Exploring the fashion industry’s habit of borrowing traditional crafts without acknowledging the communities that birthed them
In the ever-evolving world of fashion, where trends travel faster than light and aesthetics blend across borders, inspiration is the beating heart of design. However, when that inspiration stems from deeply rooted cultural crafts and is then stripped of its context, history, and rightful credit, it becomes something else entirely—cultural appropriation dressed in luxury fabric.
One of the most recent cases to ignite this conversation is the global luxury brand Prada releasing a collection of leather sandals that closely mirror the iconic Kolhapuri chappal from India. These sandals, with their braided leather, flat soles, and T-strap design, are nearly indistinguishable from the traditional handmade footwear that originated in Maharashtra centuries ago. Yet nowhere in Prada’s promotional campaigns, product descriptions, or credits was the word Kolhapur mentioned. This glaring omission is part of a growing trend in the fashion industry—the silent borrowing of heritage.
Kolhapuri Chappals: A Legacy Beyond Leather
The Kolhapuri chappal is not just a sandal; it’s a symbol of India’s artisanal heritage. With over a thousand years of history, this handcrafted footwear is made using vegetable-tanned leather and intricate hand-braiding techniques passed down through generations. It is environmentally friendly, culturally significant, and legally protected by a Geographical Indication (GI) tag in India.
The chappals were originally made by the cobbler community in Kolhapur and nearby regions such as Athani and Sangli. Traditionally worn by both royalty and rural populations, these sandals have adapted over centuries but have always remained rooted in their cultural and geographic identity.
When a global brand recreates this design and presents it without any mention of its origin, it erases not only the artisans but the entire cultural legacy behind the product.
The Pattern of Appropriation in Fashion
Unfortunately, Prada’s Kolhapuri-inspired sandals are not an isolated incident. Luxury fashion brands have long drawn from the visual and material cultures of various global communities—particularly those from the Global South—without acknowledgment or compensation.
Here are just a few examples that demonstrate how widespread this issue is:
- Ikat (India, Indonesia, Guatemala)
Ikat is a dyeing technique where the yarns are tie-dyed before weaving, producing a signature blurred pattern. It is found across several countries, with rich variations in India (Telangana, Odisha, Gujarat), Indonesia (especially Bali), and Latin America (notably Guatemala).
Luxury brands have frequently featured Ikat-like patterns in collections described as “bohemian” or “abstract tribal,” rarely acknowledging the centuries-old traditions or the regions they originate from.
- Bandhani & Leheriya (India)
These traditional Indian tie-dye methods, native to Rajasthan and Gujarat, are labor-intensive and passed down through family lineages. Their dotted and striped patterns often appear in Western collections as playful or exotic prints—usually with no mention of Bandhani or Leheriya, let alone the artisans who make them.
- Shibori (Japan)
Shibori, a resist dyeing technique from Japan, is known for its striking indigo patterns. Yet, several Western designers have introduced “modern tie-dye” pieces that closely resemble Shibori, reducing the technique to a seasonal aesthetic without cultural recognition.
- Otomi Embroidery (Mexico)
The bold, colorful embroidery made by the Otomi people of Mexico is often replicated in home décor and fashion items under vague labels like “folk art embroidery” or “vibrant ethnic patterns.” The lack of attribution not only denies cultural credit but also devalues the original craft in global markets.
- Bogolanfini or Mud Cloth (Mali, Africa)
This handwoven fabric dyed with fermented mud carries deep cultural symbolism in Mali. Its motifs are widely used in global streetwear and high fashion collections under broad labels like “tribal print” or “African-inspired,” often with no reference to the Bogolan craft or the meaning behind its symbols.
The Consequences: Economic and Cultural Erasure
When global fashion brands co-opt traditional crafts without acknowledgment, the damage is not merely symbolic—it is profoundly economic, cultural, and systemic. This form of erasure affects entire communities whose livelihoods and identities are tied to these crafts.
- Economic Injustice to Artisans
Traditional artisans—many of whom come from marginalized or rural communities—rely on their craft not only as a creative outlet but as a means of survival. When a global brand mimics their work without collaboration or compensation, it undercuts the artisan’s ability to compete in the market. The luxury version often carries a far higher price tag, marketed with the sheen of exclusivity, while the original makers struggle to find buyers or gain visibility beyond local bazaars.
