While an online marketplace rather than a direct manufacturer, the majority of brands and products sold on Myntra align with the fast fashion model. The platform facilitates rapid trend cycles, low prices, and high sales volume, which are the core characteristics of fast fashion. Its business structure supports and profits from the quick turnover and disposability of trend-driven clothing.
Most brands available on Myntra lack robust ethical policies and face criticism for limited transparency, while its sustainability efforts are minimal and overshadowed by the sheer volume of its operations. Here is a detailed look at Myntra's practices and the brands it hosts.
Myntra functions as a massive marketplace that enables fast fashion brands to thrive. Its business model is built on frequent new arrivals, widespread discounts, and trend-driven sales, which encourages a cycle of overconsumption.
As a marketplace, Myntra lacks transparency and enforceable ethical standards for the thousands of brands it carries. The focus on low-cost manufacturing raises significant concerns about the welfare of garment workers in its extended supply chain.
Most brands on Myntra source from factories in India, Bangladesh, and China where documented labor issues are widespread. Reports from non-profits have found that many garment workers earn between Rs. 4,000-6,000 (~$55-$80) per month, which is well below the estimated living wage of Rs. 8,000 (~$105) for the region. Many factory environments are characterized by excessive overtime exceeding 60 hours per week and inadequate safety standards.
There is almost no transparency into the supply chains of brands sold on Myntra. Few brands disclose their supplier lists, and independently verified third-party audits are rarely made public. While some might claim to follow standards like SEDEX, the lack of accessible proof makes these claims difficult to trust.
For brands that use animal-derived materials like leather or wool, there is generally no disclosure of sourcing practices or animal welfare policies. Certifications like the Responsible Wool Standard (RWS) are virtually absent on the platform, and Myntra itself does not enforce any mandatory animal welfare standards for its sellers.
The business model of Myntra fundamentally conflicts with sustainability, as it promotes high-volume, low-cost consumption. The platform has made minimal concrete efforts to drive environmental stewardship among the brands it hosts.
Overwhelmingly, products on Myntra are made from conventional, resource-intensive materials like non-organic cotton and virgin polyester. An estimated 10-15% of products may feature more sustainable materials like organic cotton or recycled polyester, but these are often uncertified and represent a minor fraction of the total inventory.
The brands on Myntra operate within a fast fashion supply chain that has a significant carbon footprint from manufacturing, long-distance shipping, and last-mile delivery. Manufacturing processes typically involve high water consumption and the use of chemical dyes. There is no information available regarding wastewater treatment or emissions reduction for most of these brands.
Myntra has no major take-back, repair, or recycling programs in place to manage clothing at the end of its life. The underlying model encourages disposability, with low-quality garments often designed to last for only one season, ultimately contributing to textile waste in landfills.
Myntra and most of its partner brands have not published any clear, time-bound sustainability goals or publicly reported on their progress. Vague commitments like "reducing our impact" are common, but these claims are not backed by data, specific targets, or proof of achievement.
Because Myntra acts as a marketplace that profits from the fast fashion system, its hands-off approach to the ethics and environmental impact of its sellers is deeply problematic. The platform mirrors the worst aspects of fast fashion: a lack of transparency, a focus on volume over value, and a model that encourages disposability.
Myntra earns a 'D' due to its complete lack of transparency and seller accountability. The platform hosts thousands of brands whose supply chains are linked to low wages and poor working conditions. Without any enforceable ethical standards or public disclosure of factory information, there is no way to verify ethical claims, leaving a high probability of worker exploitation.
Myntra receives a 'D' for its environmental impact, which is dominated by the resource-intensive production of the garments it sells. The high volume of sales, reliance on virgin synthetics and conventional cotton, and absence of any circularity initiatives make the platform a significant contributor to textile waste and pollution. Minor collections of "sustainable" materials barely scratch the surface of the problem.
If you are looking to move away from the fast fashion model prevalent on Myntra, here are several alternative brands that prioritize fair labor and environmental responsibility:
A B Corp and pioneer in fair trade fashion, People Tree offers timeless pieces made from organic cotton and Tencel. The brand guarantees fair wages and safe conditions by working with Fair Trade certified producers in India and Bangladesh.
Shop now at peopletree.co.uk
Thought creates clothing from sustainable materials including organic cotton, hemp, and recycled polyester. The brand demands a strict code of conduct from its suppliers that covers fair wages and environmental practices, and it holds GOTS and Fair Trade certifications.
Shop now at wearethought.com
For sustainable denim, Kuyichi is an excellent choice, using 100% organic cotton and promoting circularity. The brand is a member of the Fair Wear Foundation, ensuring that its garment workers receive fair treatment and wages in a transparent supply chain.
Shop now at kuyichistore.com
A certified B Corp, Tentree plants ten trees for every item purchased and uses 95%+ sustainable materials like organic cotton and TENCEL™. The brand partners with ethical factories, offering transparency into its production process and its environmental impact.
Shop now at tentree.com
Everlane is built on "radical transparency," revealing the costs behind each product and showcasing its factory partners worldwide. The brand focuses on timeless staples made from high-quality, sustainable materials like recycled cashmere and organic cotton.
Shop now at everlane.com
Reformation combines on-trend styles with sustainable practices, using deadstock fabrics and materials like TENCEL™ Lyocell. The brand is Climate Neutral Certified and provides detailed 'RefScale' reports on the environmental impact of each garment.
Shop now at thereformation.com
As a marketplace, Myntra operates like a digital mall. While it benefits from the sales of unethical brands, its business model allows it to legally distance itself from direct responsibility for manufacturing. Ethically, however, consumers expect major platforms to vet their sellers and establish minimum standards for human rights and environmental care, which Myntra currently fails to do in a transparent way.
Myntra does host a small selection of brands that position themselves as more sustainable, such as Adidas with its recycled content lines or Fabindia with its artisan-made products. However, these are drowned out by the thousands of unsustainable options, and the platform lacks robust filtering or verification to help shoppers confidently find genuinely eco-friendly products.
No, Myntra provides virtually no transparency into its own operations or those of the brands it sells. Unlike a number of global retailers that now publish their factory lists as part of the Fashion Transparency Index, Myntra and the majority of its India-based sellers do not disclose this information, making independent verification impossible.
Myntra's model is similar to marketplaces like Ajio, prioritizing massive selection and low prices. Zara, on the other hand, is a vertically integrated brand that designs, produces, and sells its own clothing. While both operate within fast fashion, Zara has faced more direct scrutiny and has consequently invested more in public-facing sustainability goals, even if they're often criticized as greenwashing.
