With its formidable growth, e-commerce has revolutionized our purchasing habits, but the convenience of a click hides a significant environmental impact, especially when it comes to returning what we have bought. The phenomenon of compulsive returns, in particular, is forcing companies and consumers to reconsider their choices.

What is vegan fashion? Simply, fashion made of clothes and accessories produced without harming animals, using materials and processes that do not endanger their health and lives. Basically, an item of clothing, a bag, a pair of shoes… can be called vegan if it is made without any use of wool, silk, leather or fur.

The Environmental Impact of Returns

According to the Global Web Index, people aged 25 to 44 who have returned purchased items within a year are approximately 70%.
Due to returns, in the United States alone, the e-commerce sector generates approximately 5 billion kilograms of waste and 15 million tons of CO₂ emissions annually. Globally, the cycle of compulsive purchasing and returning, incentivized by the free return option, has an even more devastating impact, especially due to reasons related to packaging and transportation.

Other recent studies tell us that transportation contributes to 15% of e-commerce greenhouse gas emissions, while packaging accounts for as much as 75% of emissions. The average return rate stands at 14%, but for major e-commerce players, it can reach up to 50%, with an associated environmental impact equivalent to 9% of greenhouse gas emissions per purchase order.

In terms of sectors, the clothing industry performs the worst: a McKinsey survey conducted just before the pandemic revealed a return rate of 25% for clothing on e-commerce channels compared to the overall 20%.

The serial returners

Free returns have given rise to a new category of consumers: serial returners, who intentionally buy more than they want to keep. According to analogous surveys by Barclayscard and Narvar, the percentage ranges from around 30% to 40% of online shoppers. Some customers choose different versions of the same product – mostly colors and sizes – to comfortably choose at home and then return what doesn’t convince them.

Within this category, but with their own characteristics, are wardrobers – who buy a garment with the intention of wearing it for an evening and returning it the next day – and social media wardrobers: influencers or aspiring ones who buy clothes and accessories to match and show off on social media with the hashtag #OOTD (outfit of the day).

Amazon and Others

Amazon, the e-commerce giant founded by Jeff Bezos, has introduced free return policies that have contributed to normalizing compulsive return behavior among consumers, including types of returns not due to any product defect or sizing error but simply because the customer changed their mind.

According to the American National Retail Federation, in 2022, customers returned approximately 17% of merchandise purchased on Amazon, totaling $816 billion. However, as we have seen, the convenience of free returns has enormous environmental costs.

To get a clearer idea, you can follow step-by-step the journey of, for example, a T-shirt from the moment of purchase.
The process begins with packaging and shipping the item from the warehouse to the distribution center, through trucks or planes that produce polluting gases. Once the package is received, if the item does not meet the consumer’s expectations, it can be returned even without objective reasons.

The T-shirt then returns to the warehouse, the package is unpacked and inspected. Even if the garment is intact and unused, it cannot be resold as new, so the options are basically reduced to two: the retailer returns it to the supplier for a fee, or it is disposed of, a very common option because the same computer system suggests it as the cheapest. McKinsey also tells us that 10% of fashion items – particularly women’s clothing and shoes – end up in landfills.

Amazon informs that it has introduced much more sustainable return management policies: when a product cannot be resold, the priority is to donate it, otherwise, recycling is considered. Incineration? Only in extreme cases.
Other major names like Zara, H&M, J.Crew, Anthropologie, Abercrombie & Fitch are also backtracking on free returns. The reasons are not only ethical: according to the Wall Street Journal, the companies involved lose at least 50% of the margin on returns in expenses for transportation, storage, checks, potential laundering, and packaging.
A recent report from the British Fashion Council calculated the cost of returns in 2022 for the fashion e-commerce sector at £7 billion. A significant loss of profit, considering that about half of the returned items are resold at a 40% discount, as well as an excellent reason to encourage brands to review their policies starting by charging customers part of the return management costs due to wrong online purchases. In the UK, this return fee is £1.95, while in Australia, it is around $8.

Solutions and Best Practices

According to Statista, in 2026, sales in the e-commerce sector will globally grow to $8.148 trillion worldwide (in 2014, they were just over $1 billion). From these numbers, it is evident that not even a giant like Amazon alone can make a difference. A multi-level intervention involving consumers, sellers, authorities, and civil society is needed.

Consumers need to be educated about the damages of compulsive free returns, encouraged to make more conscious purchases, and to translate their good intentions into consistent behaviors.
Sellers, for their part, should limit or eliminate free returns, provide accurate information about products, and adopt measures to prevent and limit return cases: for clothing, for example, high-quality photos and videos capable of “capturing” details, customer reviews, and indications on the fit of models seem to produce encouraging results.

And then there is the new frontier of virtual fitting rooms, a market for which growth is predicted to reach almost $15 billion by 2029: 3D avatars capable of digitally representing our bodies will allow us to try on clothes and accessories before going to the checkout.

Last but not least, generative artificial intelligence. Systems like Zalando’s Fashion Assistant, for example, open up to interaction with the virtual store: customers can chat with the sales assistant just as they would in a physical store, using their own words to ask targeted questions and receive useful suggestions to finalize their purchase, but in a conscious manner!

Similar logic applies to Levi’s Virtual Stylist, a chatbot developed to enhance the online shopping experience and better manage inventory by modulating availability based on demand. Available both on the brand’s website and on Facebook, the Virtual Stylist “interviews” customers to understand their preferences for jeans and suggest the best models, also showing images of buyers wearing jeans with similar characteristics.

Each Doing Their Share

“Our commitment to supporting the fashion supply chain – explains Francesca Rulli, CEO of Process Factory and Ympact and creator of the 4sustainability system – is strongly focused on reducing the impact of the processes behind each garment: cutting water and energy consumption and atmospheric CO₂ emissions, eliminating toxic and harmful chemicals, increasing the percentage of recycled material, reusing production waste…
The consumer side perspective seems less focused. Dynamics such as those of returns in e-commerce, for example, show the inconsistency leading many purchasing choices, either without considering their impact or without being aware of it.
Brands should educate consumers to grow, encouraging more sustainable behaviors and revisiting policies that have clearly demonstrated their limitations, such as free returns.
However, consumers are also called to do their part. To grow in awareness, I suggest watching the docu-series Junk by Matteo Ward, focusing on the mountains of clothes in Ghana, Chile, Indonesia… Mostly fueled by ultra-fast fashion products, cheaper to throw away than to refurbish.”

L'articolo E-COMMERCE AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: MANAGING RETURNS proviene da 4sustainability.

Among the chemicals traditionally used in fashion production processes, PFAS or PFCs are often in the dock. Reducing the use of PFASs and other hazardous chemicals is not trivial, however, because it subjects companies to the continual search for the best possible trade-off between performance and sustainability. Important support comes from implementation protocols such as CHEM 4sustainability aimed at implementing a responsible Chemical Management system which also is aligned with best global methodologies such as ZDHC.

PFAS – also known by the old acronym PFCs – have been used for years as Durable Water Repellent (DWR) and that is, treatments for outdoor clothing, equipment and footwear that can repel water by waterproofing materials.

• Science proposes their elimination for a number of objective reasons. Here are a few.
• PFAS persist in the environment longer than any other man-made substance, dispersing through both water and air.
• Their release causes contamination of groundwater and consequently drinking water, and conventional water purification techniques are often ineffective.
• Some PFASs accumulate in living organisms and concentrations increase as we move up the food chain (biomagnification process).
• PFAS bind to proteins, “storing” in the blood or organs such as the liver.

The advantage and together the limitation of these poly- and per-fluorinated compounds, in essence, is the extreme strength of the alloy between carbon and fluorine that characterizes them and makes them effectively non-degradable. Because of their chemical structure, in other words, PFASs accumulate in the environment making contamination almost irreversible. What is more serious is that they enter the food chain with serious effects on human health, including

• Increased cholesterol levels
• Compromise of the immune system
• Increased risk of cancer
• Disruption of thyroid hormone
• Decreased effects of vaccination
• Impacts on weight of unborn children

Brands’ commitment on PFAS

The fashion response has been to fall back on shorter-structure compounds such as C6s, which are less persistent but still dangerous. We mention first and foremost the outdoor clothing companies that make extensive use of long structure PFASs, the most tenacious.

