This is why I do this. Jeansland is a podcast about the ecosystem in which jeans live. There are an estimated 26 million cotton farmers around the world, and about 25% of their production goes into jeans, which could mean 6.2 million farmers depend on denim. I read estimates that at least 1 million people work in retail selling jeans, and another 1.5 to 2 million sew them. And then there are all the label producers, pattern makers, laundries, chemical companies, machinery producers, and those that work in denim mills. I mean, the jeans industry, which is bigger than the global movie and music business combined, employs a lot of human beings. And many of them, like me, love jeans. The French philosopher and existentialist Simone de Beauvoir, when visiting New York, said, "Everyone in the New York subway is a novel." I never met her, but I guess she made the observation because of the incredible diversity of people who ride the subway system. I'm convinced the people in our jeans industry are like those in the subway. They are unique, with rich and complex stories to tell, and I want to hear them. And deep inside me, I think you might feel the same way.
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
0:00
|
6:00
I read an article about basketball this weekend that made me think about denim. Strange, I know.
The argument was simple: we’re seeing more basketball and understanding less of it. Highlights, hot takes, 30-second explanations. Why understand the game when somebody can just tell you who won?
I think our industry has developed the same problem.
We talk constantly about sustainability, circularity, regenerative agriculture, transparency, regulations, cotton, polyester, indigo. We publish enormous reports and thousands of pages of data. But who is actually reading them? More importantly, who understands them well enough to ask the next question?
It’s much easier to remember that cotton uses too much water, recycled polyester is sustainable, or an indigo process is “clean.” Two seconds. Done. Now we have an opinion.
We’ve created our own version of ESPN. We like the highlights, not the game.
And that worries me, because you cannot improve what you don’t understand.
If you value these conversations, subscribe and leave a review. It helps more than you think. You can also visit jeanseland.co and sign up for our bi-weekly newsletter. It gives you access to our full archive along with the development shifts and stories shaping the denim supply chain in real time. Follow us on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Instagram to stay connected between episodes. I read an article in The Guardian this weekend about ESPN, the sports network, and basketball. I'm a big basketball fan. And strangely enough, that article made me think about our industry. The article argues that serious basketball analysis is disappearing, and it's being replaced by highlights, shouting, arguments, and hot takes. Why watch the game when you can watch the highlights? Why understand why a play worked when somebody can tell you in 30 seconds who won and who screwed up? The author of the article describes it beautifully. We are seeing more basketball and understanding less of it. And then the article suddenly turns to literacy. The numbers are very disturbing. In the United States, 32% of 12th grade students now read below the basic level. Among American adults, the percentage at the lowest level of literacy rose from 19% in 2017 to 28% in 2023. And the percentage of American 13-year-olds who read for fun almost every day fell from 27% in 2012 to 14% in 2023, 11 years later. But this isn't an American story. The OECD, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, actually tests adult literacy internationally. The average score among the countries tested is 260. The United States scores 258. France 255. Spain, 247, worse. Italy, 245, worse again. Canada scores 271. Denmark, 273. The Netherlands, 279. Japan, 289, and the winner is Finland. They lead everybody at 296. In Japan, only 10% of adults are considered to have low literacy proficiency. And here's something else that bothers me. Literacy has declined over the decades in many countries. The United States has dropped 12 points. France, seven, Italy, five. Japan, despite being one of the world's best performing countries, dropped six. There are exceptions. Denmark, Sweden, both improved. Finland really improved. But the overall direction is not very encouraging. Now you may be thinking, what the hell does all of this have to do with genes? I kind of think everything. For 15 years, our industry has told itself that knowledge can transform the supply chain. More reports. Does anyone read them? Or more importantly, who actually understands them? More transparency and traceability or life cycle assessments? Great. More regulations? Great. Now come on. Who out there is reading the regulation laws? Who understands them? Who has an opinion on them? And from what? That's thousands and thousands of pages of PDFs. But there's one tiny little detail. Someone has to read all these things, comprehend them, read various reports, and come to intellectual conclusions based on facts. Cotton is complex. If someone says 10,000 liters of water is needed to make a pair of jeans, okay, but what kind of water? Rainfall? Irrigation? Where is the cotton grown? What was the yield? What methodology was used? What exactly was measured? These questions require a reading, or worse, comprehension. But in the end, it's much easier to remember cotton uses too much water. That's only two seconds of your brain, and you're done. Now you're an expert. You have made an opinion. Polyester. We can discuss petroleum, feedstocks, carbon energy, microfibers, recycling, and the end of life. But let's just go with the two-second fact. Recycled polyester is perfect. It's sustainable. Done. Fine. You're an expert. Indigo. We could understand the chemistry, wastewater, worker, exposure, hydrosulfates, affluent treatment, blah, blah, blah. Or we could just simply say we have clean indigo. Perfect. Done. Two seconds. We've created our own version of ESPN in our industry. We like the highlights, not the game. Sustainable, circular, regenerative, responsible, whatever. These words aren't necessarily wrong. The problem is that without literacy, knowledge, and curiosity, nobody asks the next question. What does it all mean? And that may be one of our biggest obstacles to improving our industry or perhaps even legislation in our governments, because you cannot have progressive laws without literacy. Putting a 150-page sustainability report on a website isn't transparency if nobody reads it. I think The Guardian is a credible publication. They bring up a great point. Our society is going downwards in literacy because our governments spend less on it. Simple. Or don't care. The trajectory of France, Japan, USA all going backwards in literacy is not a good sign. With all this said, how are we ever going to improve the textile industry if the people making decisions about it don't read? Because you cannot improve what you don't understand. And you cannot understand something as complicated as our industry just from the highlights. From sustainability insights to fabric innovation and brand stories shaping the future of the Jeans industry. Inside Denim keeps you informed and inspired. So stay ahead of what's next in Denim at insidedenim.com.
