Volume 3 Issue 3

By Christie Wanstall (University of Exeter)

Citation

Wanstall, C. (2023) Responsibility and Collapse: How does responsibility of the Rana Plaza collapse spatially evolve 2013 – 2020? Routes 3(3): 178-187.

Abstract

Drawing on Young’s (2006) social connection model, this research assesses how responsibility of the Rana Plaza collapse evolves in British newspapers 2013-2020. Using thematic discourse analysis of three selected newspapers: The Guardian, Financial Times, and The Times; this research displays an evolution of responsible stakeholders, initially located in Bangladesh, later widening to encompass Western consumers. The disaster itself also transcends into an iconic event over the period studied. The theoretical debates surrounding discussions relating to this disaster broadly encompass topics of globalisation, ethical consumption, and responsibility.

1. Introduction

On 24th April 2013, the illegally constructed Rana Plaza factory collapsed, killing 1,134 garment workers (Clean Clothes Campaign, n.d.). The tragedy drew attention to commonplace labour malpractices in low income countries, catalysing uncomfortable discussions regarding normalised, yet highly unethical, Western consumption habits (Allen, 2008). The Rana Plaza disaster has transcended into an iconic event that is as relevant today as it was in 2013.

Forced to produce low-cost garments with short production lead-times, the garment industry sacrifices workplace welfare to sustain its ever-increasing demands (Cachon and Swinney, 2011). Exacerbated by globalisation, the industry’s market dominance is predicted to elevate. With this comes increased responsibility at every level of the supply chain to ensure ethical practices are enforced, to prevent disasters like Rana Plaza from reoccurring.

Grounded in debates regarding globalisation and ethical consumption, the works of Allen (2008), Barnett et al. (2005) and Robbins (2017) provide crucial insight into the conceptual arguments associated with, and embodied through, the Rana Plaza collapse. Young’s (2003; 2006) work is also fundamental to developing an understanding of the multifaceted dimensions of responsibility; particularly, Young’s (2006) social connection model. This framework focuses on the shared responsibility of individuals, derived from their cumulative contribution, no matter how significant, to structural injustice. By appealing to individual moral compasses, this model encourages collective, forward-looking action, rather than nostalgic assigning of liability which serves to pardon previous accountability (Richardson, 1999).

Using thematic discourse analysis to reflect the implicit way responsibility is incorporated into discussions, this research analyses how responsibility framing of the Rana Plaza collapse evolves 2013-2020 (Young, 2003; Müller, 2013). The methodology examines the organisational significance of this study, justifying its usefulness in answering the following research questions:

1. How is responsibility of the disaster framed in British newspapers?

• Does this change over time? How?

2. How does the event’s narrative evolve?

• Has the collapse had a wider impact than its immediate ramifications?

This research concludes that responsibility framing evolves both spatially and temporally, evidenced through fluctuations of stakeholders commonly implicated. Through a temporal gaze, this research highlights the progression of the Rana Plaza’s narrative, elevating the collapse itself into an iconic event.

2. Methodology

Thematic discourse analysis critically analyses the use of language and patterns in texts (Taylor, 2000). Language allows responsibility to be placed on various stakeholders whilst linguistic patterns are crucial to reinforcing narratives, by repeating ideas (Young, 2003; Taylor, 2000). Focusing on such patterns, thematic discourse analysis was conducted across 524 newspaper articles to answer the aforementioned research questions. This was the most appropriate method to use since the issue of responsibility is implied in a thematic manner, rather than explicitly stated (Young, 2003). A large sample of newspapers available, which lends itself to this style of analysis (Stenson and Watt, 1999).

Chosen for their variety in audience encapsulation and comparably serious reporting style, this research analysed responsibility framing across three “quality” (Carvalho and Burgess, 2005: 1460) newspapers; The Guardian; Financial Times; and The Times (Taylor, 2000). As the research occurred in 2021, the sample period (2013-2020) was chosen to assess how the event’s narrative evolved from its origin until the end of the most recent calendar year. Across the entire timeframe, The Guardian had written 315 articles relating to the Rana Plaza, Financial Times; 102 and The Times; 107; therefore, a greater proportion of articles written by the Guardian were examined, to appropriately reflect the volume of textual discourse surrounding the disaster (Taylor, 2000).