More responsible is the choice of those who are trying to abandon the use of PFAS altogether, investing time and resources in developing alternative materials and techniques. This is the case of Patagonia, a well-known American sports and outdoor clothing company, which has publicly committed to eliminating these compounds from its supply chain, communicating the progress it has made and also inviting consumers to support the change through more conscious purchasing behaviors.

The brand informs that waterproof garments for which a DWR treatment is not crucial – about 90% of the total – are already produced without the use of PFAS. That leaves 10% for which there is still no alternative solution, nothing at least that guarantees the performance which is essential for some specific sportswear. Patagonia correctly gives evidence of this, citing ongoing research to develop lower impact treatments.

Performance vs Sustainability

Dangers come not only from PFAS, of course. Every outfit we wear, every pair of shoes, every fashion accessory … is produced with extensive use of chemicals, which are not always harmless or sustainable. We have already mentioned the processes for waterproofing materials. But chemistry is also used to achieve color fastness or perform a long series of treatments.

Phthalates, for example, are used to give flexibility and softness to rubberized prints: in the long run, however, they can disrupt the body’s hormone balance when in contact with the skin. Chlorine – used to “bind” a great many dyes – and chromium, which is used to fix the color on the fabric, are known carcinogens. Formaldehyde is an eye and respiratory irritant gas used to fix pigments in the printing stage and also as a preservative in the packaging stage. Also strongly allergenic is nickel: watch out for dark or heavily colored jeans and garments because they are likely to contain significant amounts of it!

Do we ever stop to think, as consumers, about the consequences of the massive use of these substances? How much do factory discharges impact the sea we fish in or the rivers from which we draw water to irrigate our fields? And what damage does eating food from these fields cause to our health?

Regulations raise the bar on accountability

In recent years, regulatory authorities have been active on sustainable chemistry as never before, having as its primary goal the protection of human health, the environment and biodiversity. Let us cite, as an example, the 2021-2024 plan of the EPA – Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. federal agency for the protection of the environment and human health, which gives mandatory directions for:

• Investing in research and innovation to increase understanding of PFAS exposures and toxicity to human health and the environment, thus developing effective countermeasures and solutions.
• Pursuing a comprehensive and proactive approach suitable for preventing PFAS penetration levels in air, soil, and water from negatively impacting human health and the environment.
• Deepening and accelerate PFAS decontamination to protect human health and environmental ecosystems.
• Eliminating PFAS from all products by 2030.

Other initiatives aimed at totally eliminating PFAS from products and production processes:

• On Jan. 13, 2023, authorities from Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden submitted a proposal to ECHA, the European Chemicals Agency, to ban the entire PFAS class of chemicals, with the ban taking effect between 2026 and 2027.
• A group of more than 40 NGOs urged EU countries to ban PFAS in products such as food packaging, cosmetics and clothing by 2025 and in absolute terms by 2030.
• Canada already bans the production, use, sale and import of PFOS (specific subgroups of PFAS, ed.) and PFOS-containing products.
• Japan bans the import of several products containing PFOA-related substances, another type of PFAS. The list includes various textile products with water and oil repellent properties, water and oil repellent coating agents, and so on.

A responsible Chemical Management system

The self-conscious cynicism for which the fashion system has been responsible in the past is slowly but surely giving way to sustainability policies that often see brands and supply chains working together on shared goals. Among these is good chemistry, which involves the elimination of chemicals hazardous to health and the environment from the fashion industry’s production cycles. Those same substances that have been used extensively over the past fifty years because they are inexpensive and high performing.

On this front, the major global initiative is Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals (ZDHC), a working table that later became a Foundation joined by the major international fashion & luxury brands, the most advanced companies in the supply chain, chemical manufacturers, analytical laboratories, research organizations, associations and companies such as Process Factory that specialize in supporting the process of converting companies to good chemistry.

CHEM 4sustainability protocol

The case of Patagonia tells us how complex this process is to achieve with one’s own forces alone, due often to lack of knowledge, method, tools… This is the basis for the 4s CHEM protocol, the original core of the multidimensional 4sustainability implementation and assurance system that supports the transition to sustainability of fashion supply chain. The dimensions involved, in addition to chemistry, are all those identified by the Global Fashion Agenda as priorities for sustainable development.

4s CHEM, more precisely, supports the creation of a chemical management system along the entire processing chain aimed at eliminating hazardous chemicals from production cycles through the ZDHC methodology and by referring to its MRSL. The acronym stands for Manufacturing Restricted Substances List, a list of chemicals restricted in use precisely because of their hazardousness. PFASs also belong to this list.

Companies that adopt 4s CHEM commit among other things to eliminate the direct use of such substances, opting for chemicals that exclude the intentional use of substances included in the MRSL. The methodology applied includes supplier qualification procedures, in-company training activities, review of production processes, replacement of chemicals in production inventories and recipes, and measurement of wastewater to assess the level of sustainability of production processes and their impact on human health and the environment.

“It is a structured and credible way to demonstrate to the market one’s commitment to environmental impact reduction,” stresses Francesca Rulli, CEO of Process Factory and creator of the 4sustainability framework. “There are so many companies that are achieving compelling performance through the 4s CHEM protocol, contributing to groundwater cleanup and ecosystem protection in a concrete, measurable and verified way. The 4s Companies section of the 4sustainability website shows a wide selection of them, pointing to the activation of the other initiatives of the system as well, which is based – I want to reiterate – on recognized global methodologies for reducing impacts through a local and collaborative approach.
Replacing hazardous chemicals with more sustainable alternatives enables excellent paths of process and product innovation, contributing to the formation of critical thinking geared toward building a better future.”

L'articolo PFAS: FASHION INDUSTRY BETWEEN CHEMISTRY AND SUSTAINABILITY proviene da 4sustainability.

We hear a lot about Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). But what does this tool consist of and why is it gaining more and more importance in the perception of legislators and the market? In this in-depth discussion we try to shed light on it while also introducing distinctions.

LCA: how many people really know the meaning of this acronym? LCA stands for Life Cycle Assessment and the implied part is “of products.” Although from a scientific point of view this methodology has been known and used for a long time, only recently are we seeing its dissemination and application by companies and, therefore, its communication to the market.
This type of survey was created to provide companies with a structured and reliable scientific tool to use in the analysis of a good’s production processes in order to identify process improvement and efficiency actions aimed at reducing consumption and associated impacts.
In fashion and all industries in general, it is increasingly being used to measure the environmental impact of a product, with the main purpose of showing the world how “cool” we are. Although, as we will see later, LCA was supposedly born to analyze, not to communicate.

Cradle-to-cradle

The LCA methodology, if we reflect on it, has truly significant innovative contents, because it considers the product no longer and not only for its final characteristics, but as the result of all the steps to make it, of the subsequent stages of use and end of life, assessing its impacts from the consumption of resources (raw materials, water, energy, auxiliary products) and releases into the environment (discharges, emissions, waste, discards). It is no coincidence that we speak of cradle-to-grave analysis, which, in a circular economy logic, we could rephrase as cradle-to-cradle.

For some applications, it is possible to limit the analysis to the production stages and thus to a part of the product life cycle. We could call this cradle-to-gate analysis that typically concerns manufacturers of semi-finished products.

To communicate results and assertive statements about a product to the outside world, however, it is not possible to exclude the use and end-of-life phases, which can significantly affect the final impact. It is also necessary to engage consumers by holding them accountable for the consequences of their purchasing choices.

For a garment used over a long period of time, the impacts from its maintenance and especially from the washing and drying phases will also have to be considered. These impacts will increase the longer the garment lasts, while cushioning those from the production processes.

Mind the fake!

