Italian luxury fashion house Prada has found itself at the center of a growing controversy over cultural appropriation after unveiling sandals in its June Milan runway show that closely resembled India’s iconic Kolhapuri chappals—without crediting their origin. These handcrafted leather sandals, native to Kolhapur in Maharashtra, have been produced by local artisans for centuries, embodying India’s rich legacy of craft and design. Prada’s omission of any reference to this Kolhapuri tradition sparked backlash from Indian observers, craft activists, and fashion critics alike, who accused the brand of failing to acknowledge the source of its inspiration.
Responding to the criticism, Prada issued a statement acknowledging the sandals’ Indian roots and expressed its openness to engage in “meaningful dialogue” with Indian artisans. In a notable step, a Prada team recently visited Kolhapur, meeting local artisans and shopkeepers to understand the process and tradition behind Kolhapuri footwear. The brand also held what it described as a “successful meeting” with the Maharashtra Chamber of Commerce, Industry & Agriculture, indicating a possible future collaboration with manufacturers of the traditional sandals. While details of the potential partnership remain unclear, the move is being seen as a rare instance of a global fashion powerhouse admitting oversight and actively seeking reconciliation.
This incident has reignited conversations around how international fashion brands often draw from South Asian cultures—particularly India’s centuries-old textile and embroidery traditions like Kolhapuri chappals—without proper credit or compensation. Similar debates erupted earlier this year when Reformation and H&M faced backlash for spring collections resembling South Asian attire. Reformation admitted to drawing inspiration from a model’s wardrobe, while H&M denied the allegations. More recently, Dior was criticised for showcasing a coat resembling mukaish work—a traditional Indian embroidery technique—without acknowledging its origin.
Industry observers argue that not all design inspirations stem from malintent. Designers globally draw upon a wide array of cultures in an effort to celebrate and showcase them. However, critics insist that any such borrowing must come with appropriate attribution and ethical consideration, especially when Western luxury brands retail these designs at exorbitant prices. Delhi-based fashion writer Shefalee Vasudev notes that giving credit is a core tenet of responsible design, and failing to do so reflects a “cultural neglect” of regions brands often claim to admire.
The issue is further complicated by India’s ambiguous position in the global luxury market. While analysts, such as those at Boston Consulting Group, predict the Indian luxury market will double to $14 billion by 2032, experts point out that most global brands still don’t consider India a primary luxury consumer base. Arvind Singhal, chairman of consultancy firm Technopak, says that despite the emergence of luxury malls in Indian metros, brands like Prada remain unknown to the average consumer. He suggests that for many global labels, India continues to function more as a production hub than a viable consumer market.
Designer Anand Bhushan echoes this sentiment, explaining that Indian artisans have long been behind many high-end European collections, often without credit. He cites the 2011 Chanel “Paris-Bombay” collection by Karl Lagerfeld as a prime example. While some hailed the show for its India-inspired elegance, others criticised it for reducing Indian culture to exotic clichés.
Still, fashion voices like Nonita Kalra, editor-in-chief of Tata CliQ Luxury, believe the current controversy has created space for reflection and change. She views Prada’s response as genuine and sees it as part of a larger problem—the lack of diversity within Western fashion houses that leads to such oversights. Kalra argues that hiring talent from a broader range of cultural backgrounds could help brands become more inclusive and respectful in their interpretations.
As the debate continues, the episode also serves as a wake-up call for India to value and protect its own heritage. Despite their global appeal, India’s artisans often operate in vulnerable conditions, with limited legal protection and minimal recognition. Laila Tyabji, chairperson of Dastkar, laments that while Indians will haggle over handmade juthis, they won’t blink before purchasing mass-produced branded sneakers at ten times the price. According to her, the real shift will come only when Indians themselves begin to honour, value, and advocate for their traditional crafts—both in spirit and in policy.
The Prada controversy, then, is more than a fleeting fashion scandal. It has become a pivotal moment to push for a more respectful, ethical, and reciprocal relationship between global fashion brands and the cultures they draw from.
