When Natalie Portman created her own shoe line in collaboration with Te Casan in 2008, she said she did it so she and her fellow vegans wouldn’t have to shop at Target for shoes.

Marie Claire fashion director and Project Runway judge Nina Garcia (right) guides a "frugalista" through Target's shoe department. (Courtesy of Sal2009.com)

“Basically, I did it out of a lack of choice,” she told the U.K. Sunday Times at the launch. “Stella McCartney does great shoes, but they’re expensive and very fashiony. I wanted a mary-jane shoe without leather. I’ve been getting stuff from Target, which is de facto vegan because it’s so cheap. But I did need some shoes that weren’t made of canvas or plastic.”

But while vegans are shopping cheap because the price point guarantees it to be faux leather, many more people shop faux leather, fur, and other luxury knock-offs because they’re cheap.

Unfortunately, there are serious environmental consequences for all that polyurethane and PVC bought through fast-fashion outlets and discount stores.

The way cheap materials are manufactured today rely heavily on acrylic polymers, the production of which generates and releases metric tons of pollutants into the air and water every year. The chemical makeup of these polymers come from coal, petroleum, and limestone, and the waste pollutes the air and water.

After the plastics are molded into thread for weaving or sheets for cutting, they are dyed and texturized in chemical-laden vats. The leftover solution is often dumped in landfills around the world, contaminating the soil with toxins.

That’s to say nothing of the social impact that making clothes for cheap has on the local labor force.

In July, a riot broke out in Cambodia over a broken labor contract that caused 4,000 garment workers to strike. The workers — predominantly women trying to support their families by making clothes for the Gap, Benetton, Puma, and Adidas — were beaten by police for trying to secure better wages.

It’s an all-too-common refrain heard throughout the sweatshops of Asia. The worst cases originate in the shady factories that illicitly produce counterfeit goods, where there are even fewer regulations to safeguard environmental and labor protections. The owners of such factories realize that if they’re already breaking one law, what’s one or two more?

As we’ve discussed in this very issue, there are affordable options for ethically made fashion. But it’s sadly not the norm.

The worst part? As costs continue to be cut and apparel companies chase the biggest return on their dollar, the drawbacks of cheap fashion will only grow. That is, until ethical shoppers decide enough is enough and cheap just isn’t worth the cost.

In a provocative piece for The Guardian, ethical living columnist Lucy Siegle writes about how consumer demand — even something as small as button placement — can have a very real impact on working conditions in factories far, far away:

A CMT (cut-make-trim) factory in India, Bangladesh or Cambodia must be hyper-responsive to cope with design changes from offices in Europe. A last-minute fax insisting that a button needs to be moved sends a poorly funded, badly managed factory into a panic. Third-world firms will never tell western retail superpowers that an order is too difficult, so workers simply must finish it. …

It’s tempting to cast retailers as Dickensian ogres but fast fashion is driven by consumer appetites. We love fashion but we also dump two million tonnes of textile waste (mostly clothing) in landfill each year, which suggests we don’t value it. We get the type of fashion retail we deserve and ask for. We need a new plan.

So the next time you eye the trendy pleather boots that mimic the ones a starlet just wore in this month’s W, consider that they may have cost a garment worker in a developing country her lunch break — or more.

I was in San Francisco over the weekend, and Union Square is home to the largest Forever 21 I’ve ever experienced. It’s a multi-story behemoth that offers a little of everything Forever 21′s designers have dreamed up this season. There’s no such thing as “online only” when you have three levels of shopping warehouse to fill, but I found nothing that piqued my interest.

So I read with interest Jezebel’s work dress-code guide focusing on a fast fashion price point. I was pleased to see the article address that at certain low-cost retailers, “practices are questionable, quality is low, and things don’t get sold that cheap because people are being paid fair prices for their labor.”

However, for someone who’s just starting out in the work world, fast fashion fills a need for professional dress on the cheap.

So what’s a bargain-lover to do? The writer continues with advice to quit the habit if you find yourself guilt-ridden about a closet filled with cheaply made basics. Namely: do a closet inventory to add up the number of fast-fashion pieces with the tags still on (those impulse buys can add up!); treat yourself to something made well to remind yourself how quality feels and holds up; wean yourself off the stuff, starting cold turkey; and evaluate what you get out of the process, and whether it’s worth it to you.

Some people really do use the heck out of their H&M and Forever 21 clothes — more power to you if you’re among them. But the rest of us might take something from this intervention.

Iconic feminist scholar Naomi Wolf ponders why modern women are so compelled to shop — especially at “cheap trendy fashion” stores like Zara, Primark, Target, and H&M — when the majority of the world’s apparel is manufactured by foreign women who are virtually enslaved by poverty.

She writes:

[W]hat has been liberating for Western women is a system built literally on the backs of women in the developing world. How do Primark and its competitors in the West’s shopping malls and High Streets keep that cute frock so cheap? By starving and oppressing Bangladeshi, Chinese, Mexican, Haitian, and other women, that’s how.

We all know that cheap clothing is usually made in sweatshop conditions – and usually by women. And we know – or should know – that women in sweatshops around the world report being locked in and forbidden to use bathrooms for long periods, as well as sexual harassment, violent union-busting, and other forms of coercion.

If women around the world who are held in the bondage of sweated labor manage to win this crucial fight, that cute dress at Primark may cost a fair amount more. But it already costs too much to the women who can’t afford to feed and house themselves and their children.

