Essay topic: Marketing and Consumerism: The major enemies of a healthy environment.

Instructions:

2500-3000 words

Minimum of 10 sources – has to be academic (peer reviewed)

Things I want to write about:

1) How food industry uses masses of land for farming which leads to deforestation and
depletion of soil quality, leads to damaged ecosystem (food corporations and
deforestation) type into google scholar ‘ consumerism and environmental degradation’
2) How fast fashion has detrimental effect on the environment (fast fashion and
environmental degradation)
3) How has social media such as tiktok and instagram has increased such demand for
maximalism and hoarding culture of clothes (shein and other fast fashion brands) (social
media marketing and overconsumption ) perhaps merge ideas from point 3 and 4 into
one paragraph ?
4) How constant marketing through television and social media persuades and encourages
people to participate in overconsumption (advertising drives /fuels overconsumption)
5) How sustainable products are not promoted, aren’t as accessible or affordable, leading
to overconsumption of products that have short longevity, causing excessive waste
(sustainability and elitism / environment-friendly but costly)

The proposal I wrote:

Marketing and Consumerism: The major enemies of a healthy environment

The purpose of this essay is to argue that marketing and consumerism are major enemies of a
healthy environment.

Consumerism and environmental degradation (you may keep subtopics or remove them during
proofreading/editing)

Currently, the planet is immersed in a period of globalization that promotes the expansion of
trade and the economy. Effectively, it began just after World War II, and it is still going strong.

To keep up with the current consumption level from a developed country, we require 4-6
hectares of land. However, only 1.7 hectares of arable land is available per person. Hence,
these high consumption countries are not only depleting their own resources but are also
drawing resources from other countries in order to keep up (Shah, 2005). These numbers alone
demonstrate how consumerism is putting pressure on the earth and its resources. Apart from
depleting the earth of natural resources, consumerism also heavily contributes to pollution.
Factories need to be built to meet the demand for consumerism and the production of goods
produces toxic products, and the goods themselves also produce waste pollutants when used
(Shah, 2005).
On average, 40% of the world's total grain production is used to feed animals while a developed
country such as the US uses 70% of it for livestock. This is a result of junk food chains such as
KFC that opt for intensive breeding of livestock and poultry which causes environmental
degradation such as deforestation and water pollution. Fields lose around 5lbs of irreplaceable
top-soil for every pound of animal product produced and they also need 190 gallons of water for
the meat production which is 10 times the amount a family from a developing country such as
India gets to use (Shah, 2005).

3.9 billion hectares of the earth's land area is covered by forests (Koyunen and Yilmaz 2009). It
was estimated that the original forest cover was approximately 6.0 billion hectares and
therefore, it indicates that the world has lost about 40% of forest area. (The Effects of
Multinational Companies on Deforestation: The Building Block or Stumbling Block)

For instance, more than two thirds of Indonesia's pulp is produced in the Riau province, which
has more oil palm concessions and timber plantations than any other Indonesian province,
according to WWF (2006). Riau is also home to two of the largest pulp factories in the world:
Asia Pulp & Paper (APP) and Asia Pacific Resources International Ltd (APRIL). Forest clearings
in Riau, whether for the establishment of oil palm plantations or timber plantations, have given
these two local pulp and paper manufacturers a consistent stream of raw materials.Despite the
fact that pulpwood plantations can be economically lucrative to investors due to high demand
and a quick growth cycle, they still only provide a small portion of the raw materials required for
the rapidly expanding pulp industry (WWF, 2006). Nearly 70% of the entire wood supply for both
mills still come from cutting natural forests. For the Riau pulp mills owned by APP and APRIL,
WWF (2006) estimated that approximately 170,000 hectares of natural forests were cut down in
2005.The terrain is now barren, with habitats for elephants and tigers eliminated, and the soil is
eroding as a result of the operators' monetary interest in the timber. The Effects of Multinational
Companies on Deforestation: The Building Block or Stumbling Block

Advertising leads to overconsumption which damages the environment

This extreme consumer behavior of constant need to buy things is largely influenced by the
persistent marketing system that businesses have set up. While most people are not easily
convinced to buy new products, the relentless advertising does reinforce values of a consumer
society and propels compulsive consumer habits by inventing new needs (Butler, 2011). Modern
media is perpetually influencing and polluting the minds of consumers, convincing them to
participate in more consumption of goods and services they have no initial need or desire for.
This system is built not to provide consumers with their needs but to control them for the profit
and growth of the businesses (Foster et al. 2011). These corporations then put the blame on
consumers for the pollution and damages caused to the environment for the consumer behavior
that they created. However, the majority of pollution and waste are produced by industrial and
military processes which consumers don’t have any role in. To give a better idea, 97.5% of
waste comes from business and government operations (Butler, 2011). Hence, consumers
being cautious of their waste disposal would do very little to address the issue of environmental
degradation. These organizations need to be held accountable for the negative externalities
they are causing to the environment. There is no social cost being accounted for by the majority
of these corporations and hence they are participating in such harsh production methods to
reduce costs. Putting sanctions and regulations would drastically reduce such behavior.

