Tuesday 20th of May 2025

Nairobi, Kenya

Stop Ghana from Becoming Europe’s Textile Waste Dumpsite: A Call for Action

Ghana, like many African nations, has become a hotspot for the Global North’s textile waste, particularly fast-fashion items. Each week, approximately 15 million second-hand garments arrive in the country, overwhelming local markets and the environment. This issue, which has drawn increasing concern, is laid bare in the report Fast Fashion, Slow Poison, which uncovers the environmental and health hazards caused by this relentless influx of textile waste.

The Scale of the Problem

Kantamanto Market in Accra, one of the largest second-hand clothing markets in West Africa, receives a significant portion of these items. However, up to 500,000 pieces of clothing waste from the market end up in informal dumpsites or open spaces weekly. Accra’s landfill sites are now overwhelmed, forcing waste to pile up in informal areas, including along lagoons and near beaches. The sight of these textile mountains has become a stark reminder of the country’s struggle with Europe’s waste problem.

Beyond the eyesore, these waste dumps present severe environmental and health threats. The report reveals that 89% of the clothing waste in these dumpsites contains synthetic fibers, which release microplastics into the environment. These fibers are not only harmful to wildlife but also infiltrate water sources, exacerbating pollution. Moreover, burning clothes to heat water in public washhouses has led to alarming levels of air pollution. Benzene levels in these areas exceed European indoor air guide values by nearly 200 times, posing significant health risks to local communities.

Demands for Change

To address this crisis, advocates have made several demands to Ghanaian President Nana Akufo-Addo:

1. Ban the Import of Textile Waste
Ghana must take immediate action by banning the import of “dead waste”—unsellable and unusable clothing items that end up in landfills and dumpsites. These imports are not merely second-hand clothing for reuse but unwanted waste that has no place in local markets.

2. Hold Polluters Accountable
Companies and manufacturers responsible for producing and exporting these clothes must be held accountable. It is essential to implement mechanisms that make polluters pay for the environmental and health damages they cause in countries like Ghana.

3. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)
Effective EPR schemes should be implemented to ensure that companies take responsibility for the entire lifecycle of their products, from production to disposal. These regulations will force clothing brands to manage the environmental impact of their products, reducing the burden on countries like Ghana.

4. Invest in Local Solutions
Ghana must focus on developing slow, circular systems for its clothing and fashion industries. By investing in local designers, makers, and upcyclers, the country can create sustainable fashion solutions while mitigating the waste problem. These local innovators have the potential to repurpose unwanted garments and reduce the need for imports of low-quality, fast-fashion items.

The Way Forward

The current situation in Ghana is unsustainable, and immediate action is needed to protect the environment and the health of its people. The country cannot continue to absorb the Global North’s waste, particularly at the cost of its own well-being. Instead, the solution lies in adopting African-led initiatives that prioritize sustainability, innovation, and community resilience.

Ghana’s textile waste crisis is a wake-up call for both the Global North and the Global South. The fast-fashion industry, driven by cheap and disposable garments, has created a global waste problem that cannot be ignored. As the world becomes more interconnected, the responsibility to address these issues must be shared across borders. However, it is clear that the burden of this problem has fallen disproportionately on countries like Ghana.

The time has come to stop the influx of Europe’s fashion waste into Ghana. By banning textile “dead waste,” holding companies accountable, and supporting local circular solutions, Ghana can take control of its future and prevent becoming a permanent dumping ground for foreign waste.

As the Global North continues to offload its fast-fashion waste onto African nations, Ghana must stand up and demand change. The environmental and health impacts of textile waste are too severe to ignore, and the long-term consequences could be catastrophic. It is time to stop treating Africa as the world’s waste bin and put African solutions first. The future of Ghana and the entire continent depends on it.

“Fast Fashion’s Unsustainable Future: The Clock is Ticking for Zara, Forever 21, and H&M”

Fast fashion, a term that describes the rapid production of cheap, trend-driven clothing, has grown exponentially over the past two decades. Brands like Zara, Forever 21, and H&M have capitalized on this model, producing vast quantities of garments at low costs, allowing consumers to stay on top of trends without breaking the bank. However, beneath the allure of affordability and trendy styles lies a system that is increasingly unsustainable both environmentally and socially. The time has come to hold these brands accountable for the damage they cause, and to say to them: “Your time is up!”

