When it comes to overconsumption, the wealthiest 1% are the true culprits
‘Mounting scientific evidence reveals the vast extent of negative environmental and social impacts associated with fashion consumption, as well as the differing responsibilities of consumers in high- and low-income countries and groups.’ - Hot or Cool Fashion Report, 2022
We’re one month into this year-long #SpendingPending challenge, where I’ve committed to only buying five new pieces of clothing in 2024 (MORE HERE). And as much as I’m approaching this as a fun experiment, it is important to also note that this challenge is a privilege. Being able to opt out of a cycle, when so many folks don’t have the chance to opt in, is something I’m well aware of and don’t take for granted. It’s part of the reason why I’m using the Hot or Cool Report as my baseline.
It’s not enough to just tell the average human to reduce their consumption habits, because as has been well documented: the wealthiest countries, businesses, and individuals are disproportionately responsible for their negative impact on the planet. The Hot or Cool report specifically highlights what an equitable approach to 1.5 Celsius of warming looks like:
‘On average, the emissions of the richest 20% were 20 times higher than the emissions of the poorest 20%. According to this analysis, the richest 20% would have to reduce their footprint by 83% in the UK, 75% in Italy and Germany, and 50% in France, considering a few representative countries.
For too long, the wealthy have shifted blame to low-GDP countries and low-income individuals for emissions, convincing the world that the climate crisis is driven by overpopulation and waste from places like China and India. We now know that capitalism and overconsumption are the true culprits, and owning yachts, private jets, and hoarding wealth/resources contributes immensely to environmental injustice. Beyond all of this, one important note that the report highlighted focuses on the wealth gap that persists even in high GDP countries:
’Interventions at the national level would fail if they do not affect consumption by the richest 20% – who, in addition to their direct impacts, also influence the aspirations of others.’
I don’t know if anyone who follows me or my content is part of that richest 20% - but I know that using my platform, advocating for better, and doing what I can to reduce my consumption is how I can take action. Plus, there are far too few influencers out there encouraging reduced consumption and degrowth. It’s time to normalize loving what we already have - mama earth and our fellow humans need us!
