in real progress, etc.) consider the possibility that this article describes the very dynamic of economic progress.
Some attributes of this dynamic: Acceleration of efficiency via new forms of risk-offsetting. Improvement of manufacturing process and distribution. Finding edge through creativity and understanding the needs of who's buying.
And the progress is clear: a more sophisticated cultural environment that can be enjoyed by more people than before.
Of course there are trade-offs; progress does not arrive on your doorstep without some nasty side-effects. In the case of fast fashion, apparently: IP theft. Environmental damage. Widening gap between the classes.
So why should this corner of the economy be judged any differently than the layers of hyper-competitive tech companies in SF and SV, reacting to trends, improving their manufacturing process, and pushing design new limits?
> consider the possibility that this article describes the very dynamic of economic progress.
I agree. I'd even say that this article describes the point where economic progress starts diverging from the reasons we want to have it.
> Of course there are trade-offs; progress does not arrive on your doorstep without some nasty side-effects.
There's a moment when we should stop and ask ourselves if the side effects are worth it, 'lest we humans get optimized out of the economy, which will continue to run by itself on automation, without us being present, or alive.
> So why should this corner of the economy be judged any differently than the layers of hyper-competitive tech companies in SF and SV, reacting to trends, improving their manufacturing process, and pushing design new limits?
I don't think it shouldn't; SV nowdays is a fashion-driven industry after all ;).
"And the progress is clear: a more sophisticated cultural environment that can be enjoyed by more people than before."
Sophisticated in terms of overall manufacturing process but not so much variety, IMO.
I think the trend helps to dish out more of the same (as "cool" has now become easily attainable, both in access, timeliness and affordability), which makes a far higher percentage of people (especially under 40) look more alike.
Some attributes of this dynamic: Acceleration of efficiency via new forms of risk-offsetting. Improvement of manufacturing process and distribution. Finding edge through creativity and understanding the needs of who's buying.
And the progress is clear: a more sophisticated cultural environment that can be enjoyed by more people than before.
Of course there are trade-offs; progress does not arrive on your doorstep without some nasty side-effects. In the case of fast fashion, apparently: IP theft. Environmental damage. Widening gap between the classes.
So why should this corner of the economy be judged any differently than the layers of hyper-competitive tech companies in SF and SV, reacting to trends, improving their manufacturing process, and pushing design new limits?