The growing importance of this type of investigation can also be inferred from a recent guidance from the Danish Antitrust Authority, which stated that coining a sustainability claim without accompanying LCA actually exposes the company to suspicion of greenwashing.
The assumption of the vademecum says a lot: without accurate data, it is not legitimate to claim sustainability.
The document clearly states that due to the difficulty of defining any product or service as generically sustainable and in order not to run the risk of formulating vague, incorrect or equivocal messages – and therefore actionable as misleading advertising – only a life cycle analysis (LCA) can shelter economic operators and consumers.

The Danish Ombudsman’s guidelines come after a 2021 European Commission study conducted on corporate websites regarding sustainability claims for products and services. More than half of these green claims were found to be illegal: 37% because they were based on vague and general assertions, the remaining 59% because they lacked objective information and supporting data.

How to proceed with LCA: the 4s MATERIALS approach

4s MATERIALS is the 4sustainability roadmap initiative aimed at gradually replacing raw materials with sustainable alternatives. LCA analysis is one of the methods and standards listed in the library for conversions, including all those materials that are authentically sustainable because they are supported by analytical data or certifications attesting to positive sustainability attributes. A company best expresses its materials conversion strategy, indeed, only by increasing in volume the percentage of sustainable materials.

Speaking of standards for LCA calculation, those that clearly and unambiguously define principles, requirements and guidelines for analysis are ISO 14040 and ISO 14044. From these standards may descend specific rules for product types – so-called PCRs – Product Category Rules, developed by the bodies that then issue product certifications – but the gist is that an LCA project assumes going very deep into the collection of data to be used.
Data should mostly be primary data, which means collected “at the source” by the companies performing the relevant processes, because secondary data from databases alone are not enough.

The challenge, in the case of product companies, is to strike a balance between the burden of a survey and its accuracy and reliability. Conducting a study comparing different products by basing it only on secondary data, for example, is easier but can generate results whose margin of uncertainty makes comparison impossible.

As Francesca Rulli well explains, “the environmental impact of a product depends on the raw material you use, but also on the ‘factories’ where you choose to carry out the production cycles: do they use renewable energy? how much water do they require? do they adopt recipes with green chemistry? The impact of a product is the reasoned sum of all these attributes, which is why the LCA calculation is so complex: because it assumes that so many different actors (so many different factories…) make available the primary data needed for the investigation.”

What we can rely on to overcome every difficulty on our path is methodology, which involves four well-defined steps for each LCA study:

• definition of the objective and scope
• inventory analysis
• environmental impact assessment
• interpretation

The initial and final stages, which are often overlooked, are the most important ones, first because they clearly establish the purpose of the study and thus also its limitations and, second, because they interpret the results by also calculating the margins of uncertainty.

Comparison and interpretation

In order to properly compare different products, a study must be conducted that, right from the definition of the objectives and framework, establishes the methods and elements of comparison, having at least common elements such as the intended use of the product, the use of virgin or recycled raw material, the object category, etc.
It follows that the interpretation phase is crucial to give the right reading to the results, providing the elements for their proper communication.

Let us now put the case of an LCA study conducted on the same T-shirt by two distinct subjects. The results might be different because the assumptions and stakes defined at the outset are different. Hence the importance of comparing the results of the two studies not only in absolute terms, but also considering the initial targets and working hypotheses. The risk, otherwise, is to communicate results that seem to be better at first glance when they may not be, which can expose us to accusations of fake sustainability with unpredictable effects.

Environmental impacts but more

A closing note of no small importance. “Talking about product impact and therefore production cycles,” Rulli emphasizes, “cannot be limited to environmental aspects alone, but must include social impact assessments based necessarily on the traceability and transparency of the supply chain, which is very fragmented, as we know, and generates an abnormal number of collections each year.
Well, in this context it is utopian to think of doing accurate studies on all products. Just as it is unthinkable for non-experts to be able to check whether assumptions can be actually compared or whether the study is done with primary data or simulations from databases. My view is that a systemic use of this approach is viable on continuous productions, to do research and innovation aimed at reducing process and material impacts. This is the rationale behind our decision to include the LCA study as one of 4s MATERIALS’ recognized initiatives.

Instead, when we talk about product and production impact, we refer to an assessment of the six key dimensions of sustainability – the same ones identified by the six pillars of the 4sustainability roadmap – and then to actual environmental and social impact data.
It is a method focused on concrete measurements and the engagement of a relevant number of stakeholders for comparability of implementation levels over time and transparency about the product. The more manufacturing companies reduce their environmental and social impacts, the more sustainable products the fashion & luxury industry will bring to market.”

L'articolo ENVIRONMENTAL FOOTPRINT OF PRODUCTS: THE LCA METHOD proviene da 4sustainability.

Waste reduction, technological investment, recovery and recycling are the key words in the production of sustainable supply chains. And consumers can also make an important contribution through their purchasing choices.

The thunderstorms that hit several Italian regions towards the end of summer, often violent due to the tropicalization of the climate, are by no means enough to repair the damage of an out-of-the ordinary drought. Between January and July, more than 40 percent of the population was affected by drought; one-fifth, on the other hand, live in areas affected by severe or extreme long-term drought (source: Osservatorio Siccità dell’Istituto di Bioeconomia del Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche del CNR). This is not just a transitory condition, but a clear consequence of climate change.

The numbers of the drought emergency

Twenty-eight percent of Italy’s land area shows clear signs of deterioration, the Higher Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (Ispra) announced on the occasion of World Desertification Day 2022. WWF’s Water Risk Filter estimates that in 2030 Italy will be exposed to a risk of water scarcity rated at 2.96, on a scale ranging from 1 (very low) to 6.6 (extreme); however, scores visibly rise in large areas of the South and Islands, with Calabria at 3.66, Sicily at 4.1 and Sardinia at 3.74.

It therefore becomes a priority to manage water more rationally and efficiently, reversing the trend that has seen the world’s use of fresh water increase sixfold in the last century (source: UNESCO). Globally, agriculture is responsible for 69 percent of water withdrawals, followed by industry with 21 percent and the civil and domestic sectors with another 10 percent. The textile industry alone consumes 93 billion cubic meters of water per year (source: Ellen MacArthur Foundation, “A new textiles economy. Redesigning fashion’s future”), of which 335 thousand cubic meters per year in Italy (Istat data).

The fashion supply chain and water

There are several processes in the fashion supply chain that are characterized by high water requirements, primarily the cleaning of raw materials and the various rinsing stages. Dyeing and finishing are also critical stages, as they require up to 125 liters of water per kg of fiber (in the case of cotton) and load the water itself with toxic substances that, if not properly filtered and recovered, risk spilling into rivers and seas. Finally, massive amounts of water are also needed to cool the plants.

In recent years, technological innovation is focusing precisely on finding solutions to reduce water requirements, such as alternative solvents, more efficient machinery or sophisticated filtering processes. These are smart ways to deal with emergencies without compromising performance levels.

Virtuous approaches

So many companies in Italy’s best supply chain are distinguishing themselves through proactivity. Such is the case of the Biella-based Tintoria e Finissaggio 2000, which as early as the 1970s is been investing in an effective purification plant to improve its performance over time. The most recent innovation is the integration of advanced technology for the wastewater microfiltration: once treated, it is partly recovered and reintroduced into other internal processing, and partly returned “clean” to the environment. In terms of volumes, we are talking about 100 thousand cubic meters of purified water per year, with about 10 percent recycled water from purification. In fact, despite belonging to a sector physiologically forced to make extensive use of chemicals, this company was the first in Italy to achieve an excellent rating in the chemical management protocol of 4sustainability, the implementation framework and registered trademark that guarantees the sustainability performance of the fashion & luxury supply chain.

Among the more than two hundred companies that have relied on 4sustainability is Creazioni Digitali, the first company in the Como district to deal with digital sublimation printing, the only one in Italy to adopt the innovative printing technologies of the Israeli multinational Kornit Digital. The new machinery makes it possible, on the one hand, to reduce the consumption of water needed to print fabrics and, on the other, to shorten the supply chain by concentrating several steps within the same plant. The numbers are staggering, according to associated studies: when compared to regular digital printing, a water smart print would save 5,000 liters of water for every 1,000 linear meters of fabric.

