RIS321186 Fast Fashion, snel eruit! bijlage 6

Brands’ responses, and the information publicly available on their websites, clearly

Bottega Veneta, Gucci and Saint Laurent).

indicate that fashion brands are using and selling recycled PET as a perceived antidote to the fossil-fashion problem. Where brands disclosed their main feedstock

In contrast to over three-quarters of brands jumping on the bandwagon of down-

for recycled polyester, this was always PET bottles.Well over three quarters (85%)

cycling PET bottles to meet their ‘recycled’ polyester targets, none of the brands

of the brands either said PET bottles were their main source of recycled polyester

reported a high level of fibre-to-fibre recycling targets, nor indicated a clear goal

or mentioned PET bottles as their only recycled polyester feedstock. For example,

to move towards this type of recycling. The majority either did not disclose any

Adidas said that, for polyester, feedstock predominantly comes from used PET

amount of fibre-to-fibre recycling (e.g. M&S, Monsoon) or said they do not have

bottles, while Asda said 12% of its total 16.5% recycled materials is made from PET

visibility of this figure (New Look). Several brands (e.g. Morrisons and Esprit) noted

bottles. REPREVE was a commonly mentioned brand of recycled PET polyester.

the difficulty of tracking products once they are sold.

In some cases, other plastic feedstocks were given, such as ‘ocean-bound’ plastic

There were some nods towards using pre- or post-consumer waste, but in most

waste. On its website, Patagonia emphasises it is looking beyond plastic bottles, that

cases companies did not disclose a percentage. H&M said its recycled polyester is

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | Where do brands stand on policies and commitments to curb fossil fashion?

|

27

made from 10% pre- and post-consumer textile waste, although 90% still comes

While many brands indicated they are planning to invest in – or work to advance

from PET bottles. It also said around 99% of its recycled polyamide comes from

– fibre-to-fibre recycling technology, Inditex and Target were the only brands to

pre-consumer sources – largely in-house wasted yarn.

disclose how much they have invested into it. Inditex said it has invested €3 million ($3.5 million) to fund textile recycling-related activities, including the MIT-Spain

While Kering said it ‘encourages’ its houses to choose recycled polyester from the

Inditex Circularity Seed Fund. Target’s 2020 corporate responsibility report46 says

internal recycling processes of suppliers’ fabric scraps over PET packaging, it did

it has invested over €819,530 ($1 million) in ‘textile-recycling’ technologies. Broad-

not provide further details. Similarly, Uniqlo’s parent group, Fast Retailing, said

ly, the industry as a whole exhibits an overwhelming lack of focus on scaling up

its recycled products currently incorporate collected used polyester clothing and

investments into closed-loop recycling solutions, as opposed to increasing their

scraps, as well as PET bottles, without disclosing proportions. Closer investiga-

capacity for bottle-to-clothes recycling.

tion of Uniqlo’s clothing collection (see Chapter 3) found no products made from recycled synthetics within the sample. Asics said it uses some recycled polyester

H&M, Asics and Kering mentioned support of or investment in Worn Again Technolo-

made from textile waste and pre-owned clothing, although most still comes from

gies,47 which is developing recycling technology to convert polyester and polycotton

PET bottles. Next said its aim is for its recycled fibres to come from fibre-to-fibre

blended textiles and PET plastic into ‘circular’ raw materials. While a promising

recycling in the longer term, but did not give any concrete dates or details.

technology, the degradation of the fibre chains over time means it will not allow the infinite recycling of plastic materials without virgin input.48 H&M and the Hong

Adidas is making some efforts to create a circular product, with the launch of the

Kong Research Institute of Textiles and Apparel have a number of other technolo-

successor to its UltraBOOST DNA LOOP43 shoes, available in larger volumes in Spring

gies in production, focusing on polycotton blends. The Green Machine Technology

2021. The shoe is made from a single material, fused together without glue, and

uses a method to recover polyester fibre from cotton blends.49 H&M also launched

can – according to the company – be returned to Adidas, where it is shredded and

Looop [sic] in-store technology, which is a mechanical recycling technology that

reused to produce a new shoe. Adidas said its pilot projects include fibre-to-fibre

shreds old garments and re-spins the fibres to produce new clothing. While this is

recycling technologies, and its website says it is working to make products easy

certainly a positive step for the industry, the material input requirements for the

to recycle, with the goal of ‘completely eliminating waste’. Similarly, Nike’s Reuse

process are not clarified. This type of technology also requires fibres to be mixed

a Shoe programme44 recycles used trainers into other materials, and its Grind pro-

with virgin material, as reinforcement, to ensure sufficient durability – the extent

gramme45 recycles manufacturing scrap, unsellable products and worn-out sneakers

of which is also not detailed.50

back into Nike’s own products and for other purposes. However, these companies provides few details of the recycling technology used for these products, nor the

To foster a circular model, the big elephant in the room – in addition to the need

environmental impacts associated with it; neither do they disclose what percentage

to have technological infrastructure in place for commercial-scale fibre-to-fibre

of their overall products is currently recycled this way.

recycling – is the implementation of takeback schemes, through which brands can guarantee that, at end of life, discarded clothes are actually collected for repair, re-

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | Where do brands stand on policies and commitments to curb fossil fashion?

|

28

use or recycling. Without this, any claims about brands’ items or collections being

buy more cheap clothes, further fuelling overconsumption and the growing waste

‘recyclable’ or ‘circular’ are misleading and incorrect.

crisis. This also encourages consumers to throw away clothes with a clearer conscience, in the belief they will be repurposed. For example, Monsoon’s website52

Our research shows that, while a growing number of brands (Adidas, Inditex, Monsoon, Nike and Puma) are offering takeback options for used clothes, few – if any – of these programmes are currently geared towards fibre-to-fibre recycling. While the existence of these schemes could help

says customers get a £10-off voucher to spend on new purchases of £50 when they donate unwanted Monsoon clothing. Gap, Levi Strauss & Co., The North Face and Timberland also have second-hand programmes that give customers store credit in the form of discounts.

to support this in the future (if brands choose to put greater emphasis on it), none of the companies indicated that the

In principle, the rise in the number of takeback schemes

clothes they currently collect are for recycling into new

and repair-and-reselling platforms reported by brands –

clothes. Indeed, many brands didn’t disclose what

such as Asda, Gucci, H&M, Kering, Patagonia and Tom-

happens to the clothing upon collection. A recent

my Hilfiger – is applaudable; but the current fashion

study by Textile Exchange found that the majority

system, established on overproduction, diminish-

(52%) of companies using in-store clothing-takeback

es the impact of such initiatives. Making small, in-

schemes do not actually know what happens to their

cremental changes to companies’ business models

collected materials, or ‘have little visibility’ of this.51

while continuing to promote the sale of thousands

Others (C&A, Dressmann, H&M, M&S, Monsoon, Mor-

of cheap products – with a huge environmental and

risons and Tesco) offer takeback schemes for reuse or

climate impact – will neither lead to transformational

recycling of clothing via charity schemes, where brands

change in the industry nor curb the tremendous envi-

have no overview of what happens to collected items. In

ronmental externalities of fast fashion.

some cases, collected items are downcycled into different items, such as industrial used fabrics (Monsoon) or emergency

2.2.3.