Moreover, these brands profit exponentially from designs that are part of an artisan’s inherited knowledge system. The imbalance of economic benefit—where the creators remain in poverty and the imitators profit—is a clear case of exploitation disguised as innovation.
- Loss of Authenticity and Dilution of Technique
Traditional crafts are often rooted in specific processes, materials, and philosophies. For example, Kolhapuri chappals use vegetable-tanned leather, which is eco-friendly and part of a slow, skill-intensive process. When global brands replicate the form using synthetic materials or factory-made shortcuts, the result may visually resemble the original, but it lacks the integrity, symbolism, and sustainability that define the craft.
This mass-market reinterpretation flattens the complexity of traditional knowledge. Centuries-old weaving techniques, dyeing rituals, or embroidery styles become hollowed out and simplified, eventually altering public perception of what these crafts are and reducing them to “exotic designs” or passing fads.
- Cultural Distortion and Misrepresentation
Cultural crafts are expressions of history, faith, identity, and regional pride. When brands strip these designs from their context and repackage them for commercial consumption, it leads to distorted cultural narratives. The symbolic meanings—whether religious, social, or spiritual—are lost or, worse, misrepresented.
Over time, this distortion can weaken cultural memory. Younger generations may begin to associate their heritage crafts with foreign brands rather than their own culture, leading to disengagement, loss of transmission, and eventual decline in the craft itself.
- Widening the Global Inequality Gap
At a systemic level, this practice deepens global inequalities. The fashion industry already suffers from an imbalance where design credit, visibility, and capital are concentrated in the West, while labor and creativity in the Global South are undervalued. When cultural crafts are extracted and commodified without a fair value exchange, it widens the gap between those who create and those who profit.
Even when artisans are aware their work has been “inspired,” they often lack the legal means or international platforms to demand justice or intellectual property rights. This dynamic mirrors the colonial extraction of resources, now in the form of intangible heritage.
The Ethics of Fashion in a Globalized World
Fashion does not exist in a vacuum—it is a product of people, places, and politics. In a world where global exchange is inevitable and often beautiful, it becomes even more critical to ensure that cultural inspiration does not become cultural exploitation.
Design thrives on exploration, but with exploration must come accountability. When designers tap into indigenous or regional crafts, they bear the responsibility to ask:
Who created this? What does it mean? Who benefits from this design?
True ethical design goes beyond surface-level homage. It involves:
- Collaborative development with craft communities
- Fair compensation and royalties
- Storytelling that honors origins, not erases them
- Education for consumers and creative professionals about heritage and its significance
Far from limiting creativity, such an approach adds richness, authenticity, and integrity to design. In fact, brands that choose ethical practices stand to gain consumer trust, cultural respect, and long-term sustainability in an increasingly conscious marketplace.
Today’s consumers are no longer satisfied with “inspired by” as an excuse. They demand to know the how, the why, and most importantly, the who behind what they wear. The fashion industry must evolve to meet that demand—not with appropriation, but with appreciation backed by action.
What the Fashion Industry Must Do
- Practice Transparent Attribution
If a product is inspired by a regional craft or community, say it openly. A simple acknowledgment goes a long way in preserving cultural identity.
- Collaborate With Craftspeople
Instead of imitating, work alongside traditional artisans. Co-design initiatives and partnerships can uplift communities, offer fair wages, and create sustainable ecosystems.
- Educate Designers and Consumers
Institutes, brands, and media must educate new designers and buyers about the cultural significance of regional crafts. This builds respect, curiosity, and informed appreciation.
- Protect and Promote Indigenous Knowledge
Support for GI tags, local artisan cooperatives, and funding for craft documentation projects is vital in preserving these heritages for future generations.
Conclusion: Fashion Must Tell the Whole Story
From the sunbaked lanes of Kolhapur to the catwalks of Milan, the journey of a craft should not be one of silence and invisibility. When fashion borrows, it must also acknowledge, compensate, and protect.
Because behind every braided sandal, resist-dyed textile, or hand-stitched motif, there is a human story—of knowledge, struggle, pride, and identity.
Let fashion not be just about what we wear, but also about who we honor when we wear it.
