The RMG industry’s challenges are too big to solve at the individual level. That is why we have seen so many sectoral initiatives and collaborations among buyers and suppliers in the past few years—examples being the Fashion Industry Charter for Climate Action and the Fashion Pact—addressing issues such as cleaner production, worker rights, and purchasing practices. These attempts at collaboration are now widely accepted and one could almost view it as a form of industry self-regulation.
Some might say we need more government regulations to address industry challenges but the problem with this is that, firstly, these challenges are often complex and, in many cases, a blunt policy tool might not be effective. The second problem is that legislation takes time—often many years—to come to fruition. There are legal wrangles and other issues along the way and often such regulations end up being watered-down by industry lobbying, in any case. Finally, in many cases, people within the industry have more knowledge than legislators and are better equipped to provide solutions to industry challenges (although whether they are inclined to actually do so, is another question).
So, why not allow the industry to collaborate and solve its own problems? There are many who argue, with some justification, that this collaborative approach brings its own problems, some of which I would like to address here and hopefully offer some solutions.
The first problem with collaboration is that of self-interest. If an industry like ours is essentially allowed to self-regulate, there is a danger that it will create a climate which is focused too much on profit and too little on the planet. If one looks at the many initiatives in our industry right now, they are almost always headed by business executives. There is a lack of true independence and oversight, and I firmly believe this is a huge conundrum. Our industry cannot continue to “mark its own homework”. We all have to accept that this has not got us anywhere up to now.
As a solution to this issue, I would propose that any form of collaborative initiative should have an independent chair and equal representation from the public, private, and NGO sectors. Everyone would have equal voting rights and this bipartisan approach would ensure decisions were made for the right reasons—and not just for financial benefits. Such an independent voice would also provide credibility, which many collaborations lack at present. If a collaboration wants to be taken seriously, it needs independent oversight—no ifs or buts.
The second solution I see is one of accountability and the setting of tangible goals and objectives. How often do we see a new initiative in our industry where the goals are distant, unclear, and hard to define? How many times have you seen initiatives come along, make many bold promises, and then disappear without trace a few years later?
There are a plethora of collaborative initiatives ongoing in our industry right now. Surely, it is better to have just a small number but ensure these are properly monitored, with clear oversight and regular, transparent reporting (a role which could be carried out by the independent delegate mentioned above). Sometimes, less can be more, and in collaboration of this nature, this is certainly the case. Too many initiatives create confusion and lead to overlapping goals and objectives.
The third issue is that collaborations need to settle on penalties for organisations which do not play by the rules. Too many businesses are signing up to initiatives for the sake of it, with very little intention of changing. They are, in effect, gaining kudos on the back of their more progressive competitors.
This isn’t fair and should not be allowed to happen. If a business wants to collaborate, it must be prepared to do so on an equal footing with its competitors. Any company looking to freeload should be quickly punished and ejected from the group. Strong due diligence and high barriers to entry for those looking to join industry collaborations would ensure this.
There is another benefit to ensuring penalties for laggards. It would provide a clear distinction in the industry, promoting leaders while making clear that there is no room for businesses which are simply paying lip service to such issues. As already mentioned, collaborative work which makes clear it is serious about change and not just providing a smokescreen for inaction will have much more credibility—and buy-in from end consumers. Nobody benefits if an industry is constantly being accused of greenwashing, which is what we are seeing at present.
Finally, there must be rewards for collaborations with genuine purpose and which will bring about real change. For any collaboration to be successful, the benefits to getting on board must be tangible and immediate. Likewise, we must not have a situation where leaders are collaborating and making sacrifices while others are carrying on with business as usual. We must find a way to reward good behaviour and positive collaborations while leaving laggards out in the cold. These rewards could take many forms, including tax-breaks and other fiscal tools or the incentive of public procurement contracts for businesses which show a willingness to put competitive instincts aside in order to do the right thing for the planet and people.
Mostafiz Uddin is the Managing Director of Denim Expert Limited. He is also the Founder and CEO of Bangladesh Denim Expo and Bangladesh Apparel Exchange (BAE).