Microplastics: Swept under the carpet

clothing aid for refugee camps (Fast Retailing) – or are even used to produce energy from waste (Fast Retailing, Nike) – which would surely surprise consumers who return the clothes for recycling.

Microplastic pollution has become a global challenge, a significant proportion of which is caused by textiles shedding. Every time synthetic clothes are manufactured, 53 worn, washed or disposed of, they release microplastics. These tiny

Several brands offer credits, to be spent in-store, in exchange for donating old

particles have already tainted the most remote environments on the planet – from

clothes. As such, not only are the clothes collected not guaranteed to be recycled

2,000 metres below sea level to the remote Arctic.54 They have even been found

or reused, but the store credit also aims to retain customers and persuade them to

falling in the form of ‘plastic rain’; a recent study found that 1,000 metric tonnes

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | Where do brands stand on policies and commitments to curb fossil fashion?

|

29

of microplastics (equivalent to over 120 million plastic water bottles) – mostly from

common microplastic materials found in the marine environment to date, and are

synthetic fibres used for clothing – fall on 11 protected areas in the US every year,

bound to grow; as such, they need to be cut back at their source.

deposited there by wind and rain.55 Moreover, research increasingly warns that microplastics end up in the bodies of animals and humans. An estimated one in three fish eaten by humans contains microplastics. The smallest microplastics can also be consumed by zooplankton, which are then eaten by creatures such as oysters,56 as well as by larger animals such as whales. 57 They are also found closer to home – we are eating and drinking plastic fibres found in both outdoor and indoor environments.58 Indeed, about one-third (33%) of fibres in indoor environments are plastic fibres,59 and we breathe in at least 13,000–68,000 plastic microfibres from our clothing, carpets, curtains and other textiles every year.60 While the research on the health impacts of microplastics is ongoing, several

INDIRECT

DIRECT

studies already show alarming results. They are now present in human lung tissue, stool, stomachs – even the placentas of unborn babies.61,62 Microplastics

INHALED/INGESTED

from textiles (namely nylon and polyester) have been found to inhibit the lungs’

EXPOSURE TO CHEMICALS

ability to repair damage caused by Covid-19, as well as to inhibit the development of lung tissue in children.63 A recent research from Australia looking at microplastics present in people’s homes, warned that children under six inhale around three times more microplastics than the average adult.64 Recent studies have also found that contaminated plastic fibres from waste may even lead to

CAN CROSS THE BLOOD/BRAIN BARRIER

Covid-19 transmission through the air that we breathe.65 A 2021 study by the California Ocean Science Trust and a group of interdisciplinary scientists concluded that precautionary measures, such as reducing the

FOUND IN PLACENTAS OF UNBORN CHILDREN

sources of microplastics, may be the most effective way to tackle the problem.66 The study acknowledges that microfibres from textiles are among the most

INHIBITS LUNG DEVELOPMENT

HIGHEST INHALATION OF MICROFIBERS IN CHILDREN <0.5 years

TRANSMISSION OF PATHOGENS VIA MICROPLASTICS PRESENT IN STOOLS

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels |

Where do brands stand on policies and commitments to curb fossil fashion?

|

30

Box 2.4: How are brands addressing microfibres? The evidence highlights that microplastic pollution will become an ever-worsening environmental problem, and that measures need to be taken now, but our research found that very few clothing companies are taking any concrete action to stop the immediate release of microfibre from their clothes. Most companies analysed are addressing this issue by joining voluntary industry groups, or are holding off on any meaningful action until ‘more research’ is done. Important as research is, the idea that much more testing needs to be done to confirm that microplastics are a big problem is a dangerous abdication of responsibility – especially after years of studies. Many brands (Fast Retailing, Gap, H&M, M&S, New Look, Next, VF Corporation) said they are investing in new research, or collaborating with research institutes, without outlining what precautionary actions they are undertaking in the meantime. Even certain brands’ stronger-sounding actions appear to still be stuck in the stage of testing or understanding the impacts of microplas-

marine-plastics pollution, with an aim to better understand its own impacts and

tics. For example, Adidas said it is proactively working on microfibre pollution, and

– ‘ultimately’ – find ways to improve its practices.68 G-Star launched a call in 2016,

that it ‘recognise[s] the importance of taking responsibility for this topic as a sporting

alongside the Plastic Soup Foundation, to support the international Ocean Clean

goods company’. It said it has established a cross-functional working group and is

Wash initiative to develop solutions, but has not reported any individual progress

collaborating with supply-chain partners, research institutes and external industry

as a company since.

working groups, including The Microfibre Consortium. Its website says it is working on a common test method, which it ‘expect[s] to be available in 2019’, to create

Worse still, companies such as Asda, Nike and Primark appear to emphasise uncer-

products that shed a minimum of microfibres and develop new material solutions

tainty over the extent of the clothing industry’s impact as a reason for their hesitance

for textiles.67 However, at the time of writing (2021), nothing new has been reported

to act against microfibre shedding. Nike – one of the champions of synthetic use, by

on this issue.

tonnage – says on its website that ‘microfibres can originate from synthetic or natural materials’, and argues that the science behind the major sources and potential

Similarly, despite saying on its website that microfibre shedding has taken on a ‘heightened urgency’ for the company in the past two years, Patagonia is still at the stage of investing in studies on microfibres and organisations working to address

environmental impacts of microfibres is not fully understood.69

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels |

Where do brands stand on policies and commitments to curb fossil fashion?

|

31

While indeed all fibres – including natural ones – shed microfibres, which end up in

Excuses and delays from the fashion industry because ‘all materials shed microfibres’

our environment, the problem of synthetic microfibres or microplastic is amplified

and ‘more research is needed’ do not stand up to scrutiny – and are an industry tactic

by several additional factors. First, synthetic fibres already account for 69% of all

to distract and delay meaningful action while continuing to grow their reliance on

textiles produced in the world, and projections are that this share will grow further.

cheap synthetic fibres.