Another excellent case, for its intelligent approach to rationalizing water consumption, is Gruppo Colle, whose efforts can be summarized basically in three keywords. The first is control, to reduce waste at all levels by optimizing water use to what each process actually requires (and not all processes, nor all materials, require the same quantities to maintain the same product quality). Then there is technology, on which Gruppo Colle constantly invests by collaborating with leading dyehouse equipment manufacturers such as Loris Bellini and Laip: the innovation numbers are significant, if we think that the latest generation of machines guarantees water savings of between 30% and 40%. The third is recovery, practiced not only at the company level but, intelligently, at the district level. The Prato district is a historical excellence that sets the standard because it multiplies results, with its integrated system for water purification and recycling among the most extensive and efficient in Europe.

Voice to insiders

“The issue is not only environmental,” highlights Francesca Rulli, Ceo and Founder of Process Factory and creator of the 4sustainability framework. “The correlation with social and governance aspects makes the issue much more complex. I try to explain myself simply. In order to reduce the use of resources such as water, the supply chain needs innovation and production volumes; for this we need structured development plans supported by financial aid, as well as a more equitable distribution along the value chain (brands, manufactures, sub contractors, and so on). At the same time, style and design must convert to the development of sustainable garments by being aware of the impact that each choice adopted at the design stage can have on production and thus preferring materials, processes and suppliers that can reduce this impact, for example in water use. The two dynamics are linked: the more production focuses on sustainable supply chains by recognizing their value, the more volumes allow to invest in innovation.”.

10 tips for the responsible consumer

In these months of chronic drought, citizens have also been urged to limit waste, for example by installing a flow reducer in home faucets, remedying any leaks or reusing water wherever possible. There are also several ploys to reduce the water footprint associated with the clothes one wears. Rulli, who is also author of the book Fashionisti consapevoli. Vademecum della moda sostenibile (Flaccovio editore), suggests ten of them:

1. When doing laundry by hand, collect water in the basin while leaving the faucet open the minimum amount necessary.
2. When buying a new washing machine, also check the estimated annual water consumption: it is indicated on the energy label.
3. Wash laundry at low temperatures: the most modern detergents and machines guarantee excellent results even at 30 or 40 degrees.
4. Use the detergent cap as a dispenser, limiting yourself to the amount recommended in the package: extra detergent is not needed to clean better, so why waste it?
5. Start the washing machine only at full load or, if there are few clothes, opt for the “half load” program.
6. Consider dry cleaning for certain types of garments, such as ties, men’s suits and coats
7. Put garments in the washing machine only when they are actually dirty: according to one major global denim brand, a pair of jeans can be worn at least ten times before being washed!
8. Among synthetic fibers, favor viscose over polyester: according to the Water Footprint Institute, it has a lower water footprint.
9. When buying a cotton garment, check that it is organic (look for the GOTS or OCS label) or recycled (GRS or RCS labels). Conventional crops, in fact, are heavily irrigated to maintain productivity, as well as making considerable use of pesticides.
10. Keep away from disposables and extend the useful life of clothes as much as possible by repairing them if they get damaged or reselling them when we haven’t worn them for too long.

“Do we really need all the items in our closet? Do we know that the water consumption required to produce what we wear changes from product to product? How many questions do we ask ourselves when making purchases? Production processes,” Rulli stresses, “are evolving to reduce environmental impacts, but it is equally essential that more and more consumers become accustomed to finding the information they need to make informed choices about what and how to buy, adopting more responsible behaviors even in post-purchase maintenance. The more consumers become discerning in their demands on the market, the more brands will change the way they produce, moving toward greater environmental and social sustainability”.

L'articolo DROUGHT EMERGENCY: FASHION SUPPLY CHAIN DOES ITS PART proviene da 4sustainability.

by Francesca Rulli

Fashion is one of the most polluting industries in the world. For years, all the most impactful sectors have started a transition which unfortunately is still too slow and unevenly applied.
In this historical moment, fashion & luxury brands have a great responsibility, which in my opinion is also a precious opportunity: use their way of designing and producing to witness the transition underway, inducing the consumer to make conscious purchasing choices that may contaminate their lifestyle in the broadest sense of the word. Together, brands and institutions have the real power to accelerate change.

Many companies in the Italian supply chain have launched interesting initiatives to transform the production system so as to reduce their environmental and social impact. The most advanced ones range from the elimination of toxic and harmful chemicals from the production cycles to the improvement of safety and healthiness in the workplace, to process traceability and the replacement of raw materials with more sustainable alternatives, up to the reduction of the factory’s impact.
The pandemic has favored the multiplication of this kind of projects and new regulations such as the EU Due Diligence Legislation, the NY Social Accountability Act or the package of measures from European Commission which sees the fashion sector underspecial surveillance will make this trend even more widespread and structured.

A complex transition

The hoped-for green and social transition of the fashion system is highly complex, but the road is drawn, investment is inevitable and returns – for those who have already moved – are beginning to be seen in terms of business and reduction of environmental impacts, as well as in terms of attracting skills and talents for innovation.
The value of the investment depends above all on the DNA and the complexity of the “journey” you want to go on. It is not by chance that the first step of the 4sustainability® methodology is a sustainability initial anlysis: we take a picture of the starting situation to define strengths and weaknesses and, therefore, the intervention priorities (4sustainability Assessment).
There are companies with a well-oriented DNA: efficient processes, satisfied people, buildings and plants with low environmental impact, compensation systems, use of sustainable chemistry, production traceability and engagement of the upstream supply chain. Logically, in terms of support the investment is simpler and aimed at systematizing the approach and making the performance data measurement transparent.
If, on the other hand, you need to review the industrial processes, renew the related machinery and so on, the commitment will clearly be much higher. However, the indirect investment we should highlight is that relating to business culture, which must be built and nurtured to enhance actions to reduce environmental and social impact.

Recovery, reuse, recycling… Where do we stand?

Circular economy is a largely unexplored field. Also in Italy, there are appreciable recovery and recycling projects and I’m thinking especially of historicized excellences such as the Prato district. We note the most advanced initiatives especially on the reuse of production waste, but large volumes are made on unsold products, as suggested by the evidence on over production and post-consumer products which have exploded along with fast and ultrafast fashion.

Today, the true challenge is to spread and root good practices, structuring supply chains capable of correctly managing production volumes with clear and controlled regulations. While waiting for this evolution, certification and traceability systems such as the GRS standard from Textile Exchange, now widely applied in the sector, have found space.

Having said that, ther’s no doubt that we must extend the product life cycle and this is possible only if at an early stage in the design process we identify characteristics of durability, reuse and recycling and only if we prefer supply chains capable to demonstrate their own sustainability.

Traceability is the key

Traceability is central in the transition of fashion system because applying a sustainable production model means moving from a logic of product control to a logic of process transparency: from “what I produce” to “what I produce + how I produce it”.

The current production model is very fragmented and the geographies and cultures involved are extremely different from each other. Creating a production model that is capable of guaranteeing environmental and social performance, therefore, means first of all mapping all the processes and all the steps necessary to activate and obtain the finished product and then proceed with data collection and verification of sustainability initiatives and sustainability performance for the various steps.

Without traceability – intended as the ability to intercept all the key processes for obtaining the finished product, starting from the raw material – it will not be possible to tell an authentic story of sustainability through the product and it will not be possible for the brand to claim to have a sustainable supply chain.

4sustainability has precisely this objective: it is a sustainability data collection system of the supply chain based on the 6 topics which are relevant to the sector and supported by a platform through which each segment in the production chain can give evidence of its sustainability performance, allowing customers – including brands – to connect to data. This will make it possible to establish production systems that are sustainable as they are capable of measuring and sharing improvement paths in a transparent way.

