Search

Nearly 25% of Major Fashion Brands Lack a Decarbonization Plan, Report Finds

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

05 Aug, 2024

This post was originally published on Eco Watch

A new report by Fashion Revolution — What Fuels Fashion? 2024 Edition — has found that nearly a quarter of the biggest fashion brands in the world — like DKNY, Tom Ford and Reebok — have no public decarbonization plan.

The report also revealed the brands lacked transparency in several important areas.

“Nearly a quarter of the world’s biggest fashion brands disclose nothing on decarbonisation, signifying that the climate crisis is not a priority for them,” a press release from Fashion Revolution said.

The fashion industry can be highly polluting, wasteful and destructive to the environment. It is responsible for up to 10 percent of greenhouse gas emissions globally — more than international flights and shipping combined. Left unchecked, its emissions could grow to more than twice that amount.

Fashion is the second-largest consumer of water on the planet, and its polluting wastewater is frequently discharged into rivers and streams.

Nearly all textiles — 85 percent — end up in landfills or the incinerator, creating a colorful pile of microplastic– and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)-laden waste.

The new report ranked and analyzed 250 of the largest fashion brands and retailers on the planet — those who make $400 million or more — based on the public disclosure of their actions and goals on climate, reported The Guardian.

The researchers looked at 70 separate sustainability criteria, including emissions targets, whether fashion companies used renewable energy to power their facilities and supply chain transparency, in order to come up with a decarbonization score.

The average score of the brands examined in the report was 18 percent, with 13 percent of major brands scoring a zero rating, the press release said. The highest score for 2024 was 75 percent.

According to Fashion Revolution, less than half of the brands disclosed a Science Based Targets Initiative that covered the whole value chain.

The majority of companies — 86 percent — are without a public phase-out target for coal, 94 percent do not have a public renewable energy goal and 92 percent lack a renewable electricity objective for their supply chains.

Just 43 percent of brands practice transparency regarding the procurement of energy for their operations, with even fewer — 10 percent — doing so at the supply chain level.

“Additionally, no major fashion brand discloses hourly matched supply chain electricity use. As a result, big fashion’s zero-emissions claims may be disconnected from grid realities, creating a false sense of progress against climate targets,” Fashion Revolution said. “The fashion industry wants to have its cake and eat it too. Most big fashion brands (89%) do not disclose how many clothes they make annually. Alarmingly, nearly half (45%) fail to disclose neither how much they make nor the raw material emissions footprint of what is produced, signalling the industry prioritises resource exploitation whilst avoiding accountability for environmental harms linked to production.”

Tom Ford, DKNY and Reebok all earned a zero percent decarbonization rating in the report, since they had failed to demonstrate how they would eliminate supply chain emissions, The Guardian reported. Dolce & Gabbana and Urban Outfitters were near the bottom as well, both scoring three percent.

The three highest-scoring brands were H&M with a 61 percent rating, Gucci with 74 percent and Puma with 75 percent.

Just four of the brands met the targets for emissions reductions set by the United Nations.

Not only did many brands get low sustainability scores, just 117 of them had decarbonization targets at all. And 42 of those reported an increase in their value chain emissions in comparison with their baseline year.

The authors of the report called on companies to protect textile workers who were frequently being paid poverty-line wages.

“A transformation on the scale necessary to stop climate change often implies losses of jobs and livelihoods, which is why we advocate for a just transition that ensures the people who make our clothes aren’t left behind,” the press release said. “But as fashion races to reach net zero, our report finds that brands aren’t providing sufficient support for their workers. The majority (96%) of the world’s largest fashion brands haven’t publicly committed to a Just Transition strategy and only 4% of brands disclose their efforts to retain and re- and/or up-skill supply chain workers whose jobs are at risk.”

Additionally, the report found that just three percent of the biggest fashion companies disclosed their efforts to provide financial support to workers who experienced impacts of the climate crisis.

“By investing at least 2% of their revenue into clean, renewable energy and upskilling and supporting workers, fashion could simultaneously curb the impacts of the climate crisis and reduce poverty and inequality within their supply chains. Climate breakdown is avoidable because we have the solution – and big fashion can certainly afford it,” said Maeve Galvin, Fashion Revolution’s director of global policy and campaigns, as reported by The Guardian.

The post Nearly 25% of Major Fashion Brands Lack a Decarbonization Plan, Report Finds appeared first on EcoWatch.

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

You may also like…

Taking the electronic pulse of the circular economy

Taking the electronic pulse of the circular economy

In June, I had the privilege of attending the 2025 E-Waste World, Battery Recycling, Metal Recycling, and ITAD & Circular Electronics Conference & Expo events in Frankfurt, Germany.

Speaking in the ITAD & Circular Electronics track on a panel with global Circular Economy leaders from Foxway Group, ERI and HP, we explored the evolving role of IT asset disposition (ITAD) and opportunities in the circular electronics economy.

