TRACEABILITY IN APPAREL - A GOAL WITHOUT AN END POINT IN SIGHT - GUEST ARTICLE FROM CARY SHERBURNE
As consumers, we can vote with our wallets, refusing to support brands who do not share our ideals and are not honest or transparent about their sustainability and traceability achievements. Regulatory agencies will eventually step in and force some of these issues to be addressed. But all of this takes time—time we may not have as the climate crisis worsens.There is no Planet B..” Read on to learn more… Writes Cary Sherburne - WhatTheyThink
GUEST ARTICLE WRITTEN BY CARY SHERBURNE OF WHATTHEYTHINK
Traceability in Apparel: A Goal Without an End Point in Sight
The fashion industry has been under fire for some time over its excessive carbon footprint and the pollution it generates. Now a new metric is being thrown into the mix: Traceability. In this article, we define traceability and cite several reports that paint a not-very-flattering picture of progress the industry is making.
As the younger generations increase their focus on sustainability, and gain in buying power, the issue of traceability in the textiles and apparel industry is rising to the top of the list as buyers decide which brands to support—and which not to support.
According to an article in Modern Retail, “Traceability is the ability to track the production process of a product from the raw materials’ source to where the finished products were delivered. While traceability is not necessarily a new concept in retail, more brands appear to be jumping on board. French fashion house Chloé is enabling products to be completely traceable and ready for the resale market through a digital ID system called Chloé Vertical. Just a few months ago, in June, Tapestry, H&M Group and Adidas were some of over a dozen retail brands that signed a pledge to ramp up transparency in the leather supply chain.” Traceability not only gives consumers insight into environmental impact of the clothing and footwear they are considering for purchase, but also delves into the human rights impact.
Regulatory agencies are also jumping into the fray—so brands that get ahead of the game in putting in place traceability programs will benefit as others scramble to comply.
In Europe, for example, “The Eco-design for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR) was unveiled in March 2022 and is moving through legislative debates. It looks at durability, energy use, recycling, carbon and environmental footprints and a digital product passport that will deep dive into a garment’s sourcing and manufacture with strict reporting requirements.” Regulatory agencies there expect to see a very different framework for apparel and footwear companies to operate under by 2030.
To make the path easier, some brands are partnering with outside organizations such as CommonShare to leverage their traceability expertise. CommonShare uses AI, data science and partner networks to simplify sustainability compliance, optimize sourcing and drive authentic ESG communication. It provides a compliance architecture to monitor and manage an organization’s risk exposure and impact in real time. It also manages third-party verification of supply chain data to ensure a brand’s credibility in both sustainability and traceability.
Traceability starts at the point of origin for raw materials that go into making the final product.
Some brands are well ahead of the game.
Pre-pandemic, we wrote about Sheep, Inc., based in London but with operations in New Zealand. When you buy a sweater, beanie or other garment from Sheep, Inc., the traceability starts with identifying which sheep the wool for your garment came from…kind of an “Adopt-a-Sheep” approach.
According to a recent article in Metal, “All wool comes exclusively from farms in New Zealand that adopt regenerative farming methods. After that, all garments are produced in Europe by supply chain partners using knitting processes for minimal environmental impact.
Furthermore, each garment comes with a (removable) NFC chip in its hem that, with a simple tap of the phone gives digital access to the full creation story and your sheep.” Now that’s traceability, and as a result of its efforts, Sheep, Inc., became the first—and hopefully not the last!—carbon-negative fashion brand. This means its manufacturing processes must naturally store more CO2 than they produce.
Buy a Sweater. Adopt a Sheep.
Being traceable is good PR for brands—but only if they are sincere about their efforts and can prove the provenance of their goods. Otherwise, it just opens up a whole greenwashing discussion that ultimately will inflict severe damage on brands that approach the trend dishonestly, especially as more and more regulatory agencies demand compliance with sustainability and traceability requirements.
And it’s not just a picture-window showcase. Experts agree that being fully traceable can also minimize product waste and improve margins. In the Modern Retail article, Suzy Davidkhanian, vice president of content for retail and e-commerce at Insider Intelligence, was quoted as saying “there is no going back from this trend.…I do think that of all of the other things that retailers are potentially doing, this one is so much more transparent and holds. It’s like the accounting ledger so you can’t fake it.” That’s not to say that some won’t try, but as consumers get more savvy and demand proof of sustainability and traceability claims, it becomes harder to make unsupported claims.
Really, it’s all about transparency, and the fashion industry has been slow to make progress in this arena. Earlier this summer, Fashion Revolution released its Fashion Transparency Index for 2023. For this report Fashion Revolution reviews data from 250 of the world’s largest brands and retailers, ranking them according to their level of public disclosure on human rights and environmental policies, practices and impacts in their own operations and in their supply chains.
The report notes, “There is no fashion on a dead planet, and yet brands’ decarbonization targets set far into the future feel woefully inadequate…Transparency is only the starting point, and it feels that many brands have even failed to show up at the race.” Harsh words, but they need to get more play to increase the pressure on the fashion industry to step up its game.
There is some movement, thankfully. According to the report, for the first time in seven years, since the inception of this work, two brands scored 80% or higher—Italian brand OVS and Gucci. Kmart and Target in Australia followed closely at 76%. Be sure to read the full report for the entire story. It’s truly depressing that out of 250 brands, only these four ranked at the high end.
They also found, “Despite upcoming legislation to mitigate fashion waste, mounting evidence of over-production remains the big elephant in the room, as most brands do not disclose their annual production volumes, nor do they commit to reducing the number of items they produce.” And that’s just the beginning of the grim picture the report paints.
In other news, a recent investigation in the UK cited by RetailWire had a goal of uncovering the truth about what really happens to clothing waste that is donated to take-back bins set up by some popular fashion brands.
End-of-life for fashion is part of the whole traceability picture, but much of these purported take-backs actually end up being shipped to third-world countries and end up being burned there or put in their landfills. So kicking the can down the road and greenwashing the whole take-back scheme. I see that happening here in the Dominican Republic, where container after container of second-hand clothes are shipped into the country. Some goes to stores the importers operate, and what is not sold there is often sold to street vendors, who pick through what they are offered and discard a lot of it before even hitting the road to sell it. We saw that happen in my town, where discarded clothing was just left by the road outside the importer’s facility! The article concludes, “With this inconsistent practice being exposed, consumers are once again put in a precarious position where they cannot necessarily trust the integrity of given sustainability solutions. This should not deter consumers from recycling their clothes; it just means that, as always, one cannot blindly take promises at face value.”
As consumers, we can vote with our wallets, refusing to support brands who do not share our ideals and are not honest or transparent about their sustainability and traceability achievements. Regulatory agencies will eventually step in and force some of these issues to be addressed. But all of this takes time—time we may not have as the climate crisis worsens.
There is no Planet B.
About Cary Sherburne: Cary Sherburne is a well-known author, journalist and marketing consultant whose practice is focused on marketing communications strategies for the printing and publishing industries.
Cary Sherburne is available for speaking engagements and consulting projects. To get more information contact us. Please offer your feedback to Cary. She can be reached at cary@whattheythink.com.