Specifically, this research is not a comparison between the three newspapers, rather a holistic interpretation of how they cumulatively shape the narrative of the Rana Plaza collapse. Consequently, thematic discourse analysis was conducted across the data by year, rather than by newspaper, allowing the general shape of responsibility to progress as one rounded entity, rather than three distinct shapes (Rose, 2007).

3. The Event: Sohel Rana, Factory Owner

Sohel Rana, owner of the Rana Plaza factory, was the second most dominant recipient of responsibility of the collapse between 2013-2014. Arrested four days after the disaster, Sohel Rana was the first stakeholder to be held culpable by the Bangladeshi government and British newspapers, since he was directly connected to the factory.¹ Whilst the event is commonly referred to as an accident, Sohel Rana had foresight of the incident; the building was deemed structurally unsafe the day before it collapsed.² Threatening reduced pay and violence, Sohel Rana forced garment-makers to attend the factory.³ This emphasises Sohel Rana’s exploitative reputation, who’s avaricious actions led to 1,134 deaths.⁴ Sadly, this behaviour is not an isolated example of power abuse (Allen, 2008). Unsurprisingly, one quarter of all newspaper articles studied between 2013-2014 present Sohel Rana as immediately responsible. This type of responsibility is likened to Young’s (2006) liability model, whereby the event is assessed through the lens of enacting punishment.

It is also important to appreciate the wider context of the disaster, a crucial element which is partially overshadowed in the 2013-written newspapers analysed. Factory owners, like Sohel Rana, are deeply integrated within an interdependent global system which financially rewards worker exploitation, due to ever-increasing supply chain pressures (Young, 2003). This “race to the bottom” (Allen, 2008: 26) market structure leaves little room for factory owners to make measurable changes to worker’s conditions, due to the little profit they themselves receive. It is crucial that Sohel Rana “does not become a scapegoat” for the atrocities of the Rana Plaza disaster, since other stakeholders, such as government bodies and multinational corporations, have substantial influence over such behaviour (Greenberg and Knight, 2004).⁵ This is reflected in the narrative of responsibility throughout British newspapers, which evolves substantially 2013-2014. Immediately after the disaster, Sohel Rana was framed as a dominant culprit however, by 2014 his name is mentioned diminishingly, and responsibility progressively distributed to other stakeholders; Sohel Rana becomes synonymous with little more than a pawn in an increasingly complex game.

4. The Event: Bangladeshi government

One fifth of newspaper articles analysed 2013-2014 held the Bangladeshi government responsible for the Rana Plaza collapse. The focal argument condemning the government centred around the insufficient building safety regulations.⁶ British newspaper coverage presented the Bangladeshi government as incapable of regulating the garment industry, uncovering the uncontrollable power expansion of multinational corporations.⁷ This narrative raises questions, and sometimes anger, at the lack of control Bangladesh’s government possessed over their export industry. Emphatic with this notion, Roddick (2001) exacerbates the problems associated with heightening corporate influence over governments confined within the global system; illustrated by Bangladesh failing to globalise quickly enough to prevent “abuses of economic power” (Young and Welford, 2002: 5). Whilst governments are becoming comparatively less influential than major corporations, they still bear responsibility to protect their citizens (Young, 2003). The Bangladeshi government are framed to prioritise the serving of economic means over the welfare of their people and thus, responsible for the deaths of the Rana Plaza workers because of their failure to regulate the garment industry.⁸

In the initial aftermath of the disaster, British newspapers exposed individual government officials and their financial ties to the garment sector;⁹ at least ten percent of parliamentarians owned almost five thousand factories. This produced an evidential motive for regulatory oversight, encouraging financial maximisation whilst threatening worker safety. Whilst international governments bear some responsibility to generate economic growth (through a plethora of avenues inclusive of, but not exclusive to, foreign investment) they are also obliged to ensure this is not detrimental to citizen wellbeing; particularly if this simultaneously furthers personal objectives (Allen, 2008). Discussed at length, Bangladeshi politicians and government officials are held responsible because of their underhand working nature, evidenced through inaction taken against factories which breach safety regulations,¹⁰ and frequently using bribery to obtain audits to appease Western retailers.¹¹ Consequently, the government is framed as responsible for the collapse due to the absence of safety law enforcement and its “endemic corruption.”¹²

5. The Iconic Event: Western Consumers

The most interesting evolution of responsibility shaping across the time period studied is the shift away from stakeholders located in Bangladesh (the. government and Sohel Rana) 2013-2014, towards the dominant introduction of Western consumer responsibility 2015-2020. Modern consumers, tangled in a web of “buy one get one free”¹³ offers and ‘wear it once’ culture, exponentially fuel demand for fast fashion.¹⁴ Such rising prevalence of this ‘buy it now’ ethos, elevates pressure on sweatshop workers, like those of Rana Plaza (Hartman and Wokutch, 2003). Through recognition of consumer’s unsustainable demands, responsibility is increasingly bestowed upon them.

