Fast fashion is pushing a carefully crafted but misleading image of “green” responsibility, according to new research highlighted by BlueSky Education. A new study from the University of Vaasa argues that major fast fashion brands use sustainability messaging and influencer marketing to soothe consumer guilt and justify constant buying and binning, while the underlying business model remains rooted in overproduction and waste. The findings add fresh weight to growing concerns that much of fashion’s “green” storytelling is closer to branding than real change.
How Fast Fashion Builds a “Green” Image
The research team, including Associate Professors Henna Syrjälä and Hanna Leipämaa-Leskinen with doctoral student Tiia Alkkiomäki, analysed 401 social media posts from Swedish fast fashion leaders H&M and Lindex across 2020. They examined captions, visuals, and campaign narratives to see how sustainability themes show up in everyday brand content. The posts often spotlighted “green” initiatives, collections, or causes, even though these typically cover a small share of total production.
The researchers found that these brands strategically frame themselves as fair, ethical, and environmentally conscious, helping maintain the illusion that fast fashion can be “responsible” without fundamentally changing its volume-driven model. This image-building, they argue, keeps the system running by reassuring consumers that shopping from these retailers can still be a good choice for the planet—so long as they pick the “right” line or capsule.
Influencers as Engines of Greenwashed Consumption
A key finding is the central role of influencers in legitimising fast fashion purchasing. Sponsored hauls, outfit-of-the-day posts, and discount-led promotions frequently position large, low-priced orders as smart, even virtuous, choices when wrapped in sustainability language. Influencer content often links limited-time offers or new drops to charitable or “eco” initiatives, encouraging followers to see repeated buying as aligned with caring about the environment.
Because influencers trade on trust and relatability, their participation helps launder fast fashion’s reputation, turning high-volume purchasing into something aspirational and seemingly thoughtful. The study suggests this dynamic blurs the line between genuine conscious consumption and pure overconsumption dressed up in green language—a pattern many critics now label as fashion greenwashing.
The Reality Behind the Marketing
“The reality of the fast fashion industry is grim,” Henna Syrjälä said, pointing to accelerating production, questionable working conditions, and significant environmental harm. The industry has long been tied to high water usage, chemical pollution, textile waste, and a heavy carbon footprint, while repeated investigations continue to uncover labour violations and unsafe factory environments.
Against this backdrop, highlighting a few recycled-fibre lines or charity collaborations can give a distorted sense of progress. The researchers stress that, while consumers are constantly urged to make “better” purchasing decisions, meaningful responsibility lies with designers, retailers, and policymakers who control production volumes, standards, and pricing. Without hard limits on overproduction and stronger labour and environmental protections, the fundamentals of fast fashion remain out of step with genuine sustainability.
Why Stricter Rules and Clearer Marketing Matter
The study calls for tougher regulation and higher marketing standards to ensure that sustainability claims reflect real practices instead of carefully curated “green” narratives. This aligns with broader moves in Europe and other regions to crack down on vague or unsubstantiated environmental messaging, particularly in sectors like fashion, where impacts are large and often opaque.
As scrutiny from regulators, and shoppers intensifies, companies will need to back their sustainability stories with transparent data, independent verification, and structural changes in how they design, source, and sell. Until then, what appears “green” on social feeds may remain far from truly responsible in practice.