The Environmental Toll of Fast Fashion

The environmental impact of fast fashion is staggering. The clothing industry is one of the largest polluters globally, and fast fashion brands are a major contributor to this crisis. The environmental toll begins with the production process, which is heavily reliant on water, energy, and toxic chemicals. Textile production consumes an estimated 93 billion cubic meters of water annually, and the dyeing and treatment of fabrics contribute significantly to water pollution, especially in countries where environmental regulations are lax.

Moreover, the use of synthetic fibers, such as polyester and nylon, compounds the problem. These materials are derived from fossil fuels and are not biodegradable. Every time these synthetic fabrics are washed, they release microplastics into waterways, eventually ending up in oceans where they harm marine life. A 2017 study estimated that around 35% of all microplastics in the ocean come from synthetic textiles.

The waste generated by fast fashion is another growing concern. With trends changing at breakneck speed, consumers are encouraged to buy more and discard items just as quickly. In the U.S. alone, 85% of textiles are thrown away each year, much of which ends up in landfills or incinerated. Zara, Forever 21, and H&M have contributed significantly to this waste cycle by producing garments that are designed for short-term use. Their model thrives on planned obsolescence—where clothes are not made to last but are instead produced with the expectation that they will soon be replaced by newer items.

The Social Impact: Workers Pay the Price

While fast fashion offers consumers low prices, the real cost is often borne by the garment workers, most of whom are based in developing countries. The need to keep prices low and production fast has led to poor working conditions in factories across countries like Bangladesh, Vietnam, and Cambodia. Workers are often paid far below living wages and work long hours in unsafe environments.

Tragic incidents such as the 2013 Rana Plaza factory collapse in Bangladesh, which killed over 1,100 workers, have shone a spotlight on the human cost of fast fashion. Despite promises from major brands to improve safety standards and wages, many of these issues persist. The pressure to meet high production targets and maintain low prices has resulted in a race to the bottom, where ethical considerations are secondary to profit margins.

The Rise of Conscious Consumerism

As awareness of fast fashion’s impact grows, so too does the demand for sustainable alternatives. Consumers are increasingly questioning the true cost of their clothing, leading to a rise in conscious consumerism. The slow fashion movement, which promotes mindful purchasing, quality over quantity, and ethical production, has gained momentum in recent years. Sustainable brands, such as Patagonia, Reformation, and Everlane, have carved out spaces in the market by offering transparency about their supply chains and prioritizing environmental and social responsibility.

In response to growing criticism, brands like Zara, H&M, and Forever 21 have made efforts to incorporate sustainable practices into their business models. For example, H&M launched its “Conscious Collection,” which claims to use sustainably sourced materials, while Zara has pledged to use 100% sustainable fabrics by 2025. However, critics argue that these initiatives amount to little more than “greenwashing” an attempt to appear environmentally friendly while continuing unsustainable practices on a larger scale.

The Clock is Ticking: “Your Time is Up!”

Despite their attempts to adapt, the reality is that fast fashion’s core business model is fundamentally at odds with sustainability. Producing vast amounts of clothing at breakneck speed while maintaining low prices cannot be done without cutting corners, whether in environmental responsibility or labor rights. While Zara, Forever 21, and H&M have enjoyed immense success, the writing is on the wall.

The fashion industry is slowly shifting towards a more responsible and circular approach, and fast fashion brands are being left behind. The demand for transparency, sustainability, and ethical production is no longer niche—it’s becoming the norm. Consumers are calling for higher quality garments that last longer and have less environmental impact. They are also demanding accountability from brands, expecting them to address the systemic issues within their supply chains.

In this context, fast fashion brands must make a choice: radically overhaul their practices or risk becoming obsolete. The pressure from both consumers and environmental advocates is mounting, and simply tweaking around the edges will not be enough. For companies like Zara, Forever 21, and H&M, it’s time to acknowledge that their time is up unless they commit to real, transformative change.

The Way Forward

If fast fashion brands are to survive in a future that prioritizes sustainability, they must move away from the throwaway culture they have helped create. This means not only reducing waste but also embracing circular fashion, where garments are designed to be recycled, repaired, or repurposed. It means investing in new technologies that minimize environmental harm, such as fabric innovations that reduce water and energy use. And most importantly, it means ensuring that workers are treated fairly, with safe working conditions and living wages.

Consumers, too, have a role to play. By making more thoughtful purchasing decisions, supporting sustainable brands, and holding companies accountable for their actions, we can collectively steer the fashion industry towards a more ethical future.