Influenced by popular culture, consumers want the latest trends immediately, highlighting the necessary speed of factory turnaround times and sky-high industry-wide demand (Cachon and Swinney, 2011). Emulated through a 39% increase in Boohoo (TV show sponsor) sales whilst Love Island (TV show) aired in 2019,¹⁵ the importance of supply chain responsivity is accentuated. The argument that resonates throughout this period promotes that consumer demands fuel unethical brand behaviour (Beck, 1997). Unlike immediately after the event, newspapers in this era recognise the causal relationship between consumers, producers, and the Rana Plaza disaster, whereby the foundation of responsibility centres around consumer desire for low-cost clothing (Greenberg and Knight, 2004). By explicitly stating the connection between Western consumers and the suffering of Bangladeshi garment workers, responsibility is placed on shoppers, forcing them to accept accountability for their actions (Young, 2006). The influence of consumers over brand behaviour is further exposed, framing shoppers as responsible for catalysing industrial changes, due to the power they possess (Miller, 1995).

Greenberg and Knight (2004: 151) argue the problems associated with the Rana Plaza collapse are “rooted in the agency of consumers rather than producers,” as the injustices created by blurred supply chains fundamentally benefit individual consumers, evidenced through cheaper clothes and increased style variety. Such beneficiaries must take responsibility for the suffering of distant victims (Young, 2003; Robbins, 2017). The newspapers studied 2015-2020 promote this idea, encouraging shoppers to increase inquiries regarding the origins of their clothes¹⁶ and support ethical retailers.¹⁷ This is because economic actors are morally implicated in lines of responsibility through their decisions, both ignorant and active (Barnett et al., 2005). Asserting consumer’s principal influence of spending power away from exploitative clothing companies will force brands to reconsider their business models due to declining profits. Consequently, consumers bear responsibility to create individualised, but nonetheless significant, changes in their shopping habits (Young, 2003).¹⁸

Admittedly, individualising the frame of responsibility slows the potentiality of corrective actions, due to the plethora of actors who must coordinate behavioural changes (Greenberg and Knight, 2004; Young, 2006). However, we must not underestimate the power of consumers who coalesce to behave more ethically (Clarke et al., 2007). Within the newspapers analysed, there is a subtle appreciation of a consumer demographic who accept responsibility for such abysmal industry conditions and catalyse tangible change. Young consumers mobilised shifts in attitudes to consumption practices through increased usage of Depop,¹⁹ an app which encourages the buying and selling of second-hand garments (Miller and Rose, 1997). Through individuals coming together, responsibility and subsequently sustainability,²⁰ is adopted as a fashionable mentality (Young, 2003). Positively framing younger people by their willingness to accept responsibility and revolutionise behaviours, highlights ethical consumer agency, advocating its importance within society (Robbins, 2017). This mentality emphasises the necessity of collective action by all who realise problems as complex as those associated with sweatshops, like the Rana Plaza, cannot be tackled alone (Young, 2006).

6. Conclusion

This research centred around the Rana Plaza collapse, exploring how responsibility evolved in discourses written 2013-2020. Dictated by spatiality and temporality, this work uncovered a widening of responsibility away from Sohel Rana and Bangladesh’s government (2013- 2014) towards Western consumers (2015-2020). The linguistic style and focus of the discourses studied also progressed, transforming the narrative around the event.

The difficulty of locating responsibility of this complex disaster was exemplified, emphasising the contentious outcomes when assigning shared responsibility (Young, 2006). Responsibility of problems unveiled by this event does not wholly belong to one stakeholder however, this research demonstrated the most powerful contributors were Western brands and consumers (Robbins, 2017). Since the fast fashion industry is booming, retailers are unmotivated to adjust their business-plans (Cachon and Swinney, 2011). Therefore, responsibility to promote ethical behaviour is rooted within consumer agency.