Embracing change

A production that is concretely oriented towards sustainability and its principles has returns that do not simply relate to image and / or good reputation.
Sustainability is worthwhile because the process analysis, which is one of its pillars, almost always leads to optimizing production and therefore improving effectiveness and efficiency.
Sustainability is worthwhile because it increases the perceived and measured reliability from the market, because sustainability ratings are growing at all levels of the value chain and because you build customer loyalty.
Sustainability is worthwhile because the ability to attract talents and financial resources is also growing, as an effect of the positive evaluation that stakeholders give to the ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) factors or to structured projects related to them, as well as to the credit systems’ merit. Even if we limit ourselves to these three areas, integrating sustainability into our development strategies is a virtuous choice from all points of view.

Made in Italy and sustainability

In the common feeling, Made in Italy is synonymous with timeless craftsmanship, tradition and excellent raw materials, connection with the territory, respect and love for beauty. Is it also synonymous with sustainability?

Know-how is abounding in Italy, as well as creativity and orientation towards innovation. Another plus is the environmental and social regulatory system, which is one of the most advanced in the world. There are fronts, however, on which we still need to grow and I’m referring above all to acting methodically, planning, measuring and communicating performance transparently, considering the managerial level of our companies and the number of women in leadership roles. The 4sustainability system takes care of all this, supporting the implementation of key initiatives for the creation of sustainable production models and encouraging companies to communicate their environmental and social performance as they are appreciated by market and stakeholders.

The post- pandemic scenario

The system crisis that the pandemic has revealed to us with extraordinary violence has been having one advantage at least: that of strengthening the awareness of businesses and consumers about the crucial relevance of environmental and social issues.

Do we really want to be influenced again by the media and continue to feel “someone” based on what we own and based on the quantity of objects that enter our closets? Do we want, in all conscience, to keep producing without worrying about the people who work for us, their training, their expectations of growing professionally based on merit, having access to fair pay? Do we still want to waste water and energy resources and go on producing waste that we no longer know where to put? Do we feel safe at the thought of using, more or less consciously, chemicals that are harmful to health and the environment? Where have these behaviors led us so far? Which kind of satisfaction do they give us?
Well, now there are techniques, methodologies and actions to do business differently. I believe each of us, today, has the opportunity to make a small or large contribution to affirm a new development model. We just have to put a lot of thought and will into it.

L'articolo FASHION SYSTEM AND SUSTAINABILITY: PHOTOGRAPH OF A NECESSARY METAMORPHOSIS proviene da 4sustainability.

On the 30th of March 2022 the European Commission presented a package to promote circular business models and empower consumer towards a green deal. Inside an ad hoc strategy for the textile sector that is under close scrutiny given its enormous environmental and social impact. The aims of the EU package include making products more durable, repairable and recyclable, overcoming the model based on the anachronistic logic of take-make-waste, guaranteeing ethical production chains, avoiding the destruction of unsold items and fighting  greenwashing…

The background

Taking a step back, it should be pointed out how the package of proposals is part of the Circular economy action plan. Adopted in March 2020, the Plan is one of the pillars of the Green Deal, the European Agenda for sustainable growth which aims to equip the European Union with an efficient and competitive economy in terms of resources, by guaranteeing in particular zero net greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, development dissociated from the indiscriminate use of resources and taking care of the needs of all people and the planet without geographical distinctions.

The EU package

Let’s try and summarise the most interesting proposals contained in the package presented in March by the European Commission.

Eco-design

It is now well-established: if a product is designed with criteria and attention to ethics (environmental and social) it will have a significantly less negative impact throughout its life cycle. It is estimated in fact that designing an item of clothing affects up to 80% of its impact. For this reason the European Commission has undertaken to define mandatory eco-design requirements aimed at extending the life of products, improving safety requirements and making them easier to maintain, repair, reuse and recycle… In short, to ensure that they are the result of more efficient processes in terms of energy and the resources used.

Greenwashing

The European Commission has structured its actions to counteract greenwashing and social washing, widespread practices of misleading communications that consist in bragging about sustainability strategies without actually putting them into practice in order to improve image and reputation. The package identifies specific information requirements to help consumers understand the environmental impact of what they buy.
On this theme it would be worthwhile to make a comment by raising an exception of no small consequence. Why is there so much talk about the sustainability of individual products and little if anything about the sustainability of the processes that produce these products? It is evidently easier to invest in a single green collection and to affirm afterwards that your company is sustainable.  Too bad that real sustainability is not made up of spot initiatives, but of a wide-ranging strategy that affects the entire organization across the board and often requires a radical transformation of the business model.

Digital passport

The theme is traceability, a key objective that the European Commission intends to pursue by equipping every product with a digital passport. Its purpose is purely to facilitate the different links in the supply chain – manufacturers, importers, distributors, retailers, repairers, regenerators and recyclers – in accessing useful information to improve their environmental performance, extend product life, increase efficiency and the use of secondary raw materials by therefore reducing the need for primary natural resources, saving costs and limiting strategic dependencies.

Fast fashion slow down

By 2030 textile products launched on the European Union market must be made as much as possible with recycled fibres and in compliance with environmental and social rights. Clothing items will have to be durable, safe and reusable… Which will require companies to reduce the number of annual collections on one hand and member states to support the transition with tax breaks for those involved in reuse and repair on the other.
To strengthen the principle – because it would be naïve to set new rules and think that people would respect them in a disciplined way – the European Commission is also working on a surveillance system to check the conformity of products imported with EU requirements.

End of life management

The European Union package could not be without a chapter dedicated to textile waste and the related responsibilities of producers who will have to take care of its correct disposal by minimising the use of incinerators and landfills. Measures will be introduced to prevent and stop the destruction of unsold consumer goods, by providing for transparency and communication obligations for large companies and banning the destruction of certain products.

The legislator and teamwork

“We always welcome initiatives from the legislator on matters relating to sustainability, especially if, as in this case, it engages many different countries with a single, structured package of coherent measures. There is a great deal of voluntary action on the subject of sustainability – observed Francesca Rulli, CEO of Process Factory and creator of 4sustainability® – which, on the one hand is an important sign of the maturity of the system, and on the other it also tells us how necessary the intervention of the legislator is to align standards by clarifying and taking back possession of a role that up to now so far brands, companies and NGOs have played… Legal procedures unfortunately are extremely long that the planet can no longer afford, let alone the market. It is therefore necessary to stay one step ahead by involving all those involved in the change so their efforts convergence towards a common goal: on one side the production chain that the 4sustainability® framework aims to support by implementing sustainability projects and measuring the relative performance; on the other consumers who must be properly informed and empowered to choose responsibly so as to urge brands (and the legislator) to strengthen their action over time”.
In short, teamwork is necessary. The online consultation set up by the European Commission to collect the contribution of the various stakeholders in the sector and build a shared transition path as much as possible seems to correspond exactly with this spirit. Participation is open until the 15^th of May.

L'articolo CIRCULAR BUSINESS MODELS: PROPOSALS FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION proviene da 4sustainability.

Cotton, wool, polyester… There’s no material that, during its production cycle, does not generate some environmental and social impact, and we need to be aware of these impacts if we want to do our part for a more sustainable fashion. With an upstream premise: giving a sustainability license to raw materials to define with certainty whether one is better than the other literally makes no sense.

Considering that each fiber has its own peculiarities and lends itself to some uses and not others, drawing up a ranking would be impossible, as well as superficial. What can we do then? In what terms can we define the sustainability content of a material? We can simply list advantages, criticalities, and any less impactful alternatives, leaving other aspects such as costs and technical characteristics that clearly deserve a separate discussion in the background.

Never easy to compare

Two-thirds of the product’s impact in terms of water, energy, emissions, waste and land consumption can be attributed to raw materials. This data from the Global Fashion Agenda, the most important international forum on sustainability in fashion, is enough to understand how high the stakes are.

Now, the instinctive choice to reduce the environmental footprint of our purchases, would be to prefer garments made with natural fibers. It’s a pity that the matter is much more intricate…

Taking, for example, cotton, whose cultivation employs around a quarter of the insecticides and herbicides used globally. If it were completely replaced by organic cotton, the primary energy requirement would drop by 62%. On the other hand, replacing virgin polyester with recycled polyester, would cut the use of toxic substances by up to 90%, energy consumption by 60% and emissions by up to 40%.