70

Cheap clothes made from plastic fibres are also often much less robust, and some

fashion brands’ garments have been found to start disintegrating after only a few

What’s more, nearly a quarter of companies analysed (12) mentioned nothing what-

washes.71 For this reason, they are a significant source of microplastic pollution. Syn-

soever about microfibres on their websites and/or their responses, including Asics,

thetic textiles are the main source of primary microplastics in developing regions;

Bonprix, Burberry, Gildan, Levi Strauss & Co, Lindex, Sainsbury’s, Target, United

in Asia, Africa and the Middle East.72 According to a 2021 study, conducted by the

Colors of Benetton, Walmart, Wrangler and Zalando.

Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology in Ireland, synthetic fibres account for 35% of marine microplastic pollution.73 This is echoed by a one-year-long study, sampling

A common response from brands was that they are part of an industry grouping,

from Florida’s coastline, according to which over one-third (34.8%) of microplastic

such as The Microfibre Consortium (TMC) or the Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chem-

pollution comes from washing synthetic textiles.74 Another recent study (2020)

icals foundation task team developing guidance on microfibre release. TMC aims

found that synthetic clothing contributes vast amounts of terrestrial plastic pol-

to develop an industry-aligned approach through practical solutions for microfibre

lution, and that 176,500 metric tonnes of synthetic microfibres – chiefly polyester

release for the textile industry via several streams of work, including a Cross Indus-

and nylon – are released annually onto land across the globe.75 Polyester appears

try Topic Roadmap,78 test methodology development, scientific support for policy

to be particularly problematic, with another study finding that 73% of synthetic

development and development of industry guidelines.79 However, despite running

microfibres throughout the Arctic Ocean came from this fibre.76

since 2018, the TMC has not established any commitments to concrete actions. Brands that are members of, or collaborate with, TMC include Adidas, Asda, ASOS,

Second, while the biodegradability of natural fibres can be hindered by processing

Gap, Kering (Balenciaga, Bottega Veneta, Gucci, Saint Laurent), Lululemon, M&S,

and dyeing, synthetic fibres made from fossil fuel are fundamentally not biode-

Morrisons, Next, Nike, Patagonia, Puma, Primark, Target, Tesco, Uniqlo (via Fast

gradable – they persist in our oceans, soil, air and even bodies. A recent study on

Retailing) and The North Face. For some of these brands (such as Asda, ASOS and

biodegradation in the marine environment showed that cellulosic fibres degraded

Morrisons), membership of TMC is their main or only microfibre policy. Next indicat-

100% within 30 days in the marine environment, while fabrics containing polyester

ed that, through TMC, brands already have access to data that informs higher loss

remained relatively intact after more than 200 days in seawater.77 Furthermore, as

areas within manufacturing, ‘so that the most appropriate filtration can be instructed’.

mentioned, the increasing evidence on the deleterious effect of synthetic microfi-

However, neither of these industry initiatives seems to require or suggest reducing

bres on human health calls for prompt and precautionary measures to prevent this

reliance on synthetic fibres as an immediate solution to microplastic pollution.

pollution from escalating.

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous | Where do brands stand on policies and commitments to curb fossil fashion?

| 32

Even individually, most brands are looking only at end-of-pipe solutions, such as improving filtering systems for dyeing, washing machines and wastewater-treat-

2.3 Supply-chain transparency

ment plants, working with manufacturers to minimise the shedding of garments, and developing filters for domestic washing machines (to name a few).

Our inquiry into brands’ and retailers’ synthetic suppliers – including the names and factories of their

Only a few brands said the way to address this problem is to curb the use of syn-

synthetics suppliers, up to the raw-material produc-

thetic fibres. Reformation noted that synthetics do not meet its fibre standards

tion stage – did not yield significant results. Brands

because, among other issues, they can lead to microplastic shedding; they are

were generally extremely untransparent about where

therefore limited to a maximum of 10% in the fibre mix of products other than ath-

their synthetics came from, especially with regards

leisure and swim products. Dressmann said that pre-washing the textile products

to raw-materials suppliers. Many listed some kind of

before use only moves the problem from the consumer market to the production

suppliers on their website, but did not specify which

country. Until there is more scientific evidence on microfibres, it says, it will keep

clothing factories used synthetic materials, nor any

the share of synthetics fibre fairly low (currently at 16%). Esprit acknowledges the

synthetic raw-materials suppliers.

issue of microplastic pollution on the synthetic fibres page of its website, and says it is working to decrease the amount of synthetics it uses and instead select more

Only four brands provided a list of some of their

sustainable options wherever possible.80 Inditex said it updates its designers on

tier-3 spinning mills – including synthetic-materials

microfibre research findings to encourage the most responsible choices to reduce

suppliers – to Changing Markets, including Asda, Es-

shedding. As a priority, it is working to swap out synthetic fibres in textile fabric

prit, Next and Tesco. Inditex said it will disclose its

structures with other materials, it said.

‘nominated’ tier-4 synthetic suppliers after a review process of its tier-3 suppliers (spinning units).

Alarmingly, while Hugo Boss said it is implementing various measures to keep synthetic fibres as low as possible, it added that it deliberately uses synthetic materials in its outerwear styles because they need to be washed ‘less often if at all’, which means ‘we counteract the process of washing out microplastics’. Such a ‘solution’ is not rooted in scientific research. A recent study found that pre-consumer textile manufacturing releases the amount of microfibres of similar magnitude to that of the consumer use phase (e.g. laundering).81 Other studies suggest that even more microfibres are released from wearing clothes made of polyester materials than washing them.82 Hugo Boss added that it is looking at minimising microfibres through improved production techniques and ‘exploring the possibility’ of degradability of synthetic fibres.

