Search

Fashion’s Footprint In Our Forests

We are an online community created around a smart and easy to access information hub which is focused on providing proven global and local insights about sustainability

26 Jul, 2024

This post was originally published on Good on You

The link between forests and fashion hasn’t often been at the fore of sustainability discussions, but recent reports of intensive deforestation for material production are changing that. Here, we explore some of the sector’s key drivers of deforestation.

 

The hidden impact of material production on our forests

It’s not immediately obvious how fashion impacts our forests—or at least not as clear as the effects of, say, agriculture—which makes it easy for brands and organisations to hide behind opaque supply chains and the absence of consumer demand for improvement in comparison to more prominent sustainability issues like recycling or animal welfare. But many of the raw materials we rely on in fashion come from plants or their pulps, meaning that fashion and forests are intrinsically linked.

Materials such as viscose, lyocell, and natural rubber are derived from trees, so it’s easier to understand how they could have an impact—more on that later—but other kinds of material production cause deforestation, too. Both cotton and leather, for instance, are major drivers of land clearing for plantations and cattle grazing in forests—including in the Amazon. In fact, The Fashion Pact suggests that “the majority of fashion materials are sourced in or near areas of deforestation.”

 

Clearing trees to make way for fast fashion

In April 2024, NGO Earthsight revealed the results of a year-long investigation into cotton production in Brazil’s Cerrado region—a highly biodiverse area where deforestation rose by 43% in 2023. The report showed that illegal deforestation, land grabbing and violence related to cotton production are rife, and suppliers to H&M and Inditex exported a huge portion of the “tainted cotton”. “While we all know what soy and beef have done to Brazil’s forests, cotton’s impact has gone largely unnoticed. Yet the crop has boomed in recent decades and become an environmental disaster,” said Earthsight director Sam Lawson.

The reason cotton production has become more lucrative in recent decades is thanks in part to fast fashion and overconsumption. We buy more clothes than ever, and those materials have to come from somewhere—the WWF estimates that half of all textiles are made from cotton. As the demand for the crop increases, so does the incentive to clear land for growing it—even illegally.

What happens when land is cleared for monocultures

When land is cleared to make way for plantations—whether for cotton growing or trees in man-made cellulosic fibre production—forests rich with varieties of plants and all kinds of creatures are replaced with rows and rows of a single plant or tree species, which is grown as quickly as possible to be used in material production. These are called monocultures, and they’re bad news for biodiversity.

This form of mass agriculture that caters to mass consumption leads to soil erosion and encourages the use of harmful pesticides to protect the vast swathe of a single plant species that is vulnerable to insects. As native species’ natural habitats are taken away, there is nowhere for them to thrive, and biodiversity is severely decreased on monocultured land.

When those forests are ancient, the impact is even worse, as environmental organisation Canopy explains: “Systems that have been in place for hundreds or thousands of years are disrupted and this causes a ripple effect that impacts flora and fauna, and even the mineral content in the soil and the flow of rivers and streams. In some cases, it can lead to a dramatic loss of biodiversity and abundance of wildlife, and even to the local extinction of threatened species. It can also displace people who call the forest home and depend on its plants and animals for sustenance and livelihoods.”

 

The role of man-made cellulosic fibres in deforestation

Man-made cellulosic fibres (MMCFs) such as viscose, lyocell, and modal are made from dissolved wood pulp which means that they rely on trees for their raw material—so much so that Canopy estimates around 300 million trees are cut down annually to make MMCFs for fashion apparel.

The impact of that demand is worrying: Fashion for Good suggests that around 30% of wood for viscose is sourced from endangered forests, and a 2023 report by Greenpeace highlighted links between one of the world’s largest pulp companies and the deforestation of tropical rainforests where endangered species live, including the Bornean orangutan. Meanwhile, there’s also evidence that Indigenous communities’ land is being destroyed or degraded by monocultured plantations for wood pulp, and that “water and soil pollution from chemicals used in plantation forests and during pulp processing drive habitat loss and endanger species, unless the process is 100 percent closed loop,” as stated by McKinsey.

 

How leather contributes to forest degradation

Many leather producers have long held the claim that because leather is a by-product of the meat industry, they have no influence over cattle rearing—or how forests in places like Brazil and the Amazon are transformed into pastures to make way for animal grazing. But this isn’t entirely true, because leather is now a significant source of profit and has become a co-product (or, a desirable secondary good). That means tanneries, suppliers and brands could use their purchasing power to influence cattle rearing and its links to deforestation.

The leather industry has one of the most well-known links between fashion and deforestation, and according to Textile Exchange, brands are coming under increasing consumer pressure to guarantee their leather is deforestation-free. Despite that, “brands are finding it challenging to engage with their suppliers and map their supply chains far enough to identify their raw material sources, let alone to take action.” This ongoing challenge was demonstrated in The Guardian’s 2021 report that at least 50 brands, including Zara and Nike, had supply chain links to a leather exporter known to engage in Amazon deforestation through what it claimed were indirect suppliers. It only highlights the urgent need for full transparency across the entire supply chain.

 

What is the industry doing to stop deforestation?

It’s easy to read all this and feel at a loss for what to do about such a large-scale issue. But there are people and organisations working to improve the situation.

Good On You’s ratings take deforestation into account, and our analysts consider the steps brands are taking to avoid or minimise deforestation from the use of fabrics associated with it, including leather, rubber, metal, precious stones, and MMCFs. We also expect brands to have a policy for all at-risk fibres, with clear strategies for implementation.

