Given the world’s wardrobes – not to mention landfills – seem to be stuffed with unwanted clothing, you’d think there’d be enough for everyone to have something to wear no matter what the occasion.
In Aotearoa alone, we have approximately $1.45 billion worth of unworn, high-quality clothing hanging in our wardrobes but the average Kiwi wears only 30% of that regularly, according to research commissioned by Uber when the rideshare service did a clothing donations drive with the Red Cross.
It’s partly because we’ve well and truly normalised buying cheap clothes en masse with $20 T-shirt deals and online (so-called) style influencers sharing “fast-fashion hauls” on social media.
But talk to those in our clothing charities and a different story emerges. It’s one of shortage and want, rather than surplus and overwhelm. The rising cost of living coupled with a more fiercely competitive job market means demand for high-quality used clothing has never been greater, says Robyn Moore, executive manager at Dress for Success Auckland.
While the charity dressed 809 women in 2022 and 965 in 2023, this year they’ve already dressed 1238, and this number continues to grow. Common, formerly Koha Apparel, dressed 5318 people in 2023, and by this October, they’d given 6648 people 14,893 items of clothing and footwear. To help cover the cost of its premises, Common also sells clothing to the public and rents clothing collection crates to businesses.
Organisations such as Dress for Success, Common, Women’s Refuge and the Salvation Army always need quality second-hand or new clothing including warm layers, comfortable basics, workwear, footwear and plus-size apparel. There’s also demand for baby clothes from charities such as Littlemore and Nurturing Families to support whānau in hardship in the critical first year of a baby’s life.
Access to quality clothing means that people can attend job interviews, housing appointments and court appearances. More importantly, it encourages people to feel like they belong.
“Clothing is personal; it is our way of expressing ourselves, it’s our place in society, and it speaks to us individually,” says Common’s founder Charli Cox.
Yet it seems we might be undervaluing the importance of access to clean, quality clothing – hence the shortages charities are experiencing – and the fact that some use charities as a dumping ground for unwearable or unsanitary clothes.
Mount Maunganui Salvation Army volunteer Melissa Marshall recently arrived for a Saturday shift to find numerous black garbage bags flying around the site’s carpark and piles of clothing lying on the ground. Marshall told the Bay of Plenty Times clothes had been dropped off but left overnight and rummaged through by the morning. The clean-up job took up most of her day but had it rained, the whole lot would have had to have been disposed of.
The kind of added work needed to sort the unwearable and unsanitary from the usable garments prompted Common to introduce a $10 fee when accepting donations.
In the past year, Common’s operations have markedly expanded. Its distribution network, which includes Wellington City Mission’s residential facility Te Pā Maru, Pillars Ka Pou Whakahou, Rainbow Youth and Asylum Seekers Support Trust, has grown from five to 17 organisations, and each month, it onboards more.
Yet Common can’t always meet demand. Cox says there’s an ongoing need for new socks and underwear, and because the charity doesn’t accept these items pre-worn, one solution is for the local apparel industry to donate unsold stock. To date, corporate clothing donations in Aotearoa remain sparse compared with countries such as the United States, where Moore says numerous name brands donate stock to local Dress for Success affiliates.
“We know there is excess that brands and retailers could be donating but seldom do,” says Cox.
Many apparel brands also want to maintain control over who wears their clothing, which adds to the challenge of encouraging donations.
Globally, this excess is immense. One report, by trend forecaster WGSN, and OC&C strategy consultants, suggests that around 15-45 billion garments of the 150 billion produced per year are never sold; instead they’re destroyed or disposed of in landfills.
Our own fashion industry is largely silent about its levels of textile waste or deadstock, which includes defective, unsold and out-of-season clothing. One 2023 report by research group Sapere estimated that in the Auckland region alone each year, more than 3106 tonnes of textiles aren’t worn or sold. “These wasted items of fashion clothing come from imports.” It says. The report also says that mainstream clothing retailers were not forthcoming about providing data around their unsold and unworn waste volumes.
Although the government amended legislation in April 2024 by offering tax deductions to businesses donating trading stock to approved organisations, so far the response from the local apparel industry has been underwhelming.
Tracey Creed, communications director at Common, says after the legislation was passed, Common contacted about 170 local brands but received no donations.
Brands that destroy or dispose of defective or past-season stock largely do so rather than discounting it further because it’s often more cost-effective than recycling or repurposing.
Many apparel brands also want to maintain control over who wears their clothing, which adds to the challenge of encouraging donations. But as Creed points out, a brand’s control diminishes once a product is sold, with second-hand clothes being sold on marketplaces or elsewhere.
“We always say to brands, your customers are donating their clothing [your brand] so why not join them? There is no control over brand now. Once your product is out on the market that is it. It is being sold on Marketplace and elsewhere.”
Moore, at Dress for Success Auckland, also wonders why apparel brands aren’t more willing to donate. She says her organisation treats every item with care and respect, ensuring they find appropriate homes and avoiding landfills.
“It would be wonderful if these companies recognised the significance of the impact that their donated items could have on our clients.”
Creed also notes the absence here of the type of anti-waste legislation you’ll find in France where the destruction of unsold clothing is banned because of the economic and social implications of unnecessary waste.
Last May, Mindful Fashion New Zealand, a not-for-profit organisation set up in 2019, unveiled a landmark report charting a course for the industry to shift towards a circular economy.
Threads of Tomorrow discussed the need to minimise textile waste by keeping garments in circulation for as long as possible, including through ‘take-back’ recycling schemes to enhance the commercial viability of textile recycling.
A number of Kiwi apparel brands already facilitate take-back initiatives, which encourage customers to return worn clothing in exchange for store credit. The clothes are then resold, recycled or donated.
It comes down to being more than the dress, the clothing is only part of it. We are about a hand up not a handout.
However, the report makes no mention of donating surplus stock to charities.
Jacinta FitzGerald, chief executive of Mindful Fashion New Zealand, says most unsold stock comes from imported clothing brands, and most New Zealand and Mindful Fashion member brands are “relatively small businesses with small volumes, who first and foremost want to produce as little excess stock as possible, as it costs them money to have excess stock and it produces waste”.
FitzGerald goes on to say that there are a range of options businesses use to manage unsold stock which brands have told her about. These include repairs, remanufacturing, sales, giveaways to staff and friends, and donations.
Regarding the recent law change allowing businesses to donate trading stock for a tax deduction, she says, “If it makes sense for NZ brands to donate stock and get the tax refund they should. However, this path is a last resort for many brands who are doing other things with their clothing.”
So, in the absence of wider support from local industry and government, organisations such as Common and Dress for Success depend on private funding to keep going.
Cox says so far in 2024, Common has sought $200,567 in funding but only secured $40,637.
Creed believes that local council funding “needs to prioritise waste reduction and circular economy outcomes”.
“Having looked at funding provided to groups in recent rounds where we were declined, we have seen churches funded to buy projectors and organisations given funds to host barbecues. However, we cannot get $3500 to clothe 1000 people within their [region].”
As charities struggle to meet the growing demand for clothing, at its core, the true power in equitable access to clothing is its transformative potential.
“It can break intergenerational dependency on social services and can create long-term sustainable outcomes,” says Dress for Success’s Moore. “It comes down to being more than the dress, the clothing is only part of it. We are about a hand up not a handout!”