Since brand behaviour is dictated by consumer desires, presenting consumers as responsible, although they do not bear the entire burden of responsibility, increases the probability of tangible change, driven by collective action (Greenberg and Knight, 2004). This is already happening; young consumers are mobilising positive-attitudinal changes towards ethical fashion. Unfortunately, it is too soon to assess the noticeable implications of such actions.

Future Research

Whilst positive that newspapers eventually mobilised consumers to behave more ethically, by reflecting foci of responsibility on them, whether this has been executed on a sufficient scale to generate practical lasting change, will only be assessable through future retrospective analysis, much like this research.

Footnotes

1. Bangladesh factory owner held 2013-04-29 Financial Times (London, England) in Dhaka and James Crabtree in Mumbai. ↩︎
2. Bangladesh factory fire puts renewed pressure on clothing firms 2013-05-09 The Guardian (London) Syed Zain Al-Mahmoodguardian.co.uk. ↩︎
3. Bangladesh’s garment industry still offers women best work opportunity 2013-05-23 The Guardian (London) Syed Zain Al-Mahmoodguardian.co.uk. ↩︎
4. The stories behind the clothes factory collapse 2014-07-22 The Times (London) T2;  FEATURES; OPINION COLUMN; Pg. 10 Alex Hardy. ↩︎
5. Causes of collapse; Letters to the Editor 2013-05-01 The Times (London) LETTERS; Pg. 21. ↩︎
6. Bangladesh garment industry under scrutiny following factory collapse 2013-06-06 The Guardian (London) Syed Zain Al-Mahmoodguardian.co.uk. ↩︎
7. Factory’s collapse highlights failure to enforce basic rules 2013-04-26 Financial Times (London, England) WORLD NEWS; Pg. 5 Amy Kazmin in New Delhi, Barney Jopson in New York and Louise Lucas in London. ↩︎
8. Majority of Bangladesh garment factories ‘vulnerable to collapse’ 2013 06-03 The Guardian (London) Jason Burkeguardian.co.uk. ↩︎
9. Pinned back by politics; Bangladesh 2013-08-06 Financial Times (London, England) ANALYSIS; Pg. 7 Victor Mallet. ↩︎
10. Clothes factories are flirting with disaster 2013-06-24 The Times (London) BUSINESS; Pg. 40. ↩︎
11. Somebody pays for your cheap jeans, and the price isn’t worth it 2013-05-06 The Times (London) BUSINESS; Pg. 34 ROBIN PAGNAMENTA. ↩︎
12. Somebody pays for your cheap jeans, and the price isn’t worth it 2013-05-06 The Times (London) BUSINESS; Pg. 34 ROBIN PAGNAMENTA. ↩︎
13. We’re workers, not slaves: a Bangladeshi woman’s quest to change the fashion industry; In the wake of the latest tragic factory incident in Bangladesh, Fairtrade spoke to garment worker Nazma Akter about workers’ rights 2016-09-30 The Guardian (London) SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS – FAIRTRADE PARTNER ZONE Fairtrade Foundation and Nazma Akter. ↩︎
14. Fast fashion is on the rampage, with the UK at the head of the charge; One in three young women in Britain consider a garment worn once or twice to be old 2019-06-21 The Guardian (London) FASHION; Version:2 Lucy Siegle. ↩︎
15. Fast-fashion entrepreneurs set out their stalls as high streets crumble 2019-06-24 The Times (London) NEWS; Pg. 39 Elizabeth Burden. ↩︎
16. From a £1 bikini to an XR funeral: the year in fashion sustainability; After a year in which fashion was heavily criticised for its environmental impact, we look back at the progress – or lack of it – made by the industry in 2019 01 Jan 2020 The Guardian (London) FASHION; Version:1 Tamsin Blanchard. ↩︎
17. Don’t blame Beyoncé for the harsh lives of garment makers; It’s not just her new clothing line but the entire fashion industry that can use branding to put us off the scent. Consumers need to challenge the system 2016-05-19 The Guardian (London) OPINION Sophie Slater. ↩︎
18. Confronting corporate sins of the past; Business cannot ignore links to slavery but should focus on the future 2020-06-23 Financial Times (London, England) NEWS; Pg. 16. ↩︎
19. Bright future? Fashion’s watershed year as it moves from waste to woke; As new brands begin to tackle social and environmental harm, a more sustainable future awaits 2018-12-31 The Guardian (London) FASHION; Version:1 Tamsin Blanchard. ↩︎
20. Sustainable style: will Gen Z help the fashion industry clean up its act?; Four years after the Rana Plaza tragedy, a burgeoning collection of cool but ethical brands have launched to target the socially conscious young consumer. But there is still a long way to go 2017-04-25 The Guardian (London) FASHION; Version:1 Emine Saner. ↩︎