As mentioned before, the excessive effect of consumptions not only is a detriment to the
environment but is also causing scarcity of resources worldwide. For instance, if society does
not take actions, by 2040 there will be no clean water available for people. Another example is
overfishing; it is expected that by 2048 we will run out of seafood if overfishing is not controlled.
All of this is a result of the tragedy of consumption as these resources are not being allowed to
maintain themselves as they are being overused.

Fast fashion and environmental degradation

The term "fast fashion" is a commercial technique to quickly and affordably introduce new
apparel items to retail stores. Additionally, shoppers today receive new clothing even twice a
week.(Material Culture and Environmental Woes: Devotion to Fast Fashion)

The second-largest polluter after textile dyes is fast fashion companies, which contribute to
global pollution. Fast fashion causes water contamination, microplastic pollution, and climate
change, according to Columbia Climate School. The fashion business not only generates 20%
of the world's wastewater and 10% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, but it also
consumes more energy than both the aviation and shipping industries combined
(Escobar,2022).Fast fashion is the second-largest global carbon polluter, from the creation of
fabrics to the shipping of clothing from abroad, and it has a significant negative influence on the
environment. Greenpeace estimates that up to 20,000 pieces of clothes are discarded in
landfills in the UK every 10 minutes. Cheap synthetic textiles like polyester and nylon can take
up to 200 years to degrade.

The ultimate catch that fast fashion giants like Shein avoid in favor of convenience is the
destruction of the environment caused by the mass production of inexpensive fast fashion
garments. The products are easily disposed of in landfills when fashion trends in clothes fade.
The typical American purchases 70 pieces of apparel annually, and fast fashion encourages
buyers to purchase inexpensive clothing, allowing Shein to release new items regularly rather
than on a seasonal basis like most fashion businesses. People are readily seduced by unique,
affordable, and fashionable products. However, they undermine environmental conservation
with their hasty spending habits. (Escobar, 2022).

People should instead purchase clothing from one of the many sustainable clothing companies
and brands, such as Levi's, Adidas, or Reformation. By 2025, 100% of the cotton and 100% of
the electricity used in Levi's owned and controlled facilities will come from sustainable sources,
according to the company's website. Since launching their Water-Less campaign in 2011, Levi's
has saved 4.2 billion liters of water and uses 75% cotton from sustainable sources.

Purchasing clothing from consignment shops is an excellent additional approach for customers
to practice sustainability. Thrifting is an environmentally friendly habit that lowers energy use
and air pollution. Thrift stores, as opposed to the online fast fashion behemoth, help prevent
clothing from ending up in landfills.

https://dailytitan.com/opinion/sheins-chic-clothing-exploits-the-environment/article_2e385cd8-
ca65-11ec-ac31-cb2f45505471.html
Sustainability and elitism / environment-friendly but costly

Consumer prices go up as a result of ethical business activities that typically cost a lot of
money, such as using high-quality materials and production procedures. This makes eco-
friendly clothing out of reach for some people, which works against the industry's goal of
influencing consumers to make more environmentally friendly purchases. Instead of criticizing
people for purchasing a modest amount of fast fashion if it is their only option, we should
encourage those who can afford more costly clothing to do so in an effort to change a culture
that values overconsumption and tossing out items after a few wears. Despite the fact that fast-
fashion retailers offer affordable, stylish apparel that fits a wide range of body types, they must
share some of the blame for fostering the overindulgence in clothes consumption.It doesn't
need to be so extreme.

It is obvious that the fashion industry as a whole has a terrible impact on the environment. It is
legitimate to call for improvements and criticize giant fast fashion retailers for significantly
contributing to socioeconomic and environmental problems. Additionally, the overabundance of
fast fashion encourages wasteful behaviors and overconsumption, since items degrade or are
thrown away after a few uses. Existence of ethical business models and their promotion are
unquestionably positive developments. Recognizing that sustainability and excellence are costly
and not available to everyone is nonetheless vital. While becoming more sustainable is
something we should strive for, the ability to do so is unquestionably a blessing.

References:

https://www.globalissues.org/article/238/effects-of-consumerism

https://climateandcapitalism.com/2011/12/03/are-consumers-destroying-the-earth/

https://www.theworldcounts.com/challenges/planet-earth/state-of-the-planet/number-of-
consumers