The years 2024 and 2025 have served as a harsh wake-up call for the global luxury industry. What was once dismissed as a « creative oversight » has evolved into a full-blown legitimacy crisis. When Prada debuted « leather sandals » in its Spring/Summer 2026 collection — priced at a staggering $1,200 — the internet’s « digital tribe » quickly identified them as nearly identical copies of the traditional Indian Kolhapuri chappal. While authentic versions handcrafted in Maharashtra retail for as little as five dollars, the luxury iteration carried no credit to the original artisans and a markup of over 20,000%. This follows a pattern of increasingly tone-deaf releases, such as Louis Vuitton’s $39,000 « Auto Bag, » a miniature auto-rickshaw that many argued blurred the line between high-fashion tribute and the commodification of street culture. 

These incidents are not merely accidental aesthetic blunders. They are the inevitable result of a luxury system that remains structurally dependent on « exoticism » as a form of decorative capital. This report argues that systemic cultural appropriation in fashion is a modern manifestation of a colonial mindset — one that views the heritage of the Global South as a library of « free » raw materials to be extracted, polished, and sold back to an elite audience without compensation or acknowledgment.

The Battlefield of Definition: Appropriation vs. Appreciation

In the high-stakes world of fashion marketing, the word « inspiration » acts as a convenient shield. To understand why certain collections trigger global protests while others are celebrated, we must look at the power dynamics involved. Cultural appropriation occurs when a dominant culture adopts elements from a marginalized community without permission or a deep understanding of the original context. It is a process of « decontextualization, » where symbols of sacred or historical significance are stripped of their meaning and reduced to mere ornaments.

The distinction lies in respect and reciprocity. Cultural appreciation involves an active effort to learn, honor, and engage with a culture through legitimate channels. When a brand simply takes a pattern, it is theft; when a brand partners with the community to ensure they control the narrative and receive a fair share of the profits, it becomes collaboration. As scholar Agnès Rocamora suggests, fashion is not just a commercial industry but a symbolic system where the production of value is a collective process, often influenced by social and economic forces far beyond the designer’s solo imagination.

Historical Echoes: The Legacy of Aesthetic Extraction

The luxury industry’s habit of cultural « borrowing » is a legacy of 19th-century colonial expansion. This era established a fascination with « Orientalism, » a term popularized by Edward Said to describe a Western system of cultural dominance that reduced the « East » to a series of exotic stereotypes.

One of the most telling examples is the work of Paul Poiret, the early 20th-century « King of Fashion. » Poiret is often celebrated for freeing women from the corset, but historical analysis reveals a darker side to his genius. His 1907 « Ispahan » coat, long considered a masterpiece of innovative construction, has been identified by fashion historians as an exact replica of the choga, a traditional coat worn by Muslim men in the Punjab region. Poiret’s « innovations » were often sourced from the Expositions Universelles in Paris, which functioned as « theatres of empire » where colonized people were displayed in « human zoos » for the entertainment of Europeans. In 1903, he even incorporated Chinese kanjian vests into his collections without modification, simply adding his own label to the collar.   

This historical framework explains the contemporary industry’s comfort with « extracting » beauty from marginalized groups. It treats the heritage of the « Other » as a limitless, ownerless repository, while Western designers claim the exclusive power to « enhance » these designs with what Poiret called a « dreamlike quality », as if the original was somehow incomplete. 

Case Studies in Symbolic Erasure

Dior and the Mamian Skirt Controversy

In 2022, Dior released a $3,800 pleated skirt that it marketed as a « hallmark Dior silhouette » and a « new elegant and modern variation » of its own house codes. However, the design — with its four panels, flat « horse face » (Ma Mian) center, and side pleats — was identical to a Chinese garment worn as far back as the Song and Ming dynasties. 

The outrage was not just about the design but the erasure of history. By claiming the silhouette was a brand original, Dior was effectively overwriting centuries of Chinese cultural heritage. This sparked the « Guochao » movement, with Chinese students protesting in Paris and London. Their fear was legal as well as cultural: if a luxury giant like Dior « patents » a traditional design, local Chinese brands using their own heritage could theoretically be sued for copyright infringement in international markets.

Valentino and the « Wild » Archetype

Valentino’s Spring 2016 « Wild Africa » collection serves as another cautionary tale. The show featured tribal motifs, Masai beading, and bone necklaces, yet only 8 of the 87 models on the runway were Black. The ad campaign, shot by Steve McCurry, placed white models in the foreground while Maasai people were used as literal « props » or « background » to add a resemblance of authenticity.

