Spotlight Articles

For generations, master artisans across India and the Global South supplied luxury markets while their names stayed hidden behind export houses, intermediaries and non-disclosure agreements. A new incubator asks whether that labour can carry its own name and command luxury value. Susan Walker, whose nonprofit Ibu operates from the American city of Charleston, explains how visibility and price might converge.

India's craft sector employs millions of women in home-based work, often paid by the piece and rarely counted in corporate accountability. As machine-made imitations spread, the question of fair pay grows sharper. Katherine Neuman, who runs House of Wandering Silk in Delhi, examines how replication, pricing and storytelling together decide the fortunes of traditional makers.

As slow fashion turns handmade cloth into a selling point, the artisans behind Ikat and Kantha have gained visibility without a matching rise in pay or security. The imbalance raises a pointed question about who profits from the story of craft. Megha Agarwal, founder of Studio Maeve, weighs whether artisan recognition delivers genuine dignity or borrowed branding.

Himroo, a centuries-old silk-and-cotton weave from the city now called Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar, had fallen from thousands of handlooms to none still working. Arushi Chowdhury Khanna, who founded the social enterprise LoomKatha, argues that reviving such a craft depends less on preserving skill than on rebuilding the market and the visibility that sustain it, not on the loom alone.

For generations, the women who hand-paint Kalamkari cloth in southern Andhra Pradesh sold their labour without their names attached to it. Anita Reddy, a social worker who founded the artisan collective DWARAKA, set out to change that by placing control of both the making and the pricing with the women themselves, from the first outline to the final price.

Efforts to regulate global textile waste are reshaping debates over who defines sustainability and who bears its costs. A UNEP initiative to standardise “waste” classifications has triggered backlash from reuse economies, exposing how circularity policies can threaten livelihoods and distort trade while ignoring the real drivers of overproduction in wealthier manufacturing nations.

As policymakers seek to standardise global rules on textile waste, African traders find themselves contending with definitions that could reshape their markets. Atobrah Edward Brinkley, Secretary of the Ghana Used Clothing Dealers Association, argues that lived realities of reuse and repair deserve equal recognition within sustainability frameworks largely framed by institutions far removed from their economies.

As international agencies develop new criteria for textile “waste,” concerns are emerging over how these definitions affect circular trade and livelihoods. SMART, the US-based association for secondary materials and recycled textiles, urges clarity and inclusiveness. Its Director of Government Affairs, Jessica Franken, stresses that credible environmental frameworks require full transparency and peer-reviewed data.

Efforts to tighten global definitions of “waste” have sparked a struggle over the future of reuse economies. Teresiah Wairimu Njenga, who leads the Mitumba Consortium Association of Kenya, argues that poorly conceived guidelines risk collapsing viable circular systems under the guise of environmental reform, while the real issue of fast-fashion overproduction remains unaddressed.

As the global textiles industry faces mounting scrutiny over waste, UNEP’s efforts to define what counts as “used” or “discarded” are sparking tension. Critics warn that new circularity rules risk undermining reuse economies in developing countries, threatening livelihoods and exposing how environmental ambition can collide with economic dependence.