Acknowledgements

This work is dedicated to Clive Barnett. Clive was my dissertation supervisor and an excellent mentor throughout my final year of university. I am publishing this excerpt of my dissertation as a recommendation (and now in memory) of Clive, who commended that it was “very probably the best undergraduate dissertation I have supervised in my long, long time as an academic.” Sadly Clive passed away before this work was completed. I hope this piece is everything he hoped it would be.

References

Allen, J. (2008). Claiming connections: a distant world of sweatshops. Geographies of Globalization. Los Angeles, London, New Dehli, Singapore: Sage Publications.

Barnett, C., Cloke, P., Clarke, N. and Malpass, A. (2005). Consuming ethics: Articulating the subjects and spaces of ethical consumption. Antipode, 37(1), pp.23-45.

Beck, U. (1997). The Reinvention of Politics: Rethinking Modernity in the Global Social Order, trans., Mark Ritter. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

Cachon, G.P. and Swinney, R. (2011). The value of fast fashion: Quick response, enhanced design, and strategic consumer behavior. Management science, 57(4), pp.778-795.

Carvalho, A., and Burgess, J. (2005). Cultural circuits of climate change in U.K. broadsheet newspapers, 1985-2003. Risk Analysis, 25(6): pp.1457-1469.

Clarke, N., Barnett, C., Cloke, P. and Malpass, A. (2007). Globalising the consumer: Doing politics in an ethical register. Political Geography, 26(3), pp.231-249.

Clean Clothes Campaign. (n.d.). Rana Plaza, https://cleanclothes.org/campaigns/past/rana-plaza [Accessed 8 April 2021].

Greenberg, J. and Knight, G. (2004). Framing sweatshops: Nike, global production, and the American news media. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 1(2), pp.151-175.

Hartman, L.P. and Wokutch, R.E. (2003). Nike Inc.: corporate social responsibility and workplace standard initiatives in Vietnam in Hartman, L.P., Arnold, D.G. and Wokutch, R.E. (2003). Rising Above Sweatshops: Innovative Approaches to Global Labor Challenges, Westport, CT, Praeger.

Miller, D. (1995). Consumption as the vanguard of history: a polemic by way of an introduction. In D. Miller (Ed.), Acknowledging consumption: A review of new studies (pp. 1e57). London: Routledge.

Miller, P., and Rose, N. (1997). Mobilising the consumer: assembling the subject of consumption. Theory, Culture and Society, 14(1), pp.1-36.

Müller, M. (2013). Text, Discourse, Affect and Things. In Dodds, K., Kuus, M., and Sharp, J. (Eds.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Critical Geopolitics. London: Ashgate.

Richardson, H. S. (1999). Institutionally Divided Moral Responsibility. Social Philosophy and Policy, 16, no. 2 pp. 218–49.

Robbins, B. (2017). The Beneficiary. Duke University Press.

Roddick, A. (2001). Taking it personally: How globalisation affects you and powerful ways to challenge it. London: Element.

Rose, G. (2007). Visual Methodologies. London: Sage.

Stenson, K. and Watt, P. (1999). Governmentality and ‘the Death of the Social’?: A Discourse Analysis of Local Government Texts in South-east England. Urban Studies, 36(1): 189-201.

Taylor, S. (2000). Locating and Conducting Discourse Analytic Research.

Young, I.M. (2003). ‘From guilt to solidarity: sweatshops and political responsibility’, Dissent, Spring, pp.39–44.

Young, I.M. (2006). Responsibility and global justice: A social connection model. Social philosophy and policy, 23(1), pp.102-130.

Young, W., and Welford, R. (2002). Ethical shopping: Where to shop, what to buy and what to do to make a difference. London: Fusion Press.

Related articles