These numbers tell us how articulated the considerations to be made are and how appropriate, also considering a picture further complicated by the multiplicity of measurement systems in use, that the fashion industry takes up the invitation of the Global Fashion Agenda “to concentrate on the development of new, more sustainable raw materials”.

Fibers’ production

From reading the latest Textile Exchange report for 2019, which is therefore not affected by the effects of Covid19, it emerges that global fiber production amounts to 111 million tons, a quantity that has doubled in the last 20 years and has grown by 2.7% compared to 2018. Continuing on this rate, it would reach 146 million tons by 2030.

Synthetic fibers are the master. Polyester alone accounts for 52% of global production, but also considering nylon and other synthetic fibers it reaches 62.9%.

Cotton is second in the ranking, with a production of 25.7 million tons, of which about 25% can be defined as sustainable. As for artificial cellulosic fibers, namely viscose, acetate, Lyocell, Modal and Cupro, we are in full swing: up to 1990 about 3 million tons were produced per year, rising to 7 million tons in 2019.

Focus on wool and cotton

To better understand the pros and cons of the different raw materials from a sustainable perspective, let’s focus on two textile fibers that are among the most used and familiar to consumers too: wool and cotton.

WOOL

The main environmental advantage of wool is that it’s natural, renewable and completely biodegradable resource. However, working with wool has some limits to keep in mind. First of all, in the washing phase, because the essential steps to purify the wool and eliminate waste require a large amount of water and chemicals.

Intensive livestock farming contributes to aggravating soil degradation, accelerating the desertification process of geographical areas already affected by frequent waves of drought.
Furthermore, despite being a natural fiber, wool also has an impact on climate change. In fact, methane and nitrous oxide deriving from animal waste are greenhouse gases.
From a purely environmental dimension to the ethical one linked to animal welfare, the step is short. How do we know if our sweater was made without mistreating animals? And what are the sustainable “alternatives”?  we can identify three great families.

Organic Wool

It comes from farms where the animals are left free to move, fed with organic feed and treated with natural methods, without the indiscriminate use of antibiotics. The main reference is the set of five fundamental freedoms of the animal codified in 1979 by the Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC), the most widespread certification scheme, the Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS).

Responsible wool

The best-known certification is called RWS (Responsible Wool Standard), it was developed by Textile Exchange and relies on the concept of chain of custody: if we notice the RWS brand on the label of our sweater, this means in principle that the steps of production have been certified. Similar to the RWS certification, because they share the same attention to animal welfare, there are other schemes verified through third-party audits, such as the New Zealand ZQ, Nativa, Schneider, SustainaWool and others.

Recycled Wool

More than recycled wool, we should technically speak of regenerated wool, that is made with raw materials obtained from the reuse of waste with an identical destination to that of its “first life”. There are two great advantages in terms of sustainability: the need for virgin raw materials is reduced and the dyeing phase is avoided, with all the foreseeable savings in water and chemicals that it brings with it. As reference certification schemes, we mention among others, GOTS and Recycled Claim Standard (RCS).

COTTON

When we have to choose a baby romper, a set of sheets or a t-shirt, grandma’s advice is always the same: check on the label that they are made of pure cotton. We all agree on the properties of this natural fiber, fresh, breathable, resistant and hypoallergenic.
But what about sustainability? Being a natural fiber, cotton is biodegradable, it decomposes on average in a couple of months, and this is precisely one of its greatest environmental advantages.

Promising is also the possibility of reusing production waste, for example to create sound-absorbing or insulating materials used in construction. We have already mentioned in part about the cons. Conventional agricultural practices make extensive use of chemicals to accelerate the growth of cotton plants, harmful products for human health that also contribute to soil depletion. And then there is the immense waste of water caused, even before cultivation needs, by obsolete water management systems.

A terrible chapter is also that of the exploitation of child labor and forced labor: millions of people employed in the cotton fields without any kind of protection.
Sustainable alternatives, at least on paper, do exist. Let’s try to summarize the main ones.

Organic cotton

According to Textile Exchange organic cotton, certified Organic Cotton Standard (OCS) or GOTS, for example consumes 62% less energy and 71% less water than traditional cotton. The difference is manly in the cultivation phase, because among other things, GMOs are banned, the seeds are not treated with chemicals and pests are kept away through natural methods, rather than using herbicides and pesticides.
The second large family is represented by recycled cotton, whose production has a significantly lower impact because it does not require the use of virgin fiber but uses only pre-consumer (i.e. production waste) or post-consumer (i.e. discarded clothing materials).
If we want to make sure that a garment is made from recycled raw materials, we can look for the symbol of certifications such as Global Recycle Standard (GRS) and RCS.

Standard initiatives

In addition to certifications, there are also some product-independent initiatives that each brand is free to join to support a more sustainable model. The most popular of all, focused on training farmers, is the Better Cotton Initiative (BCI). Farmers learn to use water more efficiently, to prefer techniques that respect the balance of the soil and natural habitats, to minimize the use of toxic chemicals and to ensure decent working conditions.

Everything is clear?

Cotton is second only to polyester in the ranking of the most common fibers, with almost 26 million tons produced in 2019. About 80% comes from just six countries: India, China, USA, Pakistan, Brazil, and Uzbekistan. India is, in particular, the largest producer of organic cotton in the world, with a growth of 48% in the last year, despite the pandemic. Growth however, which according to several sources is false, because the “organic” label associated with cotton is false.

On the dock is an opaque, if not quite fraudulent, certification system. Consumers are guaranteed the “organic” material of the brands, which are based on official stamps of approval from external organizations. These stamps are in turn based on reports from opaque local inspection agencies, which base their conclusions on a single scheduled annual inspection or on a few random visits. In 2009, India’s agricultural export agency uncovered a large-scale fraud, with entire villages certifying genetically modified cotton as organic. The government promised it would release the digital tracking software next year, but he never did.

The credibility of the inspection agencies, meanwhile, has been destroyed. To the point that the European Union has voted to no longer accept Indian organic exports certified by some international agencies.

Structure the commitment

According to Francesca Rulli, CEO of Process Factory/4sustainability®, the certification schemes have an important function, as long as the upstream checks are carried out with a logic of correctness and transparency and as long as they are part of a transversal commitment to sustainability on the part of the companies. Obviously, it cannot be limited to obtaining a stamp. “The hallmark, if the upstream release process is credible, is what allows us to recognize the sustainability content of a given product. And it has a much more value the more it is integrated into a structured path for the creation of a sustainable production model. The 4sustainability frameworks was created to exactly support this commitment, measuring the performance of companies in the supply chain on all dimensions of sustainability relevant to the sector”.
In short, a systemic approach is needed. The single attribute of a product is a good thing, but not enough to affect the reduction of the impact of production. This is what Rulli tries to “translate” in her book Fashionisti consapevoli. Vademecum of sustainable fashion (Dario Flaccovio Editore 2022) thinking of a wider audience than just professionals.

L'articolo SUSTAINABLE RAW MATERIALS, WATCH OUT FOR LICENCES proviene da 4sustainability.

A pebble slowly starts rolling down a mountain. It picks up speed, and in so doing it drags other stones and dirt, eventually growing into a landslide that reaches the valley.
It may be an understatement to call the recent bill proposed in the State of New York a mere “pebble”. Introducing obligations for fashion companies to trace and communicate their environmental impact throughout their supply chains, the legislation is bold and far-reaching, with the potential to trigger a true avalanche in the fashion industry.

An innovative project

Legislative projects concerning human rights and environmental due diligence are underway in both the EU and many nation-states – Germany, France, United Kingdom, Australia, among others. Similar to the New York bill, these ambitious proposals attempt to define new responsibilities for brands and big businesses in the fashion supply chain.

