Hi friends, this is my first longer post of several with the goal being to educate people and start conversations on some proxies MFA commonly use to encompass the idea of “quality” and “worth”. These are words that we as a community easily throw around but what do they mean? Or rather, what can they mean?
I am not in the fashion industry or even in a fashion adjacent industry, this is just something I'm interested in. I’ll always put all my sources at the end just to improve readability. If you have any ideas or topics that you think may be interesting in this overall discussion, just post it or PM me.
TL;DR - Made in X labels are not a very good indicator of the overall garment in a vacuum. There are pretty loose laws about Made in Europe labels and that one line of text doesn’t tell the whole story of how your garment came to be. Made in USA is comparatively highly regulated.
The Origin Story
The Made in X label actually stemmed from the British in 1887, to clarify copycat products from other countries. In particular, they wanted to stigmatize products Made in Germany. Within a decade, however, German manufacturing had improved while British manufacturing had declined, ultimately leading to Made in Germany commanding prestige (that is still recognized today, most prominently in the Automobile industry). The labeling convention remains to this day and while some industries like food and product are heavily government regulated, fashion is still somewhat unchecked.
The Marketing
The reality is that not all labels are perceived equally so it may be in a brand’s best interest to settle on the “sexiest”, or most palatably marketable country.
The best: A lot of times we put value into “Made in USA”, with MFA-loved brands like Everlane, Taylor Stitch, and Gustin heavily marketing the fact. We also associate “Made in Italy” and “Made in France” with artisanal goods and luxury clothing, with most designer houses having one of those labels. If you take a gander at high-end boutiques like ssense or MrPorter, you’ll find that the most expensive products usually have a label for one of those two European countries. I’m also going to throw Made in Japan into this group as the country has global recognition for their craftsmanship, with brands like Thom Browne and Yohji touting the label.
The worst: It’s no secret that the fashion industry takes advantage of poor working conditions in their supply chain. Southeast Asia has had the most media attention around sweatshops and slave-like conditions. Countries like India, Vietnam, and Bangladesh frequently appear on labels from fast fashion brands like H&M and MFA-adopted-child Uniqlo. Conscious consumers tend to shy away from products with these labels because there is the assumption that unethical practices were used, at least in part.
The China: China is an interesting case that I’ve separated out, partly because I am Chinese-American and partly because I think it is relevant to the current climate of the US. In the second half of the 20th century, the US moved from a manufacturing to a service economy. China offered an abundance of manpower and manufacturing expertise so many industries moved production overseas, including textiles. Made in China was synonymous with cheap and eventually, poor quality. With the influx of international business, iit was a race to the bottom for Chinese manufacturing. Predictably, human rights violations were rampant and largely unchecked. As China grows in global political and economic influence, media influences consumer perception and with trade deals, embargos, and ethical consumption all at the tip of the tongue, it’s no surprise that for the general population, Made in China is still perceived negatively.
The International Chain Dilemma
Everyone’s made a sandwich before. If you break down the steps to making a sandwich, there are actually many, from choosing to buy the right bread to opening the fridge to choosing the right utensil to spread the mayo. But what if I wanted you to make a hundred varieties of sandwiches, a thousand of each, and to send them to every house in your neighborhood? That becomes a daunting supply chain problem.
Fashion, of course, is not exempt from this complexity. The garments must be designed, the raw material must be sourced, then processed, then woven into textiles. Then the textiles must be dyed, cut, turned into clothing, packaged, processed for inventory, shipped out to retail, delivered to consumers, and so on. Each step of the process could be in a different country so which country or which process gets the Main in X label?
The Fashion Foolery
With the globalization of fashion supply chains, many brands have products that touch multiple continents, let alone countries. A good recent example is Asket’s attempt to making the whole process more transparent. One garment spans the globe, from US to India to Italy to Portugal to China. You can imagine that other brands have similar supply chains but all of that is lost when it is all distilled down into one Made in X label.
The problem, of course, is determining which part of the chain most deserves the label. According to the European Union’s current laws around labeling, as long as the product is finished in the country, that country can be put on the Made In X label. Major designer houses like Gucci, Saint Laurent, and Prada have goods manufactured outside of Italy, but because the final finishes are done in Italy, they can legally label their goods Made in Italy.
Made in USA is a notable exception as the FTC does more heavily regulate that label. For a product to have the label Made in USA, all significant parts and processes must originate from the US. You may have seen labels that say Made in the USA from Imported Materials.
The Good People Everywhere
When a brand chooses to manufacture in another country, it’s not always just because they’re looking to decrease the cost of production. The reality is that there are skilled artisans and producers everywhere in the world and sometimes you just get a better product overseas. There’s no reason to believe that a brand can’t find a supplier in China, India, or any other country just as skilled as one that they would find in the “best” Made In X countries.
A good example is Shinola Detroit, a watch brand previously hinging on manufacturing in its namesake city. Recognizing the limitations of Stateside skills, they imported Swiss and Taiwanese experts to help with the design and manufacturing process and even now, an undisclosed amount of their manufacturing is done internationally despite the brand’s ethos. Now my point isn’t that Shinola is being unfaithful to American manufacturing but rather that the brand recognized there was a hole in its process and that hole was filled by international resources. It is justified, I think, for any brand to look for the best personnel to accomplish their goal.
The Conclusion
So that was a lot of words to say a little. Whatever your own reasons are for choosing or valuing clothes with certain Made in X tags, there are many leading up to that single line of text. It may be valuable as one of many ways with which you judge a garment. What’s most interesting to me is that because we make conscious and unconscious judgments based on the Made in X tag, the “best” ones are the ones with the most to hide and the “worst” can be taken at face value.
As with any other qualification, Made in X labels are only a barometer and not to be used as a judging criteria in a vacuum.
Do you use the Made in Label as a justification to buy or not buy something? How important is transparency of the production of your clothing to you?
Further reading/Source material:
The next post in this series will be on synthetic and organic fabrics and common applications they have in fashion. Sorry, I lied. I will write on the materials topic but it won't be my next post.