The Re-evaluation of Masstige Fashion and Overconsumption Habits in Light of Low Corporate Human Rights Benchmark Scoring

Author: Lena Abara

April 7, 2026

Example of discarded garments located in the Atacama Desert in Chile [Image credit: Los Angeles Times, 2024]

It may come as a surprise that there are strong linkages between the garment industry and the human rights field. This “fast-fashion” sector, which depends on cheap and speedy production of low-quality clothing to meet the fast-changing trends, has boomed in recent years (Lai, 2021). This business model involves rapid design, production, and distribution that ultimately allows brands and retailers to “pull large quantities of greater product variety” (Lai, 2021). As a result, consumers can access these different styles and varied products at low prices (Lai, 2021). It is particularly detrimental to the environment, as it actively encourages excessive consumption habits and many of these mass-produced garments are non-biodegradable (Lai, 2021).

Because of frequent consumer purchasing, it has been reported that over 1.92 million tons of textile waste is produced yearly, and the average American consumer throws away 81.5 pounds of clothes per year (Igini, 2023). These wasteful habits indicate that “throwaway culture” has gradually worsened, and the average clothing item is worn only seven to ten times before being discarded (Morrison, 2024). 

These concerning consumer habits point back to human rights, as many of these companies are assessed based on human rights commitments, their due-diligence processes, and overall implementation efforts by external advocacy organizations. For example, the Corporate Human Rights Benchmark (CHRB) aims to “provide a snapshot of the most influential companies specifically in high-risk sectors and look at their policies in place to systematize their human rights approach” (World Benchmark Alliance, 2026). In its scoreboard, the CHRB assesses around 100 companies operating across five high-risk sectors: food and agricultural products, apparel, extractives, information and communications technology (ICT), and automotive manufacturing. These companies are then scored across five measurement areas that include indicators such as how a business seeks to respect human rights in its own operations and supply chains. Many of the lowest-ranked companies on the benchmark list are considered “masstige” fashion brands; this term combines the words “mass” and “prestige” (Sederevičiūtė-Pačiauskienė, 2025). These brands sell clothing items and other goods targeted at a broad consumer base through strategic price positioning (Park, Ahn, 2025). Research has suggested that as middle-class consumers evaluate different forms of consumption, many are increasingly opting for more "prestigious" options (Park & Ahn, 2025).

Branded instagram posts utilized in researchers stimuli [Image credit: Sederevičiūtė-Pačiauskienė, Kamašauskė, 2025]

In the CHRB’s research, some of the lowest-ranked companies in terms of safeguarding human rights were Nordstrom, PVH Corp. (Calvin Klein, Tommy Hilfiger), Ralph Lauren, Hennes & Mauritz AB (H&M), and Lululemon Athletica (World Benchmark Alliance, 2026). All five of these companies ranked low in policy commitments, board-level accountability, embedding respect for human rights into organizational culture and management systems, human rights due diligence, and grievance mechanisms (World Benchmark Alliance, 2026). These fast-fashion tactics have led to individuals to consume 400% more clothing today than 20 years ago, while simultaneously increasing the use of low-paid labor in the Global South to meet demand (Maiti, 2026).

There needs to be a re-evaluation of these “masstige” fashion brands and individual overconsumption habits to better understand how they contribute to human inequality and suffering. This inequality arises when profit is prioritized over people and the planet. As the Sustainability Directory describes, manufacturing processes have led many overconsumption-driven industries to outsource production to “regions with lax environmental and labor regulations”(Sustainability Directory, 2025). Without proper regulations, the likelihood of worker exploitation increases, including unsafe labor conditions and low wages.

As previously noted, the multinational clothing company H&M has had a particularly poor track record regarding working conditions and building safety. The H&M Group states on its website, “Everyone should have access to decent, meaningful jobs with fair compensation and benefits, in safe and secure workplaces [...] Our work is aligned with the International Labour Organisation’s Fundamental Principles and Right at Work;” however, its connection to worker rights violations in Myanmar says otherwise (H&M Group, 2025). The Business & Human Rights Resource Centre (BHRRC) reported that Myanmar's corporate responsibility to respect human rights in the apparel sector was “significantly restricted” (Ethical Trading Initiative, 2022). The report found "pervasive” forced labor and excessive overtime, leading to financial penalties for refusing work (Ethical Trading Initiative, 2022). Additionally, workers at a supplier factory, the Saung Oo Sche Nay Garment Factory, were forced to “walk on their knees for not producing the number of garments required by the factory owner” (Business and Human Rights Resource Center, 2023). It was only after significant backlash, from various human rights groups, that H&M and other companies severed ties with Myanmar-based factories, rather than immediately responding to the abuses. These actions occurred after over 156 incidents of worker abuse were reported between 2022-2023 (Business and Human Rights Resource Center, 2023).