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous |

What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

| 33

3. What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

3.1

Analysis of companies’ online shops

We analysed over 4,000 products from 12 brands’ online Spring/ Summer 2021 collections to assess the prevalence of synthetic fibres in today’s fashion. We wanted to better understand the scale of fashion’s synthetic addiction in practice – and how this contrasts with what policies and commitments they choose to disclose. The brands we investigated were: ASOS, Boohoo, Forever21, Gucci, George at Asda, H&M, Louis Vuitton, M&S, Uniqlo, Walmart, Zalando and

NUMBER OF ITEMS WITH SUSTAINABILITY CLAIMS THAT ARE CERTIFIED

NUMBER AND % OF ITEMS THAT CONTAINED SYNTHETICS FOR EACH BRAND 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

0

100

200

300

500

85%

(230/270)

600

431

230

147 80%

(239/300)

270

0 0 79%

(236/300)

BRANDS ( total number of items that contained synthetics/total number of products reviewed)

400

76%

268

0 0

(204/268)

69% (316/436)

72%

283

157

0

SUSTAINABLE COLLECTION (121/176)

0

67%

(201/300)

57% (286/431)

283 283

0

66%

412

212

RESPONSIBLE EDIT (92/161)

72% 65%

(236/499) CONSCIOUS COLLECTION (143/199)

246

0 0

65%

(174/283)

123

300

143

45% (241/412) JOIN LIFE COLLECTION (50/112)

55%

(135/246)

300

0 0

64%

300

19 12

32%

(91/283)

206

% OF ITEMS THAT CONTAINED SYNTHETICS IN SUSTAINABLE COLLECTIONS

OVERALL % OF ITEMS THAT CONTAINED SYNTHETICS PER BRAND

128 AVARAGE COMPOSITION OF GARMENTS CONTAINING POLYESTER ( ALL BRANDS)

59% POLYESTER

412

AVARAGE COMPOSITION OF GARMENTS CONTAINING POLYESTER ( SUSTAINABLE COLLECTIONS)

41%

52%

48%

OTHER MATERIALS

POLYESTER

OTHER MATERIALS

Figure 3.1: Ranking of the 12 brands by percentage of items containing synthetics

157

436

360

TOTAL NUMBER OF ITEMS REVIEWED TOTAL NUMBER OF ITEMS WITH SUSTAINABILITY CLAIMS TOTAL NUMBER OF ITEMS WITH CERTIFICATION TO SUPPORT SUSTAINABILITY CLAIM Figure 3.2: Ranking of the 12 brands according to number of items with sustainability claims and number of items with sustainability certification

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

Zara. These were chosen to represent a range of brands: from luxury to low-cost,

3.2.1.

|

35

Sustainability claims and greenwashing

department stores and online-only, those who put sustainability at the forefront of their communications and ultra-fast-fashion brands for whom this is not a consid-

Across the brands, ASOS, H&M, Zalando and Zara each have dedicated ‘sustaina-

eration. For the analysis, a selection of products was chosen across the following

ble’ or ‘responsible’ collections. When comparing the composition of brands’ main

male and female categories: shirts/tops, non-jeans-based trousers, jackets/coats,

and ‘sustainable’ collections, the findings reveal that synthetics – and polyester in

dresses, kidswear and hoodies/sweatshirts, with data collected on material com-

particular – are still omnipresent. H&M’s Conscious Collection actually contains a

position, sustainability claims and certifications to support such claims. The full

higher percentage of synthetics than its main collection, standing at 72% versus

research methodology can be found in Annex IV.

61% respectively. Similarly, 57% of the garments in the Conscious Collection use polyester, in contrast to 52% of the H&M main collection. Zalando’s sustainability

3.2

Key findings and trends

offering depicts a similar story: 68% of the collection marked with the ‘sustainability’ tag contain synthetics, and 48% contain polyester. This underscores the marginal difference between Zalando’s sustainability range and its main collection, 75% of

The data analysed revealed striking evidence on the pervasiveness of synthetics

which contain synthetics.

in fashion. For the 4,028 products recorded across all 12 brands, 67% contained synthetics and a startling 50% contained polyester, while only a marginal portion

Thirty-nine per cent of items had a sustainability claim of some sort. When a prod-

of 229 products (6%) contained recycled synthetics. Across the 2,679 items that

uct was placed in the ‘sustainable’ collection, it was assumed that a sustainability

contained synthetics, the average volume of polyester used in each individual gar-

claim was being made for it. However, only 38% of these items with a sustainabil-

ment’s material composition was 59%. More specifically, for those that contained

ity claim had a third-party certification or standard to support the claim made on

polyester, the average total volume of polyester used in each garment was 57%. It

the individual product page, meaning the majority of sustainability claims (62%)

is important to note that the analysis covers only Spring/Summer 2021 collections,

are unsupported by a third party. Notably, George at Asda, Gucci and H&M make a

meaning that lighter, breathable clothes with higher percentages of natural fibres

high number of sustainability claims about their products, but these are not backed

may be more present on brands’ websites; Autumn/Winter may include more out-

up by third-party certifications. It is important to note, however, that – due to the

erwear, which tends to contain a higher percentage of synthetics.

weakness of many certification schemes – third-party certification does not mean a sustainability claim is substantiated. Further assessment of the certifications used

The five brands that used the highest proportion of synthetics, as a percentage of

on product pages reveal wide use of standards such as Better Cotton Initiative (BCI)

their total collection, were – in order from highest to lowest percentage – Boohoo,

cotton, a weak scheme that cannot guarantee the cotton in the product is indeed

Walmart, Uniqlo, Forever 21 and Zalando (Figure 3.1).

‘better’ (see Box 3.1).

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

|

36

Greenwashing is rife across the majority of brands making sustainability claims.

Content Standard (RCS), BCI cotton and European Confederation of Flax and Hemp

In the Greenwashing Alert sections throughout this report, we highlight egregious

(CELC) – each of which has varying strengths and blind spots. Of particular note is

examples (per brand) and analyse what makes these claims misleading.

BCI, used by the majority of brands in the study. BCI cotton is sourced through a system known as ‘mass balance’, whereby it is mixed with ordinary cotton through-

We assessed each sustainability claim made in our study against the new CMA guide-

out the supply chain. As a result, BCI cotton cannot guarantee that any of the fibre

lines (see Annex IV) to help businesses comply with consumer-protection laws when

in the end product does actually come from so-called ‘better’ production practices.

making environmental claims on goods and services. We found that 59% of claims

BCI is not fully traced across the supply chain; indeed, it was recently revealed that

made across the study fell short in some respect of the new principles. We deemed

over one-fifth of its ‘better cotton’ was produced in Xinjiang, China – a region now

products using BCI cotton to be misleading, due to the scheme’s weaknesses. We

known for its enforced-labour cotton production.84 BCI also falls short of setting

also considered sustainability claims on items that contain recycled synthetics, but

sufficiently high environmental standards; it tolerates high use of pesticides (some

do not disclose the proportion included, to be in breach of the guidelines.

of which are banned in the EU) and synthetic fertilisers, and is agnostic towards the use of genetically modified cotton.85

Brands scored very differently on this front: Zara and Gucci had the fewest claims in contravention of the guidance, while 96% of H&M’s claims, 89% of ASOS’s and

Due to the weakness of this certification, and the widely publicised concerns re-

88% of M&S’s flouted the guidelines in some way.

garding its failings, we do not consider BCI cotton to be sufficient to substantiate any environmental claims. BCI is also a good example of why certification on its own should never be used as a proxy for sustainability – brands themselves should

Box 3.5: The false promise of certification

ensure they investigate the quality and robustness of any standards they use.