In light of yesterday’s protest in Cambodia, Ms. Wolf’s thought-provoking article is timely indeed.

(via Feministe)

Not shopping is, of course, probably the best thing. (We have to wean ourselves off of the absurd idea that every chain store should be like a sushi conveyor belt of brand new styles that all cost $5.) This world doesn’t need more stuff, and considering the Sex And The City juggernaut of consumer-porn is still going strong, shopping could stand to be de-aestheticized. But what happens when you really want something new? Thrift stores are green (and cheap), but hunting through their racks can be time-consuming and offer inconsistent results. What are the choices for decently-made, competitively-priced, really cute stuff?

– Jezebel.com writer Jenna on the issue of system-wide waste in fast fashion, and the dilemma facing ethical shoppers. Have a solution for this central consumption debate? Contribute in the comments section below.

H&M is once again admirably sponsoring a drive to raise money for AIDS research. The Fashion Against AIDS campaign is in its third year, and for 2010 the fast-fashion retailer has boosted its offerings (third item):

This year, FAA has expanded to become a complete festival collection – perfect for one of the hottest looks of the summer. To celebrate the launch, H&M’s Head of Design Ann-Sofie Johansson has lots of tips for styling the perfect festival outfit. “The festival look for girls is bohemian and cool,” says Ann-Sofie, “Try wearing a pair of denim hotpants with an oversized tunic top with lace detailing, a pair of gladiator sandals and, of course, a tote bag to carry around all your necessities.” Meanwhile guys should go for a look with attitude. “Wear denim with a print T-shirt, a military style jacket and a trilby to top it all off,” she says. “It’s great to be able to offer our customers a complete festival collection with all the things you need for an ultimate festival experience!”

Only problem is…it’s super trendy. Don’t get me wrong, I love a good charity collaboration. But the ’80s throwback of an acid-washed dress pictured at right is a miniature disaster, even on someone as daring as Katy Perry.

You can view the whole collection here. What do you think of the styles: fashion forward or fashion victim?

Set for wide release on March 25, the buzz surrounding the highly anticipated and eco-minded H&M Garden Collection is reaching a fever pitch. The collection features dozens of looks using recycled polyester, organic cotton and linen, and other sustainable textiles.

Kara first brought it up on the blog in January, and now that the look book is out, we can hardly wait for next week!

We’ll be first in line to scoop up this silky draped dress made from sustainable tencel ($19.95).

Which look is your favorite?

Tesco is in some ways the U.K. equivalent of Target — a place where you can buy well-priced groceries and clothes in the same trip. Now, in the tradition of Target’s eco-minded Go International collections, Tescois releasing a sweet sustainable clothing line in collaboration with From Somewhere. Fast fashion, this isn’t.

As Ecouterre reports:

Made up of damaged stock, end of rolls, and pre-consumer textile waste from Tesco’s own supply chain, “From Somewhere to F&F” consists of six striking, paneled designs that are being produced in a LEED-certified factory in Sri Lanka—the first apparel factory in the world, in fact, to receive a Gold rating for lowering its carbon footprint by 48 percent and using 60 percent less water than a standard factory.

Also, the clothes are pretty hot — we’d wear any of these dresses out on the town. Well played, Tesco!

The dresses, which start at £16, are set to go on sale on Tesco’s website this spring.

This excerpt of the New York Times‘s review of Balmain’s fashion show in Paris today caught our attention for its insinuation that even the highest of high fashion can still be disposable:

Yet, even without any fashion innovation, Balmain has still caught a vibe. A taut pantsuit, with its short jacket resting on the derrière, the designer’s signature short party dresses with sharp shoulders and, above all, the gilt trip will feed the greedy maw of fast fashion — and give a lot of young women just what they want for right now.

Usually “fast fashion” is taken to mean cheaply-made clothes from H&M, Forever 21, and the like — the fashion equivalent of a Big Mac, not a Kobe beef burger. But if a design is so trendy, so recognizably “this moment,” couldn’t that be equally short-lived in the closets of people with the deepest pockets? Discuss in the comments!

Earlier this month we reported on H&M’s Garden Collection and its lofty promises to clean up the fast-fashion retailer’s act. Unfortunately, new information may torpedo H&M’s big green hopes, if you believe genetically modified (GM) cotton shouldn’t bear an organic label.

As Ecoterre.com reports:

Roughly 30 percent of the tested samples contained genetically modified cotton, says Lothar Kruse, a director of Impetus, an independent lab in Bremerhaven, which examined the cotton fabrics in question. The contaminated cotton was traced back to India, which is responsible for more than half of the global supply of organic cotton, with an output of nearly 107,000 tons of fiber in 2009 alone, according to thee Organic Exchange.

India supplies more than half of the global supply of organic cotton.

The controversy over GM and organic cotton is far from over, but we can’t help but notice they have fairly compatible goals. Organic farming is designed to reduce farmers’ reliance on chemical pesticides and fertilizers that run off the crops and poison the habitats of native flora and fauna. Some strains of GM cotton have been developed to diminish the desirability of cotton for its main pests and to increase the crop’s heartiness in poor soil, meaning less pesticide and fertilizer are needed altogether.

So while it doesn’t excuse H&M for defrauding its ethical consumers, shouldn’t we be revisiting the GM debate to see if it’s worth berating a market leader for trying to do the right thing?