The Fashion Sustainability and Social Accountability Act signals an even more important shift, implicating all the aspects of sustainability present in the fashion industry. For example, the bill includes,

• A company’s obligation to map at least 50% of their supply chain, ranging from the selection of raw materials to logistics, and measuring their social and environmental impacts in terms of CO2 emissions, water and energy consumption, chemical substance management, salaries, etc.
• A company’s obligation to publish its production volumes, as well as their consumption of cotton and polyester.
• A twelve-month deadline to identify and involve their suppliers in this mapping of the supply chain, and eighteen months to analyze its impact.

Companies Concerned

The proposed bill would apply to all fashion companies with annual turnovers of over 100 million dollars operating in the State of New York, regardless of their place of origin. Affected companies include Inditex, H&M, Shein … – essentially all the big groups of the fashion sector. Noncompliant companies would be sanctioned with fines totally 2% of their annual revenue, as well as having their names added to a public list of “bad” companies.

The Assembly Bill A8352/S7428 was introduced by Assemblymember Anna Kelles and State Senator Alessandra Biaggi and is supported by a roster of fashion and sustainability NGOs, including Stella McCartney, the New Standard Institute, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the NY City Environmental Justice Alliance. If approved, this bill would deliver the most ambitious legislation ever passed concerning sustainable fashion.

The bill is moving quickly, with the vote taking place as early as spring. And the change that this new legislation will inevitable precipitate will have dramatic effects throughout the fashion industry.

Paris Fashion Week and Copenhagen Fashion Week

On the catwalk, this year’s Paris Fashion Week is pushing star businesses to measure their environmental, social, and economic impacts, a policy already present during the Spring-Summer 2022 season. Participating companies are not, however, obliged to publish their performance data. Still, it is an interesting signal, especially if taken in conjunction with the action plan set out by Copenhagen Fashion Week, where participation is contingent on companies reaching a minimum sustainability score in six areas of interest: strategic direction, design, smart raw materials, consumer involvement, working conditions, and events.

Among these minimum requirements are the commitment against the destruction of unsold items, the commitment to use certified or organic products and reused or recycled fabric for at least half of their collections, the commitment to use solely sustainable packaging and set up zero-waste stands, the commitment to propose samples that have previously been showed or digitalize related activity, ensuring the availability of a list of EU REACH restricted substances, compliance with the most stringent regulations in terms of access to work, health, and safety for employees and collaborators, the adoption of clear policies on internal data and communication with consumers regarding sustainability strategies… The list goes on, including casting criteria for models involved in the fashion shows.

The Importance of the Backstage

Fashion is displayed in its full glory on the catwalk. Companies show the best versions of themselves, and in the past few years, this best version has included more than just aesthetic creativity. Recently, we have seen companies add important aspects of sustainability to their collections such as authenticity, measurability, and demonstrability. In this sense, the backstage counts for more than the show. And by backstage, we meet the incredible efforts taken by companies to develop their production in sustainable ways, as well as the increasingly innovative methodologies that are being developed to ground these efforts. 4sustainability fits into this virtuous context as a hallmark and implementation framework for concrete sustainability projects.

“We have been studying a collect data system for the fashion supply chain for years,” 4sustainability founder Francesca Rulli explains, “which has been applied and continuously updated in response to new evidence. This commitment is based on our deep awareness that no brand can call itself sustainable if its production model is not. And to take on a sustainable model of production, the only road is to map one’s supply chain, slowly involving it, collecting its data concerning environmental and social impacts, in order to then build a pathway for progress together that is monitored across time. 4sustainability was born in this context, involving assessments and supply chain monitoring. This system has been digitalized into the 4s Platform and even includes far-away suppliers. We are thrilled that legislators are finally pushing the industry in this direction, as we will have more opportunities to capitalize on the investments that have already been made and the experiences that we have gained working alongside businesses.”

L'articolo FASHION: TRACING SUSTAINABILITY TO BECOME A LEGAL OBLIGATION proviene da 4sustainability.

by Francesca Rulli

Child exploitation, starvation wages, the denial of human rights… The social issues related to global fashion production are well-known. And yet, too little is being done to resolve these issues at their roots.
That’s not all. Today, we are witnessing troubling environmental phenomena. Let’s look at some of these together to understand why they are an indication that a radical change is urgent especially at the cultural level.

The Atacama desert and its “dunes”

In November 2021, Al Jazeera published Chile’s desert dumping ground for fast fashion leftovers, denouncing the “dunes” of clothing found in Chile’s Atacama Desert. Yes, clothing!
Every year, 59 thousand tons of clothes arrive at the port of Iquique, a city in northern Chile. Some clothes are sold to traders in the capital city Santiago, 1800 km to the South, while many others are smuggled to other Latin American countries. The rest – around 39 thousand tons – are dumped in the desert. Why do they end up in no man’s land? Because no one is willing to pay to take them away.

Africa’s polluted rivers

The pollution of Africa’s waterways is a major and well-documented environmental issue. In August 2021, the charity organization Water Witness International published its report How fair is fashion’s water footprint investigating these problems.
Lesotho’s rivers, for example, are highly polluted with the blue dye used for denim. In Tanzania, water samples collected inside a textile factory indicated a pH of 12, the equivalent of common bleach. And if we consider the fact that this water is used by local communities for food, field irrigation, and hygiene, it’s easy to imagine the kind of damages caused to humans and to the environment.

Amazon deforestation

To understand the fashion industry’s links with deforestation, we need to go to South America, and in particular the Amazon.
According to Stand.earth’s report Nowhere to hide: how the fashion industry is linked to Amazon rainforest destruction, there is a close relationship between the two. A great number of big fashion companies purchase leather from producers and tanneries that are devastating the planet’s lungs. This invasion into the Amazon by the cattle industry is driven by intensive farming practices and the high demand for leather goods, which according to the International Council of Tanners (ICT), is growing.

Beyond the visible

Ecowatch’s article Fast Fashion 101: Everything you need to know demonstrates the disastrous effects of the fashion industry has on our planet that may not be visible to the naked eye. According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, the sector is responsible for 10% of global CO2 emissions. A significant portion of these emissions are caused by the long journeys clothes currently take from the areas in which they are produced to those where they are sold and eventually disposed.

One issue mostly related to fast fashion is the dying process for cheap fashion products. The toxic mix of chemical substances that is widely used in these processes is, yet again, dispersed into the surrounding environment.

Textile waste: a look at the numbers

According to an article published a couple years ago, textile waste increased by 811% between 1960 and 2015, growing from 1.7 to 16 million tons.
In their 2017 report A New Textiles Economy: Redesigning fashion’s future, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation revealed that the average amount of times that a clothing item was worn before being thrown away has decreased by 36% in the last 15 years. The glaring consequence of this tendency is the exponential increase in waste.

McKinsey’s Style that’s sustainable: a new fast-fashion formula found that clothing production doubled between 2000 and 2014, with a 60% increase in the number of clothing products acquired per capita. With the speeding up of production cycles and the creation of ever new designs, consumers have infinite possibilities to renew their wardrobe. According to some estimates, cheap fashion appears to be the culprit of much of this wear-and-discard phenomenon as their products are trashed after a maximum of 7-8 uses.

Consumer behaviour

Why people conveniently ‘forget’ that child labor made their jeans is a fascinating article by MarketWatch on the selective memory of consumers who learn of the not-so-sustainable origin of the specific item in which they are interested. According to a Ohio State University study, humans activate two mechanisms when presented with emotionally difficult ethical information. On the one hand, there is a tendency to completely forget the issue. On the other, people erroneously remember these unethical aspects as good and morally right.
And then there’s social media pressure and the continuous onslaught of the latest celebrity trends. The constant bombardment of stimuli on the Internet accelerates the fast fashion cycle, making us feel forever behind and obligated to catch up with the latest trends.

A 2017 survey showed how 41% of young people between the ages of 18 and 25 felt the need to wear different clothes every time they left their home. Why? Because every outfit is scrupulously documented on social media and so wearing a piece of clothing more than once is out of the question. Arguable, of course, but these are the real feelings that young people live with.

