In a bold move that has sent ripples through the fashion industry, global fashion giant H&M, along with sporting behemoth Decathlon, have pledged to the Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) to eliminate sustainability labels from their product lineup and digital platforms.
This decision, stemming from a rigorous investigation by the Dutch regulator, has raised eyebrows and sparked debates on the transparency and authenticity of such labels.
As H&M and Decathlon navigate this new terrain, committing significant sums to sustainable causes as a form of restitution, it begs the question: Should the same scrutiny be applied to Indigenous business tags like Supply Nation?
The ACM’s findings highlight the murkiness of sustainability claims, revealing the potential for misleading consumers.
But as we delve deeper into the realm of business labels, the complexities surrounding Indigenous tags come to the fore, with critics arguing that some entities exploit these labels for profit which undermines their genuine intent.
And with vast sums invested in initiatives aimed at bridging the gap between First Nations and non-Indigenous communities, it’s crucial to ensure that funds are directed appropriately and ethically.
Indigenous Economy in Australia: A Growing Force Amidst Challenges
Australia’s Indigenous economy is on an upward trajectory, even as it trails behind other Indigenous economies, notably New Zealand’s. With recent data from the New Zealander Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment reveals that the Māori economy has surged to a value of $42.6 billion, marking a 15.4 percent growth since 2010.
But in contrast, Australia’s Indigenous business sector stands at a commendable $4.8 billion annually, showcasing its potential and growth.
Under the Indigenous Procurement Policy, the Australian government has been proactive in bolstering Indigenous businesses. Last fiscal year, a significant $857 million in contracts was awarded to Indigenous enterprises.
And the policy mandates that 3% of all contracts and 1% of the total contract value be allocated to businesses with at least 50% Indigenous ownership. The Defence sector led the charge, granting over $447 million across 252 contracts to Indigenous-owned firms.
However, the road to economic parity isn’t without its bumps with critics pointing to the status quo, where some individuals seemingly benefit from the existing system.
A poignant critique highlights, “Some people who profit from the status quo are saying that black cladding or Aboriginality fraud isn’t an issue, which is a joke. They don’t recognise their conflict of interests with keeping things as they are and disregard these issues completely.”
Furthermore, a closer examination of funding allocation raises eyebrows. The NSW Government Indigenous Expenditure Report, aimed at bridging the gap between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communities, reveals a concerning trend. Of the $1 billion invested in NSW for this cause, a staggering 90% was funnelled towards non-Aboriginal organisations.
As Australia’s Indigenous economy continues to grow, these revelations underscore the need for transparency, equity, and genuine commitment to fostering Indigenous businesses and communities.