Over 100 textile-related sustainability certification schemes are listed under the Ecobel Index. As exposed by our landmark report on the issue in 2018, The False

3.2.2.

Secondary materials and blends

Promise of Certification,83 certification schemes that satisfactorily address sustainability performance across the whole supply chain can be counted on one hand.

A high prevalence of synthetics was discovered, both as secondary materials (e.g.

For this reason, while we note where a brand takes steps to support a product’s

in linings, trimmings or embellishments) and as part of complex blends – most of-

green claims with certification, this does not necessarily mean the green claim is

ten polycotton, but sometimes multi-synthetic and natural blends of six or more

substantiated or accurate.

fibres. Gucci was notable for its commitment to 100% unblended natural fibres, in contrast to the other luxury house in the study – Louis Vuitton – which features

In this analysis of online products, various certifications were referenced – including Global Organic Content Standard (GOTS), Global Recycled Standard (GRS), Recycled

blends including PVC, crystal, glass fibre and synthetics. Zalando frequently features

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

|

37

complex blended garments in its sustainable collection. Such blends are problematic

under the GRS and RCS. The H&M Conscious Collection used the most recycled

for separation and recycling, and lack of full disclosure about this could mislead

synthetics of all collections: nearly one-third (32%) contained either recycled pol-

consumers about the true sustainability of the product.

yester or recycled polyamide. This was followed by Zalando’s sustainability range, in which 18% of the collection analysed included recycled polyester. When the data

Another key finding is that secondary materials – including lining, decorations,

was analysed, neither H&M nor Zalando disclosed the type of feedstock of recycled

ribbing, filling and coating – compromise what could otherwise be a garment void

synthetics used on individual product pages.

of synthetics. For example, half of the Uniqlo male hoodies we analysed claimed to be 100% cotton, yet contained synthetics such as spandex or polyester in their

We also discovered some inaccurate reporting relating to amounts of recycled con-

lining, which impacted the overall score.

tent. For example, a pair of ASOS ‘monomaterial’ trousers was actually made from 54% nylon and 46% polyester, and accompanied by descriptions claiming the item

3.2.3.

Synthetics rebranded

is ‘designed to be remade, so it’s easier to recycle when you’re done with it’. This is not only misleading but also factually inaccurate, and relates to a wider issue of

M&S and Uniqlo have also rebranded blended synthetics to highlight particular

transparency regarding material composition, whereby ASOS, M&S and Forever21

properties and give the material a high-tech cachet. Uniqlo uses BLOKTECH™ and

frequently use ‘other fibres’ to describe garments’ material composition.

HEATTECH™; M&S has created CASHMILON™, a virgin synthetic faux-cashmere knitwear; H&M has COOLMAX®, a quick-drying polyester material used in shirts. 3.2.4.

Recycled synthetics

3.2.5.

Synthetic use in different clothing types

Synthetic composition varied hugely by clothing type, with the highest amount of synthetic fibres found in outerwear (jackets and coats), hoodies and sweatshirts, and

Recycled synthetics – whether polyester, elastane or nylon – are the chief way in

sportswear (including leggings). British retailer John Lewis reported a twelvefold

which brands are attempting to source more sustainable synthetics. All brands – ex-

spike in loungewear and leggings sales86 – an increase of 1,303% – in 2020 due to

cluding Boohoo, Forever 21, Louis Vuitton and Uniqlo – declare their use of recycled

more people staying at home during the COVID-19 pandemic. It can be presumed

synthetics. Only three brands – ASOS, George at Asda and Zara – communicate the

that the fashion brands included in this study also experienced this trend.

feedstock of these recycled synthetics, which predominantly originate from textile waste and plastic bottles.

3.2.6.

Kidswear

Five of the retailers share the approximate volume of recycled synthetics used on

Although most brands generally use fewer synthetic fibres in children’s clothes,

each individual product page: Gucci, H&M, Walmart, Zalando and Zara. However,

this has not been the case across the board. Concerningly, US brands Walmart and

from the data collected, only Zara has attempted to certify its recycled synthetics

Forever21 – alongside Uniqlo – use high levels of synthetics in kidswear. Inhalation

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

of microfibres into the lungs has been shown to cause issues with lung-tissue de-

3.2.7.

|

38

Microfibres

velopment in children, as well as in those recovering from respiratory conditions.87 For the aforementioned brands to put children in close proximity with synthetic

Across all 4,028 garments, no single product page made direct reference to the link

microfibres is a serious oversight, and contrasts with many of the European re-

between synthetic materials and the impact of microfibres pollution on human

tailers in this study, which opt mostly for natural fibres in kidswear; for example,

health and marine and terrestrial pollution, let alone offering any solutions to the

Zalando had the lowest incidence of synthetic fibres in kidswear – only 16% – and

problem. In combination with the direct responses we received to our questionnaire,

did not use polyester.

this confirms microfibres to be a blind spot for brands – something they prefer to neither talk about nor seriously address.

3.3

ASOS

Across the products analysed in both collections, 66% contained synthetics, with 46% containing polyester and 2% containing recycled synthetics. The average amount of synthetic fibre per garment (of the garments that contained synthetics) was 63%, and the average amount of polyester was 77%. For ASOS’s Responsible Edit, 57% had synthetic composition and 29% contained polyester. Of the items containing synthetics, 9% used recycled synthetic content. The average amount of synthetic fibre per garment was 48%, and the average amount of polyester was 64%. A remarkable 89% of ASOS’s sustainability claims were deemed to flout CMA guidelines. Clothing categories with the highest incidence of synthetics in the main collection were male trousers and male jackets/coats. Due to the prevalence of polyester in puffer jackets, fleeces and outerwear, 93% of the male-jackets category contained synthetics and 83% of the category contained polyester; the average polyester count was a substantial 91%. Of this, 10% of recycled polyester was only used in the lining and filling to replace virgin synthetics.

