Fashion, Finance, and Climate Funding: A Contemporary Love Triangle or a Tale as Old as Time?

As COP29 progresses, critics (myself included: certified keyboard warrior and avid charity shopper) see climate change’s Groundhog Day rolling back around for another year of treaty agreements (non-binding, of course—cue eye roll, the United States’ yo-yo routine into and out of and into-again-and-out-of-again the Paris Treaty; and the Russian roulette of representatives who show, versus representatives who promised to. 

One could say COP is starting to feel like the ‘situationship’ you had in first year: uncommitted, indecisive and astoundingly confusing…

This year’s conference, the Climate Finance COP, is hosted by Baku, Azerbaijan. It brings together governments, businesses and representatives. From the 11th to the 22nd of November, attendees will look towards establishing a quantifiable, global climate finance goal, and setting the foundations for COP28’s ‘loss and damage fund’—the third and final pillar of climate action (not concerning whatsoever…). 

But where does the fashion industry wage in the war between finance and funding? 

Apparel Impact Institute President and CEO Lewis Perkins was preemptive in stating that the fashion industry would lack representation. Notable absentees include the Global Fashion Agenda, Kering, LVMH, Fashion Revolution, and Stella McCartney, whose prior climate change activism would typically place her front and centre. From Fashion Revolution’s vindicated remarks about being “fatigued” by climate buzzword jargon and empty promises to further fashion house absenteeism—this time as a boycott of COP29’s host, Azerbaijan, a petrostate that relied on oil and gas 92.5% of its export revenue in 2023—it’s evident that change is needed both within the conference and beyond.

But is the industry’s low turnout to COP29 a sign of unity, or a projection of a lack of commitment to green initiatives—a cop-out, one might say? With the fashion industry’s detriment to GHG emissions, transparency, and consumption levels (projected to double by 2030), does the industry’s vacancy portray yet another example of fashion and financial indifference to climate change—a hindrance to profit maximisation and an infuriating third wheel?

Perkins, a clear advocate for sustainability in the industry, further emphasises the industry’s climate-centric efforts—often through temporary approaches—with most textile recycling and sustainable material production put into capsule collections rather than mainstream production. A promise of climate action serves as a catalyst for marketing schemes that prosper in their efforts to maintain profitability and a reputation in an era of consumer eco-consciousness, all while continuing to remain non-committed to core solutions such as climate funding.

Where the fashion industry has addressed its concerns about the conflict between fashion and finance, it remains in the realm of supply chain costs rising and disposable income falling (a result of extreme weather events and global economic crises), as opposed to taking a self-interested approach by investing their capital to, once and for all, resolve these climate warnings.

Though, like any destructive relationship, fashion and finance seem inextricably linked—trapped in a cycle that ultimately ends in reunion, despite the damage that now approaches irreversibility.