Does second-hand clothing undermine local textile Industries? Here’s what the evidence says.

Does second-hand clothing really undermine local textile industries in African countries such as Ghana and Kenya? It is a claim that has been repeated for decades. But when we look at what the evidence actually says, the picture becomes far more nuanced.

The idea that second-hand imports “kill” local textile production rests on an intuitive logic: if cheap used garments flood the market, domestic producers cannot compete. The claim has been used by political leaders, advocacy groups and even international institutions. But very few of these arguments have been grounded in empirical research.

Recent studies from the World Bank, International Trade Centre (ITC), RISE Research Institutes of Sweden, and several African universities point to the same conclusion: second-hand is not the primary reason for the decline of domestic textile industries.

1. Domestic textile production had already collapsed before second-hand imports increased

In countries like Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, local textile industries went into decline in the 1990s and early 2000s due to structural challenges: high energy prices, outdated machinery, lack of investment capital, unstable trade policy and competition from cheap Asian imports. In most cases, the industry was weakened long before second-hand volumes became significant.

Second-hand market in Gikomba, Nairobi

2. The real competition is ultra-fast fashion from Asia

Multiple trade datasets show that consumers in African urban markets do not choose between “local production” and “second-hand”. They choose between:

• new, ultra-cheap imports from China, India, Bangladesh and Turkey, and

• second-hand clothing from Europe and North America.

Local producers simply cannot match the price levels of these new imports. Even if second-hand vanished overnight, the domestic industry would still face the same competitive pressure from low-cost Asian manufacturing.

3. Second-hand often fills a market gap, rather than replacing local manufacturing

Field studies in Kenya and Ghana show that second-hand garments are consumed by segments that local producers do not serve: low-income households that need durable clothes at very low prices. This suggests that second-hand and domestic textile production operate in different market segments.

4. What we cannot conclude

This does not mean second-hand is without impact. Local traders in new clothing may feel competitive pressure. Some manufacturing niches could be affected. And the environmental cost of low-quality fast fashion—whether new or reused—remains a concern.

But the broader claim that second-hand imports “destroy local industry” is not supported by current evidence.

Does second-hand clothing undermine local textile industries. Evidence says no.

Based on the best available studies, second-hand imports are not the main driver of weakened textile industries in Africa. Structural economic factors and competition from ultra-fast fashion play a much larger role. Second-hand remains one of the most resource-efficient ways to meet consumer demand—and a significant part of the real circular economy.

Written by

Thomas Lundkvist

This article is based on a synthesis of well-established research and international analyses on second-hand markets and the development of textile industries in Africa. The sources listed below are representative studies and reports in this field and reflect the broader evidence base that informs the article’s conclusions.

World Bank (2020, 2019); ITC (2021); RISE (2023); Frazer (2008, Economic Journal); KIPPRA (2021); Ghana Statistical Service (2022); UNCTAD (2020); UNEP (2022); Staritz & Whitfield (2017).