IELTS Writing · 15

The bar chart compares the average number of new clothing items purchased per person annually in the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan and Brazil in 2010 and 2023. Overall, consumption rose in three of the four countries over the period, with the UK both leading throughout and showing the largest increase, while Japan was the only nation where purchasing declined. In 2010, UK consumers bought the most clothes, at 44 items, followed closely by Germany with 38 and Japan with 35. Brazil recorded the lowest figure, at just 22 items per person. By 2023, the UK figure had surged to 62 items, by far the highest of any country. Brazil saw the most dramatic relative growth, almost doubling from 22 to 39 items. Germany experienced only a modest rise, from 38 to 41 items. In contrast, Japan bucked the general trend, falling from 35 to 30 items and becoming the lowest consumer by 2023.

The environmental damage caused by fast fashion has prompted debate over how best to address it. While some argue that strict government regulation is essential, others maintain that empowering consumers is more effective. In my view, although individual responsibility matters, robust regulation is ultimately indispensable. Those who favour regulation point to the scale of the problem. The fast fashion industry generates enormous volumes of textile waste and water pollution, and relies on cheap, disposable garments designed to be discarded within months. Voluntary change has proved slow, so measures such as taxes on low-cost clothing or bans on single-use items could force manufacturers to adopt sustainable practices. Regulation also creates a level playing field, ensuring that no company gains an unfair advantage by cutting corners. On the other hand, supporters of consumer choice argue that lasting change comes from informed individuals. If shoppers refuse to buy throwaway clothing and instead choose second-hand or durable garments, demand will reshape the market naturally. They contend that heavy-handed taxes simply burden poorer families, who may rely on affordable clothing, without addressing the root cause of overconsumption. In my opinion, both approaches are necessary, but regulation must lead. Consumer awareness alone cannot counter the powerful marketing and low prices that drive overconsumption. Sensible rules, combined with public education campaigns, would shift both supply and demand simultaneously. Crucially, governments can design policies to protect low-income households while still penalising wasteful production. In conclusion, while personal responsibility plays a valuable role, decisive government regulation offers the most reliable path to reducing the environmental harm of fast fashion.