CIDER, a Hong Kong-based fashion brand, has exploded in popularity on platforms like TikTok. But beneath the viral trends and influencer marketing, a crucial question lingers: Is Cider Fast Fashion? This article delves into CIDER’s ethical and environmental practices, examining its sustainability rating and exploring whether its rapid rise to fame comes at a cost.
CIDER’s Business Model: Fast Fashion Red Flags
CIDER’s digital-first approach mirrors that of fast fashion giants like SHEIN. The brand releases small batches of trendy items weekly, operating as a direct-from-factory marketplace. While CIDER claims data-driven production minimizes waste, this model inherently encourages overconsumption and rapid trend cycles, hallmarks of fast fashion. Their claims of innovation and reduced unsold stock raise concerns about potential greenwashing.
CIDER’s Environmental Impact: A “Very Poor” Rating
Good On You, a leading source for ethical brand ratings, gives CIDER a “Very Poor” rating for its environmental impact. This stems from several factors:
- Reliance on Harmful Materials: CIDER primarily uses virgin polyester and spandex, fabrics known for their significant environmental footprint.
- Lack of Biodiversity Protection: There’s no evidence of initiatives to protect biodiversity within CIDER’s supply chain.
- Hazardous Chemicals: CIDER lacks demonstrable action to reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous chemicals in its production processes. This raises concerns about water pollution and potential harm to workers and consumers.
- Unsustainable Fast Fashion Model: CIDER’s constant release of new styles perpetuates a culture of disposability, contributing to textile waste and resource depletion.
CIDER’s Labor Practices: Another “Very Poor” Score
CIDER also receives a “Very Poor” rating for its labor practices. Despite increased transparency compared to previous assessments, significant issues remain:
- Lack of Diversity and Inclusion: There’s no evidence of programs promoting diversity and inclusion within its supply chain.
- Lack of Financial Security for Suppliers: CIDER doesn’t appear to provide financial security for its suppliers, potentially leading to precarious working conditions and suppressed wages.
- Absence of Living Wages: Perhaps most concerning, CIDER lacks evidence of paying a living wage across its supply chain, a fundamental requirement for ethical labor practices. While some suppliers are audited, the absence of living wages undermines any claims of responsible sourcing.
CIDER’s Animal Welfare: “It’s a Start” but Room for Improvement
CIDER fares slightly better in animal welfare with an “It’s a Start” rating. The brand avoids leather, fur, down, angora, and exotic animal skin. However, it uses wool and exotic animal hair without disclosing sources or demonstrating traceability. A comprehensive animal welfare policy is also absent.
Conclusion: Is CIDER Fast Fashion? The Verdict
The evidence overwhelmingly suggests that CIDER is indeed fast fashion. Its low scores in environmental impact and labor conditions, coupled with its business model centered on rapid trend turnover, align with the defining characteristics of fast fashion. While the brand shows minor progress in animal welfare, its overall lack of commitment to ethical and sustainable practices raises serious concerns. For consumers seeking truly responsible fashion choices, CIDER falls short. Consider exploring alternative brands with demonstrably better ethical and environmental performance.
