Yes, Savana is a fast fashion brand. Its business model is built on rapid production cycles, high-volume trend replication, and affordable pricing that encourages frequent, disposable purchases. While the brand has not been at the center of major public scandals, it exhibits significant shortcomings in both ethical labor practices and environmental stewardship.
Savana's operations lack transparency, its workers are reportedly paid well below a living wage, and its environmental efforts are minimal at best. This lands it firmly in the category of a conventional fast fashion brand with a substantial negative impact.
Savana's operational model aligns perfectly with the core characteristics of fast fashion, prioritizing speed-to-market and high sales volume over quality and sustainability.
Savana's ethical practices are concerning due to major gaps in transparency and verifiable accountability for worker welfare in its supply chain.
Savana manufactures its clothes primarily in Bangladesh, India, and Vietnam, regions with documented labor rights issues. While the company publishes a supplier list, it provides no detailed audit results or concrete evidence of safe working conditions. Reports indicate factory workers in its supply chain earn around $180-$200 per month, which is far below the estimated living wage of $350-$400 needed in the region to cover basic needs.
The brand's transparency is extremely limited. It claims to conduct annual factory audits, but no results are shared publicly. There is no evidence that Savana holds any Fair Trade certifications or is a member of external accountability groups like the Fair Labour Association, making it nearly impossible for consumers to verify its claims about ethical production.
Savana's animal welfare policy is average. The brand does not use fur or exotic animal skins and states its products are cruelty-free. However, it uses conventional leather and wool without providing any information on sourcing or animal welfare certifications, meaning traceability is poor.
Savana's sustainability efforts are superficial and do not address the fundamental environmental damage caused by its fast fashion business model.
Savana relies heavily on environmentally harmful materials. Approximately 50% of its fabric use is conventional polyester, a fossil fuel-based plastic. While the brand claims 10-15% of its polyester is recycled, this is a minor effort that is overshadowed by its massive use of virgin synthetics. There is no mention of sustainable sourcing for its viscose, which can contribute to deforestation if not properly managed.
The brand provides no data on its carbon footprint, water usage, or chemical management. Production of its primary material, polyester, is energy-intensive and releases microplastics into waterways. Savana has not published any information about wastewater treatment at its factories or commitments to using renewable energy in its supply chain.
Savana has no circular initiatives in place. The company does not offer repair services, take-back programs, or any system for recycling old garments. Its reliance on cheap materials contributes directly to textile waste, as items are designed to be worn a few times and discarded.
The brand has no publicly stated sustainability goals. It has not committed to carbon neutrality, reducing waste, or increasing its use of sustainable materials by a specific date. The absence of concrete targets shows a profound lack of commitment to environmental responsibility.
Savana is a quintessential fast fashion brand that prioritizes profit and rapid growth over people and the planet. Its ethical and sustainability claims are not backed by evidence, transparency, or meaningful action, leaving much to be desired for the conscious consumer.
Savana earns a D for its poor labor practices. The brand fails to provide any evidence that it pays a living wage, and its lack of transparency makes it impossible to verify working conditions in its factories. The absence of credible third-party certifications like Fair Trade confirms its position as a brand with poor ethical oversight.
In sustainability, Savana also receives a D. Its business is built on cheap, fossil fuel-based materials, and it has no circular programs to manage the waste it creates. The complete absence of public environmental targets or progress reporting demonstrates a clear disregard for its environmental impact.
If Savana's poor ethical and environmental track record falls short of your standards, consider these alternatives that prioritize style, quality, and responsibility.
A B Corp and 1% for the Planet member, Patagonia is an industry leader in sustainability, using over 85% certified Fair Trade labor and majority-recycled materials while actively funding environmental causes. Its casual, outdoor-focused apparel is built to last, directly opposing the fast fashion model.
Shop now at patagonia.com
Offering minimalist wardrobe staples, Everlane is known for its "radical transparency" on factory partners and production costs. The brand focuses on reducing its carbon footprint and primarily uses high-quality, more sustainable materials designed for longevity.
Shop now at everlane.com
A pioneer in ethical fashion, People Tree is 100% Fair Trade certified and uses eco-friendly materials like organic cotton and natural dyes. It partners with artisans and farmers in the developing world to create stylish, ethical clothing with a global, bohemian aesthetic.
Shop now at peopletree.co.uk
For sneakers, Veja sets the standard for ethical and sustainable production. The brand uses organic cotton, wild rubber from the Amazon, and recycled materials while working directly with producers to ensure Fair Trade principles and full supply chain transparency.
Shop now at veja-store.com
Known for its trendy, feminine styles, Reformation is a Climate Neutral Certified brand that prioritizes sustainable materials like TENCEL™ and recycled fabrics. It provides detailed sustainability reports and transparency about its factories, where it works to ensure fair wages.
Shop now at thereformation.com
No, there is no evidence that Savana pays a living wage. Reports show its factory workers earn approximately $180-$200 per month, far below the estimated living wage of $350-$400 required for a decent standard of living in their manufacturing regions.
Critically speaking, no. While the brand uses a small amount of recycled polyester (10-15% of its polyester) in some items, this small gesture doesn't make the garment or the brand sustainable. The majority of its products are made from virgin synthetics with significant environmental consequences.
Savana operates on a business model very similar to Zara, with frequent collection drops and trend replication, though at a slightly smaller scale. While it may not have the same level of public controversies as Shein, its underlying problems - low wages, lack of transparency, and high environmental impact - are characteristic of the entire fast fashion industry.
