Fashion Brands Talk a Big Game About Repairs—But What About Geographical Accessibility?

Source: Unsplash.com

The fashion industry is pushing for a shift from a linear model to a circular one, where clothes are designed to last longer and be repaired rather than discarded. But let’s be real—this transformation can’t happen if brands' on-the-ground actions don’t match their big sustainability claims.

In our last blog, we broke down how fashion brands love to talk about their repair initiatives but often fall short in actually delivering accessible, efficient services. And that got us thinking—beyond the marketing hype, what is it actually like for customers trying to use these repair programs? Today, we’re taking a deep dive into one key issue: geographical accessibility.

Repair Services Are Not as Accessible as They Seem

At first glance, it might seem like brands are offering more repair options than ever. But when you actually try to use them, the reality is a different story. Many fashion brands and third-party repair providers only operate in major urban areas, leaving huge gaps for customers living outside these hotspots.

Take Sojo UK, a startup that connects customers with local tailors for repairs and alterations. It’s a brilliant idea, but since launching in 2021, it has only operated in London, with recent expansions to Manchester and Birmingham. Their logistics depend on bike couriers and hyperlocal tailor partnerships, which simply don’t work in less densely populated areas. Then there’s Loewe, whose high-end Artisan Corner repair program is only available in flagship stores in Paris, Tokyo, and New York. If you’re not near one of these luxury hubs, well, good luck accessing their services.

Why Are Repair Programs So City-Centric?

This isn’t just a coincidence. There are a few clear reasons why repair services tend to be concentrated in urban centers.

First, there’s the economic side of things. Running a repair program isn’t cheap, and brands need a steady flow of repairs to make it financially viable. Based on data from Patagonia’s Worn Wear initiative, their urban repair centers handle around 1,200 repairs a month, well above the estimated breakeven threshold of 800. In contrast, suburban locations manage around 450, while rural areas see just 90—far below the estimated 500 repairs needed to keep operations afloat.

Then there’s the issue of skilled labor. Cities naturally have more trained tailors and repair specialists, as well as workshop spaces that make running repair programs easier. A great example is Hong Kong’s Fashion Clinic collaborates with local specialists and designers (Redress Design Award, 2022) within a broader industry employing over 7,000 textile workers (Hong Kong Census, 2023). Compare that to rural Wales, which faces tailoring shortages compared to urban hubs, with approximately 215 professional tailors serving its population of 3.1 million (UKFT, 2024). It’s not hard to see why brands prefer to set up shop in big cities rather than in areas where finding skilled labor is a challenge.

And of course, there’s also the demographic factor. Studies show that urban repair customers tend to be younger, wealthier, and more sustainability-conscious—making them a more attractive target for brands. According to McKinsey & Company (2022), "young, urban fashion consumers" are the primary drivers of sustainability trends, influencing eco-conscious purchasing. Meanwhile, ESW (2023) found that 94% of Gen Z and 93% of Millennials prioritize sustainability in purchases, with affluent cross-border shoppers spending 4% more than average on sustainable goods. Fast fashion giants like Zara have even started placing repair hubs near universities and busy commercial areas to capture this audience. But what about everyone else? The reality is, customers in smaller towns and rural communities are often left with few, if any, repair options.

Source: Unsplash

The Consequences of Geographical Exclusion

The lack of accessible repair services isn’t just an inconvenience—it has real consequences. For one, it deepens fashion inequality. In cities, professionals can easily get a pair of jeans repaired for £30, extending their lifespan by years. But for someone in a rural area, the lack of affordable repair options often means tossing out a £15 fast fashion piece and buying something new instead. If brands try to open repair hubs in these areas, they often have to charge higher prices to cover costs, making repairs even less accessible to lower-income communities.

There’s also a big environmental impact. Urban repair hubs are great because they minimize travel emissions—most people only need to travel a couple of kilometers to get their clothes fixed. But in rural areas, the nearest repair service might be 20 kilometers away, making the process far less sustainable. Worse still, the lack of repair options means rural communities generate significantly more textile waste than their urban counterparts.

What Can Fashion Brands Do?

So, what’s the solution? For brands with deep pockets, setting up more repair hubs outside major cities seems like the natural fix. But let's be honest—that's not realistic for everyone. For brands that can’t justify the cost of standalone repair spaces, collaboration is key. Imagine a world where rival fashion houses actually work together to create shared repair networks, pooling their resources to maintain repair hubs in underserved areas. Think of it as the repair equivalent of co-working spaces, where different brands contribute to a shared service rather than each struggling to go it alone. Not only does this spread the financial burden, but it also makes these programs way more sustainable in the long run.

One powerful strategy is forming industry-wide consortiums to invest in rural repair infrastructure. Imagine if leading fashion brands, instead of going solo, came together to co-fund a network of regional repair hubs—similar to how airlines share airport lounges. By pooling resources, brands could bring high-quality repair services to areas that would otherwise be unviable. This could also open doors for public-private partnerships, where brands collaborate with local governments to co-finance repair initiatives, offering subsidies or tax incentives to make them more sustainable long-term.

Source: Unsplash

For those looking for a more grassroots approach, partnering with local repair cafés and community initiatives is an incredibly effective strategy. These small, volunteer-driven spaces already exist in many towns, offering free or low-cost garment repairs to the public. Imagine if brands provided training, repair kits, or even funding to scale these operations. A brand like Patagonia could create an "Open Source Repair Toolkit," equipping local volunteers with branded repair guides, free patches, or thread kits, effectively democratizing repair knowledge. Not only would this extend the life of garments, but it would also foster a repair culture that goes beyond just brand-affiliated services.

Is Repairing Fashion Only for City Dwellers?

If fashion brands are serious about repair, they need to stop treating it as an exclusive, city-centric service and start making it truly accessible. The circular fashion transition won’t happen if brands only cater to select demographics. By stepping up and collaborating with local repair initiatives, they can create a roadmap that balances financial sustainability with real accessibility—helping more people keep their clothes in use for longer, no matter where they live.

Source: Unsplash

*The financial and operational figures presented in this blog were derived using publicly available data and reasonable assumptions. For repair center counts, we referenced Patagonia’s report stating their Reno facility handles over 50,000 repairs annually with 42 full-time technicians (Patagonia, 2017). Additionally, reports on Patagonia’s planned expansions to the UK and other European cities were used to estimate the existence of 12 urban repair centers (Fashion Network, 2023). The monthly repair volume estimate is based on Patagonia’s reported annual repairs, broken down to 4,166 repairs per month, with the assumption that 30% of these occur in urban hubs (The Industry Fashion, 2024). For the breakeven threshold, as no explicit data was available, we used labor cost benchmarks from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics ($25/hr for textile workers) and industrial rent averages ($15,000/month) to approximate the fixed and variable costs per repair. Our final estimate applies an 80/20 rule commonly observed in retail logistics, where urban centers handle the majority of repairs. Additional references used include Patagonia’s Worn Wear reports (CircularX, 2022, Patagonia, 2017, OIA, 2023). These calculations were used to provide actionable insights and highlight the financial realities of running a repair network.