![2[1].jpg](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/5abadf_f310244424a443b29215dadb17bba49b~mv2.jpg/v1/crop/x_5,y_0,w_1069,h_1080/fill/w_101,h_102,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_avif,quality_auto/2%5B1%5D.jpg)
By Megan Stidolph
In recent years, faux fur has emerged as the only acceptable, environmentally and ethically conscious way to wear fur. Countless PETA campaigns and harrowing images of abused animals in fur markets have swayed public opinion firmly against the consumption of real fur products. Yet is this love of faux fur damaging the environment?
Faux fur’s recent controversy:
Faux fur has recently hit the headlines thanks to an investigation revealing that many products labelled as synthetic faux fur have actually been exposed as being real fur. UK consumers had been misled into buying products they believed were faux fur from retailers such as Missguided and TK Maxx, with the latter having a robust 15-year long company policy against buying fur products. Fur farming is illegal in the UK and has been in England and Wales since 2000 and Scotland and Northern Ireland since 2002. Yet, there is no law preventing the importing of fur to the UK.
EU legislation prevents the importation of fur from domesticated animals, such as dogs and cats, and seal fur. However, in the UK, it is still possible to import a myriad of different fur products such as fox fur, rabbit furs and mink. The UK Government estimates that £63 million worth of fur products were imported to the UK in 2017. The Humane Society International estimates that the figure is over £74 million in the same year. These fur products are relatively inexpensive, with some costing as little as 30p for a fur pom-pom for a bobble hat, due to the wealth of fur imported via Chinese markets. These low prices misled both suppliers and consumers into believing the products were not real fur.
Why do we use faux fur?
The public is well versed in the cruelty involved in their fur trade. Images of caged animals later to be skinned, sometimes alive, for their fur and the accompanying grotesque stories of animal abuse in fur farms have led to over 70% of British people in favour of a complete ban on the fur trade in the UK, according to a YouGov poll commissioned by the Humane Society. The same poll found that 93% of people surveyed do not wear real fur.
For the majority, fur is not an option due to ethical concerns. Even the previous Chief Executive of the British Fur Trade Association (BFTA), Mike Moser had a change of heart about fur after seeing the cruel conditions that animals were subject to. He described the fur trade as being “barbaric” and having “no place in a modern society”. Iconic fashion houses such as Prada, Gucci, Versace and Burberry have reportedly stopped using any fur in their products. Online retailers such as Net-a-Porter have stopped stocking real fur products. Stella McCartney has pledged to stop using any animal products, including fur and leather in her designs. In 2018, Parliament debated banning the sale of fur entirely in the UK after a petition totalling 400,000 signatories was personally delivered to PM May by the musician Brian May as part of the campaign for a #FurFreeBritain. The campaign hopes to end the sale of all fur products in the UK to prevent furs from being imported from countries with lax regulations on animal welfare such as Russia and China.
With the weight of public opinion firmly against real fur, faux fur is presented as a cruelty- free alternative.
Why is real fur making a comeback?
With increasing concerns about synthetic textiles leading to micro-plastic pollution, faux fur is coming under criticism from campaigners. Faux fur is non-biodegradable, which is concerning given its popularity in fast fashion. It is produced via petrochemical products and takes around 500-1,000 years to degrade. It is hardly a choice for the environmentally-minded consumer, who is increasingly aware of the eco-credentials of various fabrics. The BFTA is keen to capitalise on this and brandish real fur’s environmental credentials as being part of a new ‘slow’ fashion and point out its biodegradable and ‘natural’ alternative to synthetics used in faux furs like acrylics or polyester.
So is real fur the more environmentally friendly option?
This argument ignores the carbon cost of feeding and raising animals for fur. The debate around which is worse for the environment, real or faux fur is still hotly debated in the industry with competing studies funded by both sides pointing at the other. The debate changes significantly depending on which type of animal fur is used, how it is caught, and for how long the garment is kept and whether or not it is second hand. Nonetheless, the debate between fake vs real persists.
Are there any environmentally friendly alternatives?
New innovative technologically advanced solutions are on the horizon. Alternatives, a company called Ecopel makes fake fur with recycled plastic bottles. House of Fluff, founded by Kym Canter, works with a range of sustainable and recycled textiles. They have introduced an ‘Eco Fur’ described as an “animal-free fur textile” which is “37% bio-based and 67% recycled polyester” sourced from consumer waste. Ironically, the company was founded via Kym Carter selling her real fur coats.
Environmental concerns have transformed the landscape of the fashion industry and the consumer market. The debate around fur is no longer one of fake vs real, as they both have grave environmental implications, but new textile innovations have the potential to revolutionise the fashion industry once again.
Further reading:
Minney, Safia (2016) Slow Fashion: Aesthetics Meets Ethics
McKinsey & Partners (2020) Survey: Consumer sentiment on sustainability in fashion, McKinsey, Accessed via: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/retail/our-insights/survey-consumer-sentiment-on-sustainability-in-fashion
Wicker, A. (2018) ‘Faux Fur: Good For Ethics, Bad for the Environment’, Refinery29 Accessed via: https://www.refinery29.com/en-gb/faux-fur-environmental-impact
Commentaires