Fast fashion as it exists today is unsustainable both environmentally and socially. The dominance of brands like Zara, Forever 21, and H&M has come at a significant cost, and the time has come for these companies to either adapt or step aside. As consumer awareness grows and demand for responsible fashion increases, the fast fashion industry’s reign may soon come to an end.

The message is clear: the era of wasteful, exploitative fashion is over. It’s time for a new, sustainable chapter in fashion, and for Zara, Forever 21, and H&M, the clock is ticking. **Your time is up!**

Content courtesy of  Green Peace & NFH

Where Is Our Future? Uganda Declares War On Used Clothing From ‘Dead People’

The tumultuous, jam-packed Owino secondhand market in Uganda’s capital has been Hadija Nakimuli’s life’s work for almost thirty years, having assisted the widowed shopkeeper in building a home and raising twelve children.
For Nakimuli and tens of thousands of other merchants, however, this vital lifeline might be severed by a possible government ban on the sale of worn apparel.

As she dug through her closet full of dresses, undergarments, shoes, and purses, the 62-year-old questioned, “Where is our future if they stop selling secondhand clothes?”
The expansive market was founded in 1971 and employs some 80,000 people, of whom 70% are women, according to Kampala municipal officials.

Menswear vendor Joseph Barimugaya remarked, “In addition to students, I get calls from ministers and members of parliament who need me to deliver clothes to their air-conditioned offices.”
There should be no tampering with this deal. The father of four told AFP that “everyone benefits, including the government, which gets taxes.”
Hundreds of shoppers, looking to get a deal, cram themselves into the tiny passageways that divide the improvised wooden stalls every day.

Here, a used Pierre Cardin jacket sells for 40,000 Ugandan shillings ($11), which is a significant discount from the retail price.

“I make less than 500,000 Ugandan shillings a year as a teacher. Robert Twimukye, 27, told AFP that he would spend his whole paycheck on clothes if he were to get a new item. He was shopping at Owino on a Saturday afternoon.

He is not alone.
“Everyone is interested in vintage clothing. Few individuals in Uganda can afford new clothes, according to Allan Zavuga, shop manager of Think Twice, a company with thirty employees spread over three locations.
“It is a disservice to the people and the country as a whole to ban it in Uganda,” he added, citing the environmental consequences of making new clothes rather than reusing existing ones.

A 2017 study conducted by USAID, the US government’s assistance agency, found that East Africa imports almost one-eighth of the world’s used apparel, creating jobs for nearly 355,000 people earning $230 million annually.
Governments in Africa, meanwhile, have long held grudges against the industry, claiming that the cast-offs hurt the continent’s textile sector.

“The deceased in a faraway nation is the source of this clothing. Presidency Yoweri Museveni stated in August of this year that “clothes are sent to Africa when a white person dies.”

“I have declared war on secondhand clothes to promote African wear,” claimed the president.

David Bahati, Uganda’s state minister for commerce, stated in an interview with AFP that it was a matter of “dignity.”.
“We will be able to replace these second-hand clothes” if the planned ban is implemented, he continued.

“It cannot be done in one day, but we can do it gradually,” Bahati stated.
To possibly enact the ban in January, the administration is looking into the matter.

“The government is ready to give investors incentives, such as tax holidays, to ensure we process our cotton into new garments to meet market demands.”

Uganda has been here before.
The Kampala City Traders Association vigorously opposed Museveni’s 2016 attempt to outlaw secondhand apparel as part of an East African push to boost homegrown industry.
There was also the factor of diplomacy.

The regional coalition of the East African Community initially presented a unified face.
But when Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda objected to the idea of losing duty-free access to US markets in retaliation, the coalition broke.

Ultimately, Rwanda decided to go it alone and enacted high levies on used apparel in 2016, which caused a precipitous decline in imports and a spike in the smuggling of used items to satisfy demand.

Two years later, in a tit-for-tat action, the US halted duty-free advantages for clothing made in Rwanda.
Geopolitics is not a concern for either buyers or sellers at Owino.
Reeling with fury, second-generation merchant Harriet Musoke Kyambadde questioned, “Who did the government consult (before deciding) to ban secondhand?”

Throwing her hands in the air, the mother of three told AFP, “Banning this business will be sending me into abject poverty.”

Content courtesy of AFP, Barron & NFH

 

According To A Greenpeace Analysis, The Majority Of Clothing Delivered To East Africa Is Garbage.