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

% OF TOTAL GARMENTS THAT USED SYNTHETICS

2%

39

AVERAGE COMPOSITION OF GARMENTS CONTAINING POLYESTER

9%

28%

|

MAIN COLLECTION

43%

23%

77% RESPONSIBLE EDIT

70% MAIN COLLECTION SYNTHETICS

48%

64%

36%

RESPONSIBLE EDIT

OTHER MATERIALS

RECYCLED SYNTHETICS

POLYESTER

OTHER MATERIALS

The ASOS ‘Responsible’ Edit is extremely generous with the garments included in this collection – similarly to Zalando’s over-frequent use of its ‘sustainability’ tag, or H&M’s ‘Conscious’ mark. Often, BCI cotton is used as a prop to justify an item belonging in the Responsible Edit. This occurs even when BCI cotton is only used

Figure 3.3: The ASOS circular trousers that claim to be a monomaterial but actually contain virgin polyester and nylon

in small quantities for the trims or lining. % OF TOTAL GARMENTS THAT USED SYNTHETICS

Greenwashing alert

15% 85%

AVERAGE COMPOSITION OF GARMENTS CONTAINING POLYESTER

76%

24%

The ASOS Circular Design Collection, launched in September 2020, has many incidences of problematic or unsupported claims. Monomaterials are celebrated

SYNTHETICS

OTHER MATERIALS

POLYESTER

OTHER MATERIALS

and considered circular, even when they are 100% virgin synthetic; for example, a ‘zero waste’ designed female shirt, which is 100% polyester. Another example of false advertising for circularity and recyclability is a pair of female trousers,

the lack of fibre-to-fibre recycling technology and the absence of any takeback

which the brand claims to be a monomaterial product of 100% nylon. However, the

scheme.

detailed material composition actually states they are made up of 54% nylon and 46% polyester. The description claims it is ‘designed to be remade, so it’s easier to recycle when you’re done with it’. This is highly misleading, especially given

3.4

Boohoo

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

|

40

Boohoo makes no pretence of being responsible or sustainable, and this is reflected in its high use of synthetics, blended materials and the sheer number of products listed. Extensive use of synthetics places Boohoo as the worst offender in our study; 85% of its products contained synthetics, of which 78% contained polyester, with an average of 73% synthetic composition per garment and 76% average polyester composition – the highest in the study. The brand does not use any recycled synthetics. With regards to product categories, 29 out of 30 male jackets analysed contained synthetics, and 22 consisted of 100% polyester. Of 30 female jackets analysed, 29 contained synthetics and 27 contained polyester specifically, with the average polyester count at 84%. One-third of these female jackets were faux-leather pieces that solely contained polyurethane and polyester. One of these jackets masquerades as linen, when it is actually made from 100% polyester ‘linen look’.

Greenwashing: Coming soon

Figure 3.4: Boohoo’s ‘linen look’ jacket

fuel-derived fibres, let alone tackling pernicious issues like microfibre release, While Boohoo currently makes no claims of sustainability, Boohoo Australia has

and the culture of disposable ultra-fast fashion that the brand epitomises and

launched a small collection of products made from 95% recycled polyester and

promotes will continue – with added greenwashing.

5% recycled elastane.88 Plans to roll this out to the wider Boohoo group are still to be confirmed89 (and

Only 7% of Boohoo’s dress category were free from synthetics. The brand ranked

the company’s 2021 sustainability report is light on details),90 but garments that

joint-highest with Zalando for the dress category, with the highest percentage

meet Boohoo’s internal sustainability criteria bear the tag ‘Ready for the Future’

of overall synthetics. Boohoo dresses also contained the second-highest inci-

– a broad, ambiguous claim, which appears to be more about tapping into the

dence of polyester (73%), following ASOS (83%). Of these 30 pieces, 13 consisted

green dollar than actually providing more sustainable products. Simply switching

of 100% polyester.

to recycled synthetics will do nothing to reduce the brand’s overreliance on fossil

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

|

41

thetics and two-thirds contained polyester, with an average polyester content % OF TOTAL GARMENTS THAT USED SYNTHETICS

24%

AVERAGE COMPOSITION OF GARMENTS CONTAINING POLYESTER

contrast to European retailer Zalando’s main kidswear range, only 16% of which 69%

31%

76% SYNTHETICS

was 72%. While Walmart has a higher incidence of synthetics (87%), this is a stark

OTHER MATERIALS

contained synthetics, and in which polyester doesn’t feature at all. A handful of Forever 21’s clothing categories contained a lower incidence of synthet-

POLYESTER

OTHER MATERIALS

ics than its UK fast-fashion counterpart, Boohoo; for example, the female jackets category ranks as the seventh-lowest category for the brand for use of synthetics.

Finally, throughout the data collection, numerous items failed to carry product

This can partly be explained by the sample collected, which reflected Spring/Summer

material descriptions at all. We strongly encourage the brand to rectify and up-

trends as opposed to traditional Winter outerwear (like puffer jackets). However, it

date its website merchandising, so as to communicate material composition to

must be noted that female jackets contained a high average of 83% synthetic fibres

customers effectively.

per item, and that one-third of the category contained 100% polyester. Only two items consisted of 100% cotton. Elsewhere, 57% of the dress category contained

3.5

Forever 21

synthetics, versus 90% of Boohoo dresses and 87% of Zalando dresses. Still, onethird of all dresses contained polyester, with a high average of 81% composition. Additionally, 9 out of 30 dresses contained MMCF 100% rayon.

Forever 21 has not made any sustainability claims for the garments we analysed. The brand ranks as the fourth highest user or synthetics, with 76% of products

In a handful of instances, Forever 21 includes the ambiguous category ‘other fibres’

containing this type of fibre. Forever21 shows a particular preference for polyes-

in its garments’ material composition. This includes female jacket #5: ‘8% poly-

ter, with the average amount of polyester per garment at 69%, as well as for nylon

ester, 30% acrylic, 7% nylon, 3% other fibres, 2% wool’, and dress #9: ‘50% rayon,

and spandex.

36% polyester, 12% linen, 2% other fibres’. In addition to drawing attention to the complexity of textile blends the brand uses, this highlights a lack of transparency,

Synthetic blends are common for the brand. For example, in the male hoodies/sweatshirts category, 28 out of 30 items used synthetics, and each garment contained an average of 44% synthetics per item. Similarly, in the female category, only 3 out of 30 items consisted of 100% cotton; 26 out of 30 were cotton and polyester blends. Like Walmart, the American brand uses significantly more synthetics in kidswear than European retailers. Out of 30 (80%) items in this category, 24 contained syn-

which could be misleading to consumers.

