Kourtney Kardashian and Boohoo- Greenwashing At Its Finest.

Written by Emma Golley 9/17/2022

Kourtney Kardashian should consider giving the Founder of Patagonia a call. This week it was announced that she would be taking on the role as Sustainability Ambassador for Boohoo in the latest example of big-brand greenwashing.

Greenwashing is a term that by now most people in the industry are familiar with. So why are certain brands still getting away with conning consumers into thinking they’re purchasing sustainable products?

Since Boohoo was founded in the UK in 2006 it has become notorious for questionably ethical business practices and proliferating the “ultra fast fashion” model. The term ultra fast fashion came about in the mid 2000’s when brands such as Boohoo, Missguided and Pretty Little Thing took the business model of mass consumption to the next level. These brands release new collections at a breakneck pace, with turnaround times from first sketch to on-sale as little as 2 weeks. On the company’s website Boohoo have even boasted to releasing 500 new items per week, and were named one of the UKs least sustainable brands in 2019 by the Environmental Audit Committee.

Today, many of these brands appear to be trying to fix their public image. Amidst growing pressure from customers for long-lasting, sustainable options, fast fashion companies are desperately seeking new ways to implement ethical and eco-friendly practices.

“When Boohoo announced it was appointing Kourtney Kardashian Barker as their ‘Sustainability Ambassador’ earlier this week, anybody would be forgiven for raising eyebrows.”

However, for established brands this is not always a simple undertaking. It takes a lot of research, money, and dedicated effort to genuinely reinvent unsustainable business processes. Unfortunately those who aren’t willing to make those sacrifices have found new ways to cut corners.

When Boohoo announced it was appointing Kourtney Kardashian Barker as their ‘Sustainability Ambassador’ earlier this week, anybody would be forgiven for raising eyebrows. The Kardashian family have made headlines in recent months for their polluting private jets, and sprawling mansions exceeding local water restrictions during one of the worst droughts in California history. Kourtney, who apparently went over by 101,000 gallons in her two acre Calabasas home, hardly appears to be a sustainable role model.

Kourtney has committed to releasing two ‘sustainable’ collections for the brand. She released the following statement when the partnership was announced:

“When Boohoo first approached me with this idea that was all about sustainability and style, I was concerned about the effects of the fast fashion industry on our planet. Boohoo responded with excitement and a desire to incorporate more sustainable practices into our line. It’s been an enlightening experience speaking directly with industry experts.

There’s still lots of work to be done and improvements to be made, but I truly believe that any progress we can make when it comes to sustainability is a step in the right direction and will open up the conversation for future advancements.”

Any public figure drawing attention to sustainability seems like a good thing - but I was skeptical. Trawling through the Boohoo website, the first image that pops up on their home page is of Kardashian Barker posing in a pink head to toe set for $20. The price tag alone doesn’t exactly scream sustainable apparel. However, trying to give the benefit of the doubt, I clicked on every piece in the collection to find out just how eco-friendly it was. Turns out, not very.

The first garment was a pink bodysuit retailing for $6. Made of 47% polyester and 3% elastane it cannot be recycled. When it inevitably ends up in a landfill after just a couple wears it can take up to 200 years to decompose.

Next I find a pair of high shine pants made from standard polyurethane (PU) on a recycled polyester backing. PU has become a staple fabric in the fast fashion industry. Although many brands label this fabric ‘vegan leather’, this is really just another greenwash marketing ploy - it is neither durable nor recyclable.

On the product details there is a note which says: “Polyurethane can’t be recycled so we need to keep this piece for as long as possible. We’ve chosen a really lovely quality PU that we hope will last”.
So in short, there is no difference between this item and the other polluting garments produced by the company other than their poor attempt to greenwash the consumer with alternative language.

Sadly the majority of the collection is made from items similar to this. However I did manage to find a few styles that gave me a glimpse of hope - a vintage, real-leather jacket and a handful of items made from either 100% recycled polyester or 100% recycled cotton.

‘the seismic difference between clever marketing and genuine concern for our planet is clear for all to see.’

While it’s difficult to attack any brand or figurehead making some effort to support sustainability, overall this collection appears to be yet another greenwashing publicity stunt. Clearly Boohoo has demonstrated they’re capable of producing somewhat sustainable clothes - so why didn’t they start small and focus on 100% recyclable or organic items? Or more vintage pieces, which were clearly a hit as they’re already sold out? Instead, they chose a massive collection full of polyester and plastic, using language designed to fool customers, and a celebrity to sell it to them. And as a result they’ve been on the receiving end of well-deserved public backlash.

With the recent breaking news of Patagonia’s founder giving his company to support environmental causes in the same week, the seismic difference between clever marketing and genuine concern for our planet is clear for all to see.

Like this article? Sign up to our new newsletter to get more articles like this delivered straight to your inbox once a month.