Decentralisation

What does it mean and what does it mean for fashion?

Decentralising. I have been thinking of this word since the MET Gala as a result of my healthy TikTok FYP which is not a mere echo chamber of my thoughts. Now, don’t get me wrong, I love the MET and have stayed up almost every night watching it live since it went live. But since it is such a big fashion/cultural moment, it has naturally raised some topics for conversation such as decentralising. This topic is big enough for a dissertation, or even a PHD, but since I don’t have the years of research to back this up, we’ll keep this brief.

What is decentralisation?

Let’s begin with a couple definitions before I explore what I have come to understand it as:

Merriam-Webster: the dispersion or distribution of functions and powers. a decentralization of powers. specifically, government : the delegation of power from a central authority to regional and local authorities.

OECD: It refers to the transfer of powers, responsibilities, and resources from the central government to elected authorities at the subnational level, with some degree of autonomy. Decentralisation covers three distinct but interrelated dimensions: political, administrative, and fiscal decentralisation.

Gov.UK: Decentralisation acknowledges the immense potential of the people and places of Britain. It also requires humility and restraint on the part of those in the highest positions of power. It is, therefore, a good in itself.

Those are some great, clear and varied examples of what decentralisation is. To summarise it in my own words: Decentralisation is a conscious process which involves other individuals/bodies/systems as key players to equalise and diversify power. Power really is the key word here that is mentioned in all three definitions because that’s essentially what it is all about. Levelling the playing field. We can all try to act like power isn’t a big deal or something that we can change or influence - but try telling that to citizens who took part in the French Revolution, Boston Tea Party or Suffragette movement. Those in power decide who gets treated right, who has rights, who gets to leave or stay - how can that power belong to a single body?

I particularly like the latter by Gov.uk which acknowledges not just what decentralisation is, but what it takes to be effective. It is not just a buzzword to be thrown around like authenticity has been on social media. It has a clear definition with particular systems that must be put in place to determine the outcome.

What does it mean for fashion?

Now, you may be wondering - what on earth does this have to do with fashion? All those definitions clearly state that it is to do with the government. Well, the thing is, fashion is and always has been more than clothes. It is a cultural reflection of our society and really a powerful tool to use. When you think back to different eras in time, you often think about the fashion and how it characterises the times and movements. What does corsets, bell bottoms, or A-line dresses make you think of for example?

Let’s take the MET Gala as a case study. The MET is often referenced to fashion’s biggest night out. The guests are seen as the biggest stars of the time and the designers the ones at the top of their game. But how about we stir the pot? What does it mean for those who aren’t part of this cultural moment? What is society saying about them? Is it ok that we are seeing the same people, sam e designers, same guests there? I think there has been a cultural shift recently with attendees and designers as the recent MET included a wider range of international stars and designers such as Shah Rukh Khan and Ahluwalia on the coveted stairs.

The real question here is, is that enough. Is it really ok to display the MET as a global fashion superpower moment. Have we, as an audience, as society, even stopped to consider what else is out there. For example, the AMVC awards (Africa Magic Viewers' Choice Awards) this year has received a lot of attention for the show stopping and innovative looks by the guests in attendance. Some Tiktok users have presented this as a cultural moment which equals if not surpasses the fashion at the MET. So why does it not have the same recognition?

This is where decentralisation comes in. We have unconsciously (if not consciously) centralised the West as a super to when it comes to practically everything to be honest. Decentralising in this case would look like first acknowledging that there is more out there that can equal or surpass what we are receiving from the West, but also offering the same levels of respect and attention. As the Gov.uk definition states, that will require a level of “humility and restraint” from those currently in power who are pulling the strings.

Food for thought:

Some may see decentralisation as a good thing, others may see it as a really scary prospect. I’ll let you decide. I will leave you with a couple questions to reflect on to start conversations of your own or disrupt accepting thinking that may need a revamp

• Who gets left out when authority it centralised? How does that affect the daily lives of others?

• In what ways could an economy benefit from decentralising or is it just negative?

• What systems/programmes/organisations have been traditionally accepted as a central power which needs to shift?

• Who determines what our central powers are? Are we aware that we as the general public also have agency to determine where power remains or moves?