“Sustainability is just a slogan unless you make it commercially viable.”
Such a sentiment, spoken by Alex Zar, owner of Los Angeles-based premium footwear and handbag factory Lalaland, is catching on as the fashion industry makes meaningful shifts from “intention to action.” But while companies are partnering up, ideating and innovating, there’s still a long way to go to meet established goals for 2030 and beyond.
Denim is a good place to start, as consumers show no signs of diminishing their love for this high-impact fashion category. From trialing next-gen fibers and developing new performance weaves to partnering with suppliers to streamline processes, global denim mills are active participants in ensuring the industry’s more sustainable and responsible future.
Related Articles
In synthetics, there’s also an intense race for circular polyester. Fashion brands are ceding plastic bottles back to the plastic bottle industry (where they can be resurrected infinitely), and focusing on textile-to-textile recycling as a more viable solution. Inditex has earmarked tens of millions of euros into securing a pipeline of textile waste-derived polyester from Ambercycle, while H&M Group is snapping up the capacity of Syre’s so-called “circular” polyester to the tune of $600 million. Additionally, Patagonia and Zalando have placed million-dollar bets to separate the fibers in polyester-cotton-blended clothing and transmute them into new garments.
You May Also Like
Fast fashion, of course, bears much of the responsibility — and wrath — for production waste and growing landfills. Beyond pushing fast fashion to recycle its textiles, some feel the way to “fix” the problem is to tax it. From France’s “kill bill” to Australia’s recycling levy, global leaders are exploring fast-fashion taxes to hold brands (and consumers) accountable. “By holding companies accountable, the tax encourages a shift toward more ethical and eco-friendly fashion, fostering circularity and reducing waste,” said Keith Fraley, assistant professor at the Fashion Institute of Technology.
But if brands and retailers really want to reduce emissions throughout, they need to look further up the supply chain. Scope 3 emissions make up the bulk of overall GHG emissions, but they can be the hardest for industry players to address.
“The reason that emissions are not coming down — or certainly aren’t coming down fast enough — is that brands are really only tackling the low-hanging fruit at this stage, when it comes to working with their suppliers to actually phase out fossil fuels,” said Rachel Kitchin, senior corporate climate campaigner for fashion and IT at Stand.Earth.
With fashion operating on razor-thin margins, it’s no wonder that without the security of sustained business from brands or a good-faith cash infusion, many suppliers are unable or unwilling to pony up the funds to revamp their operations.
Despite progress on ambitious targets related to climate impact and emissions reduction over the past few years, as the industry inches closer to its deadlines, many companies seem to be stagnating — or worse, backsliding.
The fashion industry tends to move as a pack, not wanting to take risks alone, Kitchin said. “[We need] more collaboration from brands willing to step forward and say, ‘We’re going to organize financing. We’re going to organize a funding model. We’re going to provide a fund for suppliers to make the kind of capital investments they need to support their energy transitions and their energy efficiency processes.’”
To download SJ’s Sustainability Report report, click here.