Such human right reports should not be the only trigger for consumers to re-evaluate their relationship with fast and masstige fashion brands. Individuals can begin addressing their consumption habits through community engagement and conscious consumption. Sociologist Magnus Boström argues that consumer culture plays a key role in how people socialize in contemporary societies (Boström, 2021). Consumer “desires” are both personal and social (Boström, 2021). Therefore, one way to reshape consumption is through community-based practices such as clothing swaps. These events help divert textiles from landfills while “optimising charitable benefits and shifting mindsets” (National Association for Charitable Textile Recycling, 2026).

Conscious consumption is defined as engaging in the economy while remaining aware of the impact of one’s consumption on society and the environment. In “Conscious Consumption and Its Impact on Marketing Practices and Business Sustainability”, research shows evidence of “consumer-driven transformation,” with 60% of Gen Z and Millennials reporting boycotting "non-environmentally friendly” brands in 2023. These findings suggest that purchase decisions are increasingly influenced not only by functionality but also by identity and moral values (Tewari, Dr Dheeraj, 2025).

In conclusion, this article demonstrates the strong linkages between the garment industry and human rights. This evolving sector continues to depend on cheap and rapid production of low-quality clothing. It has led to environmental harm, with non-biodegradable clothing accumulating in landfills worldwide. As Sass Brown stated, “Cheap fashion is really far from that. It may be cheap in terms of the financial cost, but very expensive when it comes to the environment and the cost of human life” (Regan, 2023). Meaningful change begins with a re-evaluation of personal consumption habits and adopting sustainable practices. 

---

Glossary

• Business & Human Rights Resource Centre (BHRRC): A global organization that works towards the intersection of business and human rights seeking to deliver a just economy, climate justice, and end abuse.

• Convenience culture: The act of prioritizing the ease and speed in daily life, often impacting sustainability and personal well-being.

• Corporate Human Rights Benchmark (CHRB): The CHRB assesses around 100 companies operating in five high-risk sectors and measures how businesses impact people and the planet in an effort to hold companies accountable for contributing to sustainable development.

• Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI): A leading alliance of trade unions, non-governmental organizations, and companies, working together to advance human rights in global supply chains.

• Fast-Fashion: An approach to the design, creation, and marketing of clothing fashions that emphasizes making fashion trends quickly and cheaply available to consumers.

• Generation Z: Cohort of individuals born between the years of 1997-2012. 

• Hennes & Mauritz AB (H&M): A retail company that sells clothing, accessories, footwear, cosmetics, and home textiles.

• International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) Fundamental Principles and Right at Work: An expression of commitment by governments and employers to uphold basic human values, ones that are vital to our social and economic lives.

• Masstige Fashion: Apparel companies selling clothing and other goods that are produced and sold for a wide range of consumers based on their price positioning and availability.

• Millennials: Cohort of individuals born between the years of 1981-1996.

• Overconsumption: Excessive consumption or use of something.

• PVH Corp.: A global apparel company that engages in the design and marketing of branded dress shirts, jeans wear, handbags, etc. It operates through segments such as Calvin Klein (North America, International), Tommy Hilfiger (North America, International), Heritage Brands Wholesale, and Heritage Brands Retail.

• Sustainability Directory: A website that is committed to democratizing sustainability knowledge, tailoring resources to empower action, and building a space for collective impact.

• Throwaway Culture: Practice of throwing something out after a single use.