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

|

42

Greenwashing alert % OF TOTAL GARMENTS THAT USED SYNTHETICS

39%

AVERAGE COMPOSITION OF GARMENTS CONTAINING POLYESTER

2% 69%

31%

59% SYNTHETICS

OTHER MATERIALS

RECYCLED SYNTHETICS

Among George at Asda products portrayed as having ‘sustainable credentials’ is a Khaki Short Sleeve Shirt, consisting of 98% cotton and 2% Elastane. It’s unclear where this cotton is from, and blending it with synthetic material reduces its end-of-life options. As per CMA guidelines, providing inaccurate information or not substantiating claims

POLYESTER

OTHER MATERIALS

is misleading to consumers; in this case, the ‘sustainable credentials’ are not properly backed up, and there is not enough evidence to justify the claim.

3.6

George at Asda

Another product – the G21 Beige Wide Leg Knit – has a fabric composition of 53% viscose, 29% polyester and 18% polyamide, and claims to contain recycled polyester from plastic bottles. It’s unclear, in this product, what percentage of the material is actually

Across the products analysed, 65% contained synthetics. The average amount of syn-

made out of recycled polyester.

thetic fibre per garment was 65%, and the average amount of polyester was 69% per garment. George at Asda has the fourth-lowest usage of synthetics across the brands analysed, but is still just below the average of 67%.

As with other brands, jackets/ coats are the repeat worst of-

While the retailer has clearly made demonstrable efforts to source more ‘sustainable’

fenders; George at Asda appears

materials, there is a substantial gap between the sustainability claims it makes and the

male jacket category has some

certifications or third-party standards used to substantiate these. For example, 63% of

of the highest incidences of syn-

the dress category has some form of sustainability claim relating to viscose or recycled

thetics across the study. While

polyester, yet none are supported by certifications. This differs significantly from Zara,

there were fewer products in the

which has worked to publish certifications on each product page.

category to analyse – 13 instead of 30 – 10 of those 13 items con-

Much like ASOS, M&S and Zalando, George at Asda uses BCI cotton as a sustainability

tained polyester, with an average

prop – despite BCI cotton not guaranteeing safe and fair working conditions, and despite

of 100% polyester.

the fibre’s lack of traceability across the supply chain.

Figure 3.5: Shirt included in George at Asda’s ‘sustainable’ range; there is no indication, on the product page, of whether the cotton is responsibly sourced

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

|

43

Dresses by George at Asda incurred the lowest incidence of synthetics for the brand. This is explained by the fact that 17 of the 30 dresses used 100% viscose. The items

% OF TOTAL GARMENTS THAT USED SYNTHETICS

that did contain synthetics had a high average synthetic content (91%), and only 33% of the category contained polyester. This differs from ASOS’s main collection

1%

68%

(whose dresses contain 83% synthetic content) or Walmart’s (67%).

AVERAGE COMPOSITION OF GARMENTS CONTAINING POLYESTER

34%

66%

POLYESTER

OTHER MATERIALS

31% SYNTHETICS

3.7

OTHER MATERIALS

RECYCLED SYNTHETICS

Gucci

Gucci was one of two luxury brands assessed in the research. Of the Gucci products assessed, 32% contained synthetics – the lowest of all brands. Only 13% of these items contained polyester, at an average of 34% per garment; 1% of these items contained recycled synthetics. Gucci seems to have made significant steps towards sustainable sourcing and reducing synthetic fibres in its garments. The collection uses organic silk and cotton as well as recycled synthetics, such as recycled polyamide and Econyl, made from recycled nylon. All items analysed bear the ‘responsible’ tag, which states: ‘Gucci guarantees—both internally and along its entire supply chain—that internationally recognized social and environmental responsibility standards are respected and consistent with the company’s own commitment to the ethical and sustainable management of its operations’. Additionally, Gucci includes an ‘eco-features’ tag on some items containing recycled or organic materials, which states: ‘In line with the House’s vision for responsibly Figure 3.6: George at Asda trousers containing recycled polyester, but with no indication of how much

sourced materials and/or sustainable production, Gucci promotes the use of alterna-

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

|

44

tive materials for lower environmental impact such as recycled, regenerated, organic

Gucci is the only organisation in the study that uses language to encourage the

or bio-based materials and emphasizes circular manufacturing processes.’ However,

uptake of seasonless and timeless designs. For example, the description of a plain

beyond a short explanation for what is meant by organic silk, cotton or responsible

white male shirt reads: ‘A message about leaving fashion’s old rules behind, the Ep-

viscose, neither third-party verification nor specific standards or certification are

ilogue collection conveys the idea that pieces should be timeless–not just in fashion

given on the product page to back up these assertions.

for one season’. As highlighted in the Key Findings section of this report, Gucci uses significantly

Greenwashing alert

fewer synthetic fibres than Louis Vuitton; for example, only one of 30 male shirts contained synthetics. This is in clear contrast to fast-fashion retailers like Boohoo; 97% of Boohoo’s male jackets contain synthetics, compared with just 3% of Guc-

Among Gucci’s products tagged as ‘responsible’ is a short lamé dress, consisting

ci’s. There is a clear focus on the use of monofibre garments, such as 100% silk,

of 47% cotton, 33% Polyester, 16% Metallised Fiber, 4% Polyamide; Lining: 73%

100% cotton and 100% wool. There is also a preference for using viscose or silk for

Acetate, 27% silk – an incredible stew of fibres, making the garment impossible

lining, as opposed to virgin synthetics like polyester. Fabric blend overcomplexity

to recycle. With a high amount of synthetic fibres present, it’s unclear what about

occurs less frequently than in Louis Vuitton collections; however, it is still present

this product is particularly ‘responsible’. As per CMA guidelines, providing inaccu-

and problematic.

rate information or not substantiating claims is misleading to consumers; in this case, the ‘responsible’ tag and its description do not provide enough evidence to substantiate the claim.