According to a Greenpeace analysis, the circularity advertised by global fashion firms is “still a fantasy,” with the majority of apparel delivered to East Africa ending up in landfills.
Greenpeace Germany traveled to Kenya and Tanzania to learn about the problem of imported textile waste in these countries and to learn about some of the numerous local efforts working to combat it.

However, according to the campaigners’ most recent study, ‘Poisoned Gifts: From Donations to the Dumpsite: Textiles Waste Disguised as Second-Hand Clothes Exported to East Africa,’ issued last week, the majority of the apparel is of such low quality that it ends up at the dumpsite.

“The failure of the fast-fashion linear business model is more visible than in the countries where many of these cheap clothes end up once their short lives are over, on huge dumpsites, burned on open fires, washed out into the sea, with severe consequences for people and the planet,” Greenpeace said in a statement on its website.

According to the report, almost one million tonnes of worn clothing are collected annually in Germany, with the volume increasing by 20% year on year. According to the report, only a small percentage of worn clothing is resold in the country where it was collected: around 10%–30% in the UK, and similar percentages in the US and Canada.

According to Greenpeace, the majority of the worn clothing is sent overseas to join worldwide second-hand commerce in which billions of old garments are bought and sold each year.

However, the non-profit claims that this report demonstrates how textile waste is frequently “disguised” as second-hand clothing and exported from the Global North to the Global South in order to avoid the responsibility and costs of dealing with the problem of disposable clothing, with these used clothes, as well as new ‘overproduced’ clothes, frequently reported and recorded as “reused.” Greenpeace estimates that over half of them wind up in landfills, rivers, or are openly burned.

Greenpeace Germany said it recently campaigned for a ban on the destruction of unsold and returned goods to be included in the German circular economy law in 2020, as well as a transparency requirement for large companies to publicly disclose the number of products they discard and destroy, including textiles.

Following pressure from a number of environmental organizations, including Greenpeace, The EU announced a new textile strategy in March 2022, which recommends a ban on product destruction and a transparency mandate.

The widespread idea that donating clothes is a circular way of dealing with garment waste, according to the Greenpeace analysis, is generating concerns.

“The trade has been labeled “charity,” “recycling,” and “diversion,” and now many people call it “circular,” according to the research, although none of these names are accurate. Circularity is not achieved by simply transferring garments from one location to another. Previously, these clothes would have ended up discarded in dumpsites in the West, but now they end up in African dumpsites.”

African countries that have taken a position against this trade have also run into difficulties, according to the report. The East African Community (EAC) agreed in 2016 to restrict used clothing imports entirely by 2019.

The reason for the prohibition was that it would improve the economy by boosting the local textile industry.

The US, on the other hand, challenged the restriction as a trade barrier and threatened trade penalties, including the loss of duty-free apparel export eligibility to the US market, under the US African Growth and Opportunity Act.

Import tax increases have also caused complications. Consignments of old clothing were left uncollected at the port of Mombasa after importers failed to comply with new duty rules, according to Uganda, Rwanda, and Tanzania.

According to Greenpeace, 150–200 tonnes of textiles are dumped in African countries every day, and because up to 69 percent of the fibers used in clothing are synthetic (mostly polyester), they are oil-based and non-biodegradable. Greenpeace alleges that discarded microplastic fibers seep into the environment and end up in the human food chain.

According to the report, because there is insufficient infrastructure to dispose of these vast amounts of textile waste and official dumpsites are overburdened, textile waste is dumped along rivers or at settlement borders.

Some of it is burned openly, causing health problems for those who live nearby and clogging rivers and drains, which can cause flooding.

Methane can be released by decomposing clothing, and synthetic materials like polyester and lycra can take hundreds of years to biodegrade. Furthermore, many clothing contains harmful compounds, according to the survey.

According to Greenpeace, it is no longer sufficient for firms to focus solely on cleaning up their supply chains, and they are encouraging global fashion brands to increase their efforts to prevent their goods’ massive end-of-life impacts.
Furthermore, according to Greenpeace, the EU must ensure that its proposal to prohibit the export of textile waste and encourage long-lasting, durable, and repairable clothes of high quality is properly implemented through various rules, which must be accepted as a global treaty as soon as possible.

Greenpeace called for control of fashion supply chains in its Self-Regulation: A Fashion Fairytale report in November (2021), claiming that self-regulation was “failed to fix the problem.”

Content courtesy of Greenpeace & NFH

Ad