The event’s focus on advancing circular economy goals and reducing environmental impact delivered a series of insights and learnings. From this assembly of international expertise across 75+ countries, here are some points from the presentations that stood out for me:

1. Environmental impact of the digital economy

Digitalisation has a heavy material footprint in the production phase, and lifecycle thinking needs to guide every product decision. Consider that 81% of the energy a laptop uses in its lifetime is consumed during manufacture (1 tonne in manufacture is equal to 10,000 tonnes of CO2) and laptops are typically refreshed or replaced by companies every 3–4 years.

From 2018 to 2023, the average number of devices and connections per capita in the world increased by 50% (2.4 to 3.6). In North America (8.2 to 13.4) and Western Europe (5.6 to 9.4), this almost doubled. In 1960, only 10 periodic table elements were used to make phones. In 1990, 27 elements were used and now over 60 elements are used to build the smartphones that we have become so reliant on.

A key challenge is that low-carbon and digital technologies largely compete for the same minerals. Material resource extraction could increase 60% between 2020 and 2060, while demand for lithium, cobalt and graphite is expected to rise by 500% until 2050.

High growth in ICT demand and Internet requires more attention to the environmental footprint of the digital economy. Energy consumption of data centres is expected to more than double by 2026. The electronics industry accounts for over 4% of global GHG — and digitalisation-related waste is growing, with skewed impacts on developing countries.

E-waste is rising five times faster than recycling — 1 tonne of e-waste has a carbon footprint of 2 tonnes. Today’s solution? ‘Bury it or burn it.’ In terms of spent emissions, waste and the costs associated with end-of-life liabilities, PCBAs (printed circuit board assembly) cost us enormously — they generally achieve 3–5% recyclability (75% of CO2 in PCBAs is from components).

2. Regulating circularity in electronics

There is good momentum across jurisdictions in right-to-repair, design and labelling regulations; recycling targets; and voluntary frameworks on circularity and eco-design.

The EU is at the forefront. EU legislation is lifting the ICT aftermarket, providing new opportunities for IT asset disposition (ITAD) businesses. To get a sense, the global market for electronics recycling is estimated to grow from $37 billion to $108 billion (2022–2030). The value of refurbished electronics is estimated to increase from $85.9 billion to $262.2 billion (2022–2032). Strikingly, 40% of companies do not have a formal ITAD strategy in place.

Significantly, the EU is rethinking its Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) management targets, aligned with upcoming circularity and WEEE legislation, as part of efforts to foster the circular economy. A more robust and realistic circularity-driven approach to setting collection targets would better reflect various factors including long lifespans of electronic products and market fluctuations.

Australia and New Zealand lag the EU’s comprehensive e-waste mandated frameworks. The lack of a systematic approach results in environmental degradation and missed positioning opportunities for businesses in the circular economy. While Australia’s Senate inquiry into waste reduction and recycling recommended legislating a full circular economy framework — including for imported and local product design, financial incentives and regulatory enforcement, New Zealand remains the only OECD country without a national scheme to manage e-waste.

3. Extending product lifecycles

Along with data security and digital tools, reuse was a key theme in the ITAD & Circular Electronics track of the conference. The sustainable tech company that I lead, Greenbox, recognises that reuse is the simplest circular strategy. Devices that are still functional undergo refurbishment and are reintroduced into the market, reducing new production need and conserving valuable resources.

Conference presenters highlighted how repair over replacement is being legislated as a right in jurisdictions around the world. Resources are saved, costs are lowered, product life is extended, and people and organisations are empowered to support a greener future. It was pointed out that just 43% of countries have recycling policies, 17% of global waste is formally recycled, and less than 1% of global e-waste is formally repaired and reused.

Right to repair is a rising wave in the circular economy, and legislation is one way that civil society is pushing back on programmed obsolescence. Its global momentum continues at different speeds for different product categories — from the recent EU mandates to multiple US state bills (and some laws) through to repair and reuse steps in India, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

The European Commission’s Joint Research Commission has done a scoping study to identify product groups under the Ecodesign framework that would be most relevant for implementing an EU-wide product reparability scoring system.

Attending this event with the entire electronic waste recycling supply chain — from peers and partners to suppliers and customers — underscored the importance of sharing best practices to address the environmental challenges that increased hardware proliferation and complex related issues are having on the world.

Ross Thompson is Group CEO of sustainability, data management and technology asset lifecycle management market leader Greenbox. With facilities in Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Canberra, Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch, Greenbox Group provides customers all over the world a carbon-neutral supply chain for IT equipment to reduce their carbon footprint by actively managing their environmental, social and governance obligations.

Image credit: iStock.com/Mustafa Ovec

Renewables Helped Prevent Blackouts on New England’s Hottest Day This Summer

Renewables Helped Prevent Blackouts on New England’s Hottest Day This Summer

Renewable energy sources, such as solar power and battery storage, have helped keep power on in New England, even during peak demand on the hottest day of summer. According to a recent report from the nonprofit Acadia Center, more than 5 gigawatts of behind-the-meter solar provided additional support during peak demand times, despite the temperature […]
The post Renewables Helped Prevent Blackouts on New England’s Hottest Day This Summer appeared first on EcoWatch.

0 Comments