More recently, the brand faced criticism from Indigenous artist Lily Gladstone regarding a pre-fall 2025 bag that closely resembled Métis and Dene beadwork. Critics argued that luxury houses often choose to copy these labor-intensive designs rather than hiring the Indigenous artisans themselves, who are the true owners of that intellectual property.

The Legal Stand in India: Prada and the GI Violation

The 2025 Prada sandal scandal led to more than just social media « trolling ». For the first time, legal avenues were being aggressively pursued. A group of advocates in India filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Bombay High Court, arguing that Prada’s design violated the Geographical Indication (GI) status granted to Kolhapuri chappals in 2019. Under Indian law, the GI tag protects products whose quality and reputation are linked to their place of origin. While the current law primarily protects the name rather than the look, this case has pushed for legal reforms that would prevent global brands from escaping liability by simply renaming a stolen design. 

Systemic Roots: The Homogeneity of the Creative Class

If the luxury industry keeps « accidentally » appropriating cultures, it is because the people in the room making the decisions are almost entirely from the same background. Reports from 2025 and 2026 reveal a staggering lack of diversity at the top of the major fashion conglomerates.

At Kering, which owns Gucci, Balenciaga, and Saint Laurent, the creative directors are exclusively white men. While the group’s overall workforce is 63% women, female creative leaders remain a rare exception, representing only about 17% of historical appointments. This structural homogeneity creates a blind spot where « internal audits » fail. Without diverse voices in leadership, there is no one to point out that a « Scandinavian scarf » is actually a South Asian dupatta, or that a « boho gladiator sandal » is a sacred Indian craft.   

Furthermore, the pressure of the modern fashion cycle contributes to creative exhaustion. Global luxury growth is predicted to slow to 2-4% through 2027. To combat this, brands are stuck on a « creative treadmill, » pumping out multiple interim collections that rely on visual shortcuts, often « borrowing » from cultures that the design teams do not understand.   

The Pivot to Ethics: A New Model for Luxury

A few brands are beginning to realize that the old « extract and sell » model is no longer sustainable. Real luxury in the 21st century is defined by transparency and the integrity of the supply chain.

Chloé and the B Corp Standard

Chloé, which became a certified B Corp in 2021, has moved toward a « fair trade » model. Their partnership with « Made For A Woman, » a social enterprise in Madagascar, empowers over 350 women from vulnerable backgrounds. These artisans provide handcrafted raffia elements for Chloé bags, receiving not just fair wages but social support and medical care. Crucially, Chloé uses a « Digital ID » or « Product Passport » that allows consumers to scan a tag and learn the exact story of the artisan who made their product, ensuring that the credit, and the humanity, remains intact.   

Christian Louboutin and the Mexicaba

Christian Louboutin’s Mexicaba tote offers another roadmap for collaboration. The brand worked directly with the Taller Maya foundation in the Yucatán Peninsula. Artisans were paid equitable wages, and 10% of all profits were donated directly back to the foundation to help preserve Mayan craft techniques. By featuring the artisans in the marketing and giving them explicit credit, the brand shifted the narrative from « extraction » to a « benevolent partnership ».

Pharrell Williams and the Native American Dialogue

In his January 2024 menswear show for Louis Vuitton, Pharrell Williams attempted a « 360-degree approach » to collaboration with the Dakota and Lakota Nations. Rather than simply using motifs, he involved four Native American designers in the actual creation of hand-painted bags and embroidered apparel. He also included Native artists in the soundtrack and staging, ensuring that marginalized voices were the ones telling their own story on the Paris runway.   

The Era of Cultural Accountability

As we move into 2026, the « inspiration » mask has become too thin to hide the colonial history behind it. The global community is no longer asking for permission to be heard; they are demanding it through boycotts, lawsuits, and a refusal to be treated as a « background prop. »

For luxury brands to survive the next decade, they must undergo a fundamental shift in their value proposition. True luxury is no longer just about the craftsmanship of the object, but the ethics of the relationship that created it. This requires moving from extraction to dialogue, where economic benefits flow back to the source communities. It requires structural diversity, ensuring that boardrooms and design studios reflect the multifaceted world they sell to. Finally, it requires transparency, where the « ghosts » in the fashion machine are replaced by the names and faces of the people whose culture the world so admires. Culture is not a trend, it is a living story, and it deserves nothing less than total respect.

Written by Linjia Xue