Turning the tide

If this is really how people behave, and if it truly is the case that even if we are aware of certain issues, we are incoherent in our purchasing choices, then the current responses are insufficient.
I have recently published a book entitled Fashionisti consapevoli. Vademecum della moda sostenibile (Flaccovio Editore), where I try to organize some of my reflections on these questions for a wide audience. If I have managed to bring even one person over to the cause, this effort will have been worthwhile. The data and evidence that is compiled in this book, part of which you find here, are horrifying, unequivocal, and “scream” the urgency of turning the tide! It is a pity that, at the end of the day, we are continuing to do as we have always done.

We must act on two fronts. First, we need to ensure that increasing numbers of people ask themselves the right questions before buying clothes. Second, companies must work together to develop ways to fully inform the consumer. This means equipping consumers with simple tools to understand the difference between a product that is truly sustainable, which means produced by a sustainable brand with a sustainable supply chain, and a product that is made in violation with ethical standards, as well as social and environmental responsibility.
There are many projects in motion that work on these fronts, among which the 4sustainability system which I discuss in the book. The biggest challenge, however, is upstream, and involves slow cultural shifts, changes in our ways of thinking, and a break with the logics of production and consumption… This will take time, but we know the path.

L'articolo FASHION OVERPRODUCTION. WHEN ENOUGH IS ENOUGH proviene da 4sustainability.

“There is an implicit aspect to this question that makes the difference”, says Francesca Rulli, CEO and Founder of Process Factory/4sustainability®: “I’m referring to the culture you can breathe in companies on certain issues, starting from the top management. The real challenge lies precisely here, in creating and spreading a corporate culture capable of recognizing the importance that an inclusive, fair and attentive work environment has on the employees’ sense of belonging and their efficiency. Relations with suppliers must also be based on the same logic of correctness and fairness. At the center, always and in any case, there must be the person: talking about sustainability strategy, otherwise, it makes no sense”.

This is a transversal theme that applies to companies in the fashion supply chain and to all private and public organizations, regardless of their sector, size and geographical location. In any case, satisfied and fulfilled workers will be more serene and collaborative citizens.
Everyone has to do their part in this cultural challenge, which isn’t exactly trivial. In Italy, for example, we still suffer a lot from the effects of the contraposition and distance between company management and workers, without really understanding that there must be no prejudices in this game. The ultimate goal is common and unity is always strength. Innovative and far-sighted companies – which are also those who perform better, coincidentally … – have understood this.

To focus on the textile and fashion sector, the business model here is still mostly the traditional one, a legacy of a not too distant past. New generations are called to unhinge this model by orienting the corporate culture and the competition rules to ethics, even more in a district organization such as thatb of fashion in Italy.

The profound changes in the world of work

Recently, we’ve witnessed a truly significant change in the social and economic context.
The family model setting has changed, with greater sharing of roles; the perspective of the work organization has changed, less and less linked to the culture of the so-called permanent job; the perception of the importance of corporate social responsibility has grown; the complexity of the markets has increased as well as the pace of life, bringing out a greater need for reconciliation between work and private life. Furthermore, the new workeforce is increasingly attentive to the qualitative aspects of work, other than to salary.

All this requires us to think of a new work organization characterized by greater flexibility in working hours and spaces, greater collaboration and sharing of objectives, relationships based on trust and empowerment of people, rather than on control.
The concept of remuneration must also be consistently reviewed, in order to consider not only the monetary aspects, but also those of the related benefits and personal fulfillment.

Corporate welfare: beware of abuses

There are only two ways of doing welfare in companies: one that works and one that doesn’t. The difference usually lies in the cultural approach to the project.
Welfare projects that do not work – that no longer work, at least – are usually those decided by the management of companies without a participatory process based on listening, they are those that consider the sphere of services to workers as the only area of intervention, often not adequately communicated and valued within organizations.

The welfare projects that work are those in which the property / management acts as an intellectual sponsor and in which the workers actively and constantly participate; they are those that identify the strategic levers of action in several areas (corporate culture, organization, personal and workplace services, work environment and finance…) and that are adequately communicated and valued.

“The winning projects – Rulli points out – are structured projects: not the spot initiative, not the one-off bonus, but a systemic intervention plan to be carried out over time and measured in order to give it evidence to the market as well as to its own employees.”.

Virtuous examples are not enough 

It was 1946 when Adriano Olivetti brought beauty, culture and well-being to his companies, demonstrating that you can do business by taking care of the people who work there, also thinking about their life outside of work – school, health, continuous training … – and, above all, enhancing talents, giving space to individual and group creativity. All this with a surprising return in development and innovation.

It is a well-known example, among other possible ones, to mean that happy experiences of corporate welfare in our country have existed and are still there today. The real challenge, however, is to move from virtuous examples, linked to visionary and enlightened entrepreneurs, to a production system in which organizational well-being is considered a key factor of productivity which is as such managed in a systematic way, with method and vision.

The social dimension of sustainability

The Brundtland Report, also known as Our Common Future, is a document published in 1987 by the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) in which the concept of sustainable development is introduced for the first time. “Sustainable development – we read – is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs“.

It is clear that, in this sense, sustainability must be understood in its three fundamental dimensions: economic-organizational, environmental and social. Well, the social dimension is considered the most strategic, because without attention to our human capital, in the presence of inequalities and in the absence of social cohesion, economic and environmental sustainability cannot be achieved.

Companies influence their employees, their value chain, customers and local communities and it is therefore crucial that they’re committed to managing these impacts proactively.
Companies can contribute to the design environments and ways of working that stimulate responsibility, belonging and motivation to create increasingly inclusive value chains. They can also collaborate with other companies to team up and therefore have a more consistent positive impact on the community and on the business.
The Consorzio Promozione Filati, which brings together dozens of companies producing knitting yarns, is an excellent example of virtuous approach.

The areas of organizational wellbeing

What are, in practice, the areas in which companies can intervene to introduce or strengthen corporate wellbeing within their organization, in line with the sustainability goals? Let’s see them together.

Culture

By “Culture Area” we mean the deep sphere of the corporate value system. It is the most intangible area and at the same time the most strategic in the company because it inspires and guides the actions of all those who work there. This includes communication policies, social responsibility initiatives, leadership styles, training policies, and the merit system.

Organization

By “Organization Area” we mean that set of rules and processes through which a company carries out its functions and activities. It is an important strategic lever for reconciling private and working life and promoting corporate well-being. This includes smart working policies, flexible hours, part-time policies, holiday and parental leave management policies, and the work shifts management.

Services

By “Service Area” we mean a series of possible initiatives aimed at supporting the worker in the workplace or in their free time. This includes tax and legal assistance services, the delivery of online purchases or clinical examinations at the company headquarters, the handling of paperwork, coaching services, cultural and recreational opportunities, etc.

Finance

By “Finance Area” we mean a financial support system dedicated to people, to support them in particular moments of their life. This includes insurance banking agreements, contributions to the purchase of school books, scholarships for deserving students, meal vouchers in the absence of a canteen service, supplementary policies.

Ambiente di lavoro

By “Environment Area”, finally, we mean the implementation of initiatives aimed at the psychophysical well-being of the worker. This includes attention to the quality of work spaces – welcoming, well-ventilated and well-tempered offices with ergonomic workstations – and the presence of wellness areas such as, for example, relaxation rooms.

People 4sustainability®

Intervening in these areas, according to Francesca Rulli, also means stimulating people’s creativity and aptitude for innovation, which is an essential support to carry on the company’s transformation process towards sustainability: “It is no coincidence that the People 4sustainability® protocol for the growth of organizational well-being is based on the parameters described so far, defining the action plan each company can implement to increase the performance and well-being of resources in a logic of continuous improvement. What are the weaknesses and what are the positive aspects to build on? Do people identify with the company and its management? In what terms do they share its sustainability policies? How to measure and monitor the level of satisfaction over time? Putting people at the center means answering all these questions and then translating the priorities identified into smart solutions that qualify the themes of working together as distinctive aggregation factors”.

L'articolo ORGANIZATIONAL WELLBEING: A STRATEGIC LEVER FOR BUSINESSES AND THE COMMUNITY proviene da 4sustainability.