Elsewhere in the industry, Textile Exchange and the Leather Working Group have partnered to create the Deforestation-Free Call to Action for Leather, which asks brands to commit to sourcing their bovine leather from deforestation and land conversion-free supply chains by 2030 or earlier. The programme also calls on brands to commit to respecting human rights along the leather supply chain, including those of Indigenous and local communities.

Canopy, meanwhile, focuses on endangered species and disappearing forests, and it launched the CanopyStyle campaign to engage with brands on these issues. The programme also looks to promote and develop next-generation solutions for MMCF production without wood pulp, such as textile and agricultural waste. Canopy also produces The Hot Button Report, which holds the world’s viscose producers to account by ranking their progress on eliminating wood from ancient and endangered forests from their supply chains, and how they are innovating and engaging in conservation.

The bottom line is that we need healthy forests for a healthy planet. They absorb billions of metric tons of carbon dioxide, are vital in supporting biodiversity, and help to regulate rainfall, to name just a few important factors. That’s why it’s so important for brands and supply chain stakeholders to take responsibility for their impacts, work to reduce them, and be transparent about their practices.

The post Fashion’s Footprint In Our Forests appeared first on Good On You.

Pass over the stars to rate this post. Your opinion is always welcome.
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

You may also like…

3 Questions To Help You Avoid the Black Friday Hype

3 Questions To Help You Avoid the Black Friday Hype

On 29th November, the world will once again fall under the Black Friday spell. We want to help you avoid the hype and embrace a more conscious approach to consumerism. 3 questions to help you avoid the Black Friday hype Originally an American phenomenon, Black Friday and its online cousin Cyber Monday have since spread […]
The post 3 Questions To Help You Avoid the Black Friday Hype appeared first on Good On You.

Driving progress in clean energy

Driving progress in clean energy

The latest projections by the Department of Climate Change, Energy and Water discussed by Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen on 27 November highlight the transformative impact of critical policies starting in 2025 — including the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES) and an expanded Capacity Investment Scheme (CIS). These initiatives are set to accelerate Australia’s shift to cleaner energy, transport and industry, with the NVES projected to slash 20 million tonnes of pollution by 2030 alone.

Renewables powered more than one-third of Australia’s grid over the past year. Major projects — like the 700-megawatt battery replacing Eraring’s retired coal-fired power station set to be the largest in the Southern Hemisphere, and Victoria’s 100% publicly owned solar farm and battery near Horsham — coming online can help cut climate pollution further.

Climate Councillor and energy expert Greg Bourne said: “Renewable energy has already made up about 40% of electricity in the national grid in the past 12 months. The Australian Energy Regulator, the Australian Energy Market Operator and the International Energy Agency have outlined our safest, cleanest and lowest-cost path forward: renewables from the sun and wind, backed by storage like batteries and pumped hydro.

“All of our aging and unreliable coal-fired power stations will shut down before 2040; it’s inevitable and already in motion. We need to be firming up plans to power Australia with more clean energy to power our lives around the clock, keep our communities safer, and put power back into the hands of Aussies.”

Climate Council CEO Amanda McKenzie said: “Significant progress on climate action has been made in the last two years. Australian homes and industry [are] now powered with 40% renewable power which is slashing climate pollution.

“Australia’s shift to clean energy is well underway. Just this month, Australia hit its four millionth rooftop solar installation and the federal government introduced standards to help electric vehicle owners use their car to power their homes.

“Businesses are taking note and going solar. More than 100,000 households have added a battery to their solar system. Our heavy industries are increasingly using energy from clean sources and boosting their green hydrogen capacity. Australia has more than 160,000 electric vehicles registered domestically.

“These solutions are making a tangible difference right now to slash Australia’s climate pollution. After a decade of inaction, Australia has strong momentum with Australians benefiting from renewables jobs and opportunities opening up in the regions. Renewable power backed up by batteries can provide the 24/7 power for a modern economy for 2030 and beyond.”

The Climate Council recently launched its Momentum Monitor, which tracks the progress of climate solutions in Australia’s energy, transport and manufacturing industries. Data in the Momentum Monitor will be updated quarterly.

Image credit: iStock.com/Alones Creative

NSW initiative tackles food waste at the source

NSW initiative tackles food waste at the source

With approximately 1.7 million tonnes of food waste sent to landfill in NSW each year, 100 of the state’s food businesses will be taking part in an initiative that aims to tackle the problem at its source.

Not-for-profit social enterprise Green Connect has received funding from the NSW Environmental Protection Authority’s (EPA) Business Food Waste Partnership Grants program to launch the project, in which it will partner with businesses including venues in Mirvac shopping centres and the University of Wollongong.

Food waste drains about $36.6 billion from the Australian economy annually and generates 3% of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions.1 The NSW Government has made food waste management a priority, setting government targets to halve the amount of organic waste sent to landfill by 2030.

Green Connect’s Zero Waste team aims to use insights from its project to create a scalable education model for businesses across NSW.

“With 17.5 million tonnes of CO2-e generated from the production and disposal of wasted food in Australia every year, our mission is clear,” said Robert Servine, Green Connect General Manager.

“Through partnerships with NSW businesses and organisations, we’re taking positive steps to reduce food waste and protect our planet while supporting meaningful employment opportunities in our community.”

Sarah Clarke, Mirvac Group General Manager, Sustainability, added, “We’re proud to work with Green Connect towards our goal of zero waste to landfill by 2030. By helping our food vendors to reduce waste, we’re making real change together.”

For more information, visit: green-connect.com.au/zero-waste-services.

1. https://www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/protection/waste/food-waste

Images courtesy of Green Connect.

0 Comments