% OF TOTAL GARMENTS THAT USED SYNTHETICS

AVERAGE COMPOSITION OF GARMENTS CONTAINING POLYESTER

2%

MAIN COLLECTION

28%

39%

68% 32% 59% MAIN COLLECTION SYNTHETICS

3.8

48% CONSCIOUS COLLECTION

OTHER MATERIALS

RECYCLED SYNTHETICS

32%

CONSCIOUS COLLECTION

61% POLYESTER

39% OTHER MATERIALS

H&M

Across the products analysed, nearly two-thirds (65%) contained synthetics, with 54% containing polyester. For H&M’s Conscious Collection, nearly three-quarters

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

(72%) had a synthetic composition – over 10% more than the main collection

|

45

Greenwashing alert

– and 57% contained polyester. Of the items containing synthetics, 32% used recycled synthetic content. The average amount of synthetic fibre per garment was 56%, and the average amount of polyester was 61%. Sustainability

A Conscious Collection dress is listed as

claims were made for 42% of all products analysed, but 96% were found to

containing ‘Polyester 52%, Polyamide

be in breach of CMA guidelines – the highest in the study.

20%, Viscose 15%, Cotton 10%, Wool 3%’ – a heady blend of fibres, totalling

H&M makes a big deal of its Conscious Collection. To qualify for that collec-

72% total synthetics. And yet, in addi-

tion, ‘a product must contain at least 50% sustainable materials, such as organic

tion to the end-of-life complexity en-

cotton and recycled polyester’.91 However, little further information is given as

tailed in such a blend, there is no further

to what qualifies as a ‘sustainable material’. Recycled polyester is the main

indication of what makes this product

reason why H&M’s Conscious Collection has a higher percentage of synthetics

‘conscious’ at all. Another Conscious

than its main collection; given that recycled polyester representing a one-way

Collection pair of trousers is, surpris-

street to landfill or incineration, it is hard to see how this material makes a

ingly, made up of no less than 100%

product more ‘conscious’ or ‘sustainable’. Furthermore, some product pages

polyester, none of which is claimed to

contain no information on recycled feedstock, and organic and recycled ma-

be recycled – even though, to qualify for

terials are not support-

the Conscious Collection, an item must

ed by any third-party

have at least 50% recycled content.

Figure 3.9: An H&M coat included in the Conscious Collection despite being 100% synthetic

certification. Unlike Zara, H&M does not

Another item, a 100% polyester trench coat, states that it uses the ‘We aRe SpinDye’ meth-

publish the country

od using ‘recycled and recyclable polyester’ - yet as fibre-to-fibre recycling technology is

of origin, or provide

still more myth than reality, with only 0.06% of all materials coming from post-consumer

clickable links through

textile waste,92 and with no information about how H&M’s clothes are used in its takeback

to any sustainable

scheme, this appears to be an empty promise.

supply-chain policies. H&M is clearly misleading consumers by placing such items into the Conscious Collection and seems to be using the sustainability cachet to assuage consumers’ guilt and sell 100% synthetic clothes. Both these and many other products in this collection flout CMA guideFigure 3.8: H&M’s highly blended rib knit dress

lines on sustainability claims.

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

|

46

For H&M’s female hoodies and sweatshirts, polyester appeared in 97% of the sample, with the average polyester content at 41%. This reflects H&M’s tendency to use a blend of 60% cotton and 40% polyester in loungewear items, including sweatpants. Many brands, including ASOS and M&S, also use this material composition for their loungewear.

% OF TOTAL GARMENTS THAT USED SYNTHETICS

AVERAGE COMPOSITION OF GARMENTS CONTAINING POLYESTER

45%

55%

Design collaboration with Simone Rocha – who is a keen promoter of sustainability, and gave this as a reason why she was excited to work with H&M93 – represented a

SYNTHETICS

OTHER MATERIALS

38%

62%

POLYESTER

OTHER MATERIALS

missed opportunity to use more sustainable fibres. Instead, a combination of virgin synthetic tulle and mesh appear in the majority of H&M’s designs and decorations. For example, a dress in the main collection consists of: ‘Lining: 60% Acetate, 40%

3.9

Louis Vuitton

Viscose, Shell: Acetate 39%, Polyamide 32%, Silk 29% and Mesh: Polyester 100%’ – both a problematic blend and high percentages of synthetic fibre. Luxury brand Louis Vuitton came in as the second-lowest user of synthetics – but, As with other retailers, jackets/coats continue to be problematic for their high

with 55% of its products containing synthetics, used 23% more than Gucci, and just

incidence of synthetics. In H&M’s main collection, 27 out of 30 jackets/coasts con-

2% lower than Zara. This indicates that a higher price point does not necessarily

tained polyester, and the average polyester content was extremely high: 90%. This

lead to higher usage of natural or responsibly sourced materials. Of its synthetic

is partly explained by the presence of numerous faux-leather items, which contain:

items, 21% contained polyester and none containing recycled synthetics. The av-

‘Coating: Polyurethane 100% Lining: Polyester 100% Shell: Polyester 100%’. It is also

erage percentage of synthetic fibres used in each individual garment was 45%, and

caused by the prevalence of synthetic sports and puffer jackets, an example of which

the average percentage of polyester used was 38%.

comprises: ‘Shell: Polyester 100%, Lining, Polyester 100%, Padding: Polyester 100%, Hood lining: Polyester 100%’.

Louis Vuitton’s collection reveals that luxury is not always synonymous with sustainability or quality. Its relatively heavy use of synthetics and complex blended

H&M has also branded specific virgin synthetic items, like fitted male shirts, as

materials underscores this. From the sample collected, no sustainability claims

COOLMAX®. This is a ‘functional fabric, a unique, soft, comfortable and fast-dry-

were made on product pages, no certifications were featured and no recycled syn-

ing polyester fibre that efficiently wicks moisture while regulating temperature’. This

thetics were used.

celebration of virgin synthetics is similar to M&S Stormwear™ and Cashmilon™.

Changing Markets © 2023 all right reserved

Synthetics Anonymous: Fashion Brands’ addiction to fossil fuels | What are brands doing in practice? A brand analysis of Spring/Summer 2021 clothing collections

|

47

Hybrid horror

Unlike luxury fashion house Gucci, which uses some product descriptions to encourage timelessness and lack of seasonality to designs, Louis Vuitton sells trend-led pieces of highly questionable material composition; for example, a clear plastic designer ‘lifejacket’ chimera, made from 100% ‘natural’ PVC. Aside from ‘natural’ PVC being nonexistent, the dangers of PVC should not be underestimated; it is deemed the most environmentally damaging material of all plastics. PVC production facilities not only generate hazardous chlorinated waste – which leaks into water streams – but also contain toxic additives, like phthalates, which can negatively impact wildlife and humans.94 Phthalates have been linked to asthma, cancer, altered reproductive development and fertility issues.95