---

References

1. Ahlering, N. (2025, April 8). 99 ways to opt out of consumerism. The Good Trade. https://www.thegoodtrade.com/features/anti-consumerism/

2. Business and Human Rights Centre. (2026). About Us. https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/about-us/

3. Business and Human Rights Resource Center. (2023, August). Falling out of fashion: garment worker abuse under military rule in Myanmar. https://media.business-humanrights.org/media/documents/2023_Myanmar_garment_workers.pdf

4. Boström, Magnus. “Social Relations and Everyday Consumption Rituals: Barriers or Prerequisites for Sustainability Transformation?.” Frontiers in sociology vol. 6 723464. 24 Aug. 2021, doi:10.3389/fsoc.2021.723464

5. Ethical Trading Initiative. (2022, September 12). Myanmar enhanced due diligence sectoral assessment. https://www.ethicaltrade.org/resources/guidance-and-reports/myanmar-enhanced-due-diligence-sectoral-assessment

6. Ethical Trading Initiative. (2026). Who we are. https://www.ethicaltrade.org/about-eti/who-we-are

7. Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. (2024). International Labour Organization. https://www.ilo.org/topics-and-sectors/fundamental-principles-and-rights-work

8. Forbes. (2026a). H&M - Hennes & Mauritz | Company Overview & News. https://www.forbes.com/companies/hm-hennes-mauritz/

9. Forbes. (2026b). PVH | PVH Stock Price, company Overview & News. https://www.forbes.com/companies/pvh/

10. H&M Group. (2025). Working Conditions. https://hmgroup.com/sustainability/fair-and-equal/working-conditions/

11. Igini, M. (2023, August 21). 10 concerning Fast Fashion Waste Statistics. Earth.Org. https://earth.org/statistics-about-fast-fashion-waste/

12. Lai, O. (2021, November 10). Explainer: What is fast fashion?. Earth.Org. https://earth.org/what-is-fast-fashion/

13. Lectra. (2020, August 13). Masstige vs. Premium Brands. https://www.lectra.com/en/library/masstige-vs-premium-brands-what-is-the-real-difference

14. Library of Congress. Doing Consumer Research: A Resource Guide. Library of Congress. https://guides.loc.gov/consumer-research/market-segments/generations

15. Los Angeles Times (Ed.). (2024, September 12). The fast fashion mountain of shame is real. Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2024-09-12/the-fast-fashion-mountain-of-shame-is-real

16. Maiti, Rashmila (2026). The Environmental Impact of Fast Fashion, Explained. Earth.org. https://earth.org/fast-fashions-detrimental-effect-on-the-environment/

17. Merriam-Webster. (2026a). Fast fashion definition & meaning. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fast%20fashion

18. Merriam-Webster. (2026c). Overconsumption definition & meaning. Merriam-Webster. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/overconsumption

19. Morrison, R. (2024). Throwaway Culture Is Drowning Us in Waste. Earth.org. https://earth.org/throwaway-culture-is-drowning-us-in-waste/

20. National Association for Charitable Textile Recycling, 2026. Community Toolkit: A Best Practices Toolkit for Community-Led Textile Reuse. NACTR.

https://nactr.ca/clothing-swaps/

21. Park, J., & Ahn, S. (2025). Unpacking masstige brand perception: A multimethod study on value dimensions and brand extension. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 87, 104376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2025.104376

22. Regan, C. (2023, February 17). Is the cost of fast fashion unsustainable?. DevelopmentEducation.ie. https://developmenteducation.ie/feature/is-the-cost-of-fast-fashion-unsustainable/

23. Sederevičiūtė-Pačiauskienė, Kamašauskė, (2025, June 27). Sustainability of Masstige brands’ identitary values. MDPI. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/5919

24. Sustainability Directory. (2025a). Convenience culture → term. https://lifestyle.sustainability-directory.com/term/convenience-culture/

25. Sustainability Directory. (2025b, April 12). What are the societal implications of overconsumption patterns? https://pollution.sustainability-directory.com/question/what-are-the-societal-implications-of-overconsumption-patterns/#:~:text=The%20societal%20implications%20of%20overconsumption%20extend%20beyond%20environmental%20concerns%20to,concentrating%20benefits%20among%20the%20affluent

26. Tewari, Dr Dheeraj,et al. (2025). "Conscious Consumption and Its Impact on Marketing Practices and Business Sustainability." Advances in Consumer Research 2.4 (2025): 5502-5510.

27. Woolums, L. (2023, October 24). The excessive nature of overconsumption in American culture. UAB Institute for Human Rights Blog. https://sites.uab.edu/humanrights/2023/10/24/the-excessive-nature-of-overconsumption-in-american-culture/

28. World Benchmarking Alliance. (2026a). Corporate human rights benchmark. https://www.worldbenchmarkingalliance.org/benchmark/corporate-human-rights-benchmark

29. World Benchmarking Alliance. (2026b). Our mission. https://www.worldbenchmarkingalliance.org/about-us/our-mission