What Are PFAS and Why Are They Harmful?

PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are a family of chemical compounds comprising between 5,000 and 10,000 substances. Renowned for their resistance to water, heat, and corrosion, PFAS are widely used in non-stick cookware, waterproof products, and electrical insulation. They are commonly found in technical garments, footwear, kitchen tools, eyeglass lenses, cardiac stents, and even some pharmaceuticals. According to the OECD, more than 4,700 types of PFAS are employed to impart water-repellent and stain-resistant properties to textiles.

However, it is precisely their chemical stability that makes PFAS hazardous to human health and the environment. They accumulate in ecosystems and living organisms, posing risks to fertility, immune function, metabolism, and increasing the likelihood of certain types of cancer.

Impact on the Textile and Fashion Sector

The textile and fashion industries are among the most affected by the new regulation, given their widespread use of PFAS to achieve water and stain repellency in fabrics and footwear. Transitioning to sustainable alternatives will require significant investment in research and development to identify innovative materials and alternative treatments such as bio-based polymers and plant-based waxes.

The impact will be particularly significant for outdoor, sportswear, and performance fashion brands, many of which will have to redesign entire product lines. Some companies, like Patagonia, have already begun the transition away from PFAS, but the challenge remains complex. Industry reactions reflect a general sense of caution.

Francesca Rulli, co-founder of Ympact and creator of the 4sustainability® framework, urges the fashion industry to take responsibility for eliminating substances that science has proven to be harmful. “Over the past few decades, the race for stain-proof and waterproof fabrics has led to an excessive reliance on these substances—often where not strictly necessary. We’ve become accustomed to not worrying about stains and expecting extreme water-repellent performance, even from everyday garments. Moreover, PFAS are also used as auxiliaries in dyeing, printing, and finishing processes to enhance performance. Considering the health and environmental risks, we must rethink both production processes and product specifications, especially where PFAS are used more to avoid product returns than to meet real functional needs. Educating consumers is not easy, but clear information could encourage many to support this transition.”

Tax Measures and Environmental Monitoring

In addition to the gradual bans, the new law introduces a tax on PFAS in consumer products to incentivize reduction ahead of regulatory deadlines. Implementation details are still being finalized.

Giancarlo Di Blasi, Research and Development Director at Brachi Testing Services, explains: “The real issue will be defining precise testing methods and concentration thresholds—a technical yet decisive aspect for the regulation’s effectiveness. It will be interesting to see whether France extends the restriction to short-chain PFAS, as already addressed at the EU level through Regulation (EU) 2024/2462 for PFHxA (C6), or adopts a California-style approach based on measuring total fluorine content in products. In that case, clear and ambitious limits would need to be set, bearing in mind that California has capped PFAS content at 100 mg/kg, to be halved by January 1, 2027.”

The law also mandates PFAS monitoring in drinking water, reinforcing EU legislation that, as of January 2026, will require all member states to track 20 pollutants from this group. France also plans to include TFA (trifluoroacetic acid)—considered the most widespread PFAS according to Greenpeace—among the substances monitored in water and the environment. The results of environmental inspections will be published annually and made publicly accessible online.

Toward an EU-Wide PFAS Ban?

The EU took its first steps on PFAS in 2009 by banning perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS), classified as “potentially carcinogenic” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. In 2020, the same fate befell perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), now officially recognized as carcinogenic, followed more recently by perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS), widely used in firefighting foam.

A broader proposal is now on the table to extend restrictions to all PFAS. In February 2023, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden submitted a joint request to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) to revise the REACH regulation accordingly. France has indicated its intention to support the initiative and, as evidenced by the newly passed law, is positioning itself as a regulatory front-runner.

A Challenge to Embrace

If more countries follow suit, the textile sector will need to accelerate its search for viable alternatives to remain competitive in an evolving regulatory landscape. Transforming investments in safer, more sustainable production processes into competitive advantages will be key.
This represents a radical shift for the entire sector, and the French law could be the catalyst: from material innovation to supply chain redesign, to balancing environmental sustainability with economic demands.

The clock is ticking toward 2026. Will the fashion industry rise to the challenge?
According to Rulli, phasing out PFAS requires a structured roadmap, akin to building a chemical management system across the supply chain.
“The first step,” she explains, “is risk assessment: analyzing the products and supply chains involved. Then, it’s essential to collect data from suppliers to identify possible PFAS exposure and validate findings through lab testing. The search for sustainable alternatives, from raw materials to treatments, must go hand in hand with close supplier collaboration to ensure an effective transition. Equally crucial are progress monitoring, internal training on PFAS risks, and consumer education. Finally, transparency: publishing verified data and achieving sustainability certifications reinforces a brand’s commitment. This process also drives innovation in the chemical industry, encouraging the development of safer formulations. The more companies adopt this strategy, the greater the momentum for research and innovation.”

L'articolo FRANCE, ANTI-PFAS LAW PASSED proviene da 4sustainability.

On February 20, the EU Council definitively approved new rules against Greenwashing. After publication in the Official Gazette, member states will have 24 months to implement them. In March, the sister Directive on Green Claims is also expected to be voted on.

Following the vote on January 17 by the European Parliament, the EU Council gave final approval for the publication in the Gazette of the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive. Its aim is to prohibit the use of misleading environmental statements, improve product labeling, and make warranty information more visible.

Under the measure – which amends the directive on unfair commercial practices (UCPD) and the directive on consumer rights (CRD), adapting them to the green transition and the principles of the circular economy – a series of questionable behaviors related to fake environmentalism and so-called premature obsolescence of goods will become more difficult, with the effect of protecting consumers and enabling them to play a more active role in the green transition.

Directive Greenwashing: Putting an End to Generic Environmental Claims

The new rules aim to make product labeling clearer and more reliable by prohibiting the use of generic claims such as “eco-friendly,” “natural,” “biodegradable,” “climate-neutral,” or “eco” without supporting documents and certifications demonstrating their accuracy and validity.

The directive on Greenwashing is closely related to another proposal by the European Commission currently under review by EU institutions: the Green Claim directive, which will define more specifically criteria and conditions for their proper use.

The use of sustainability labels will also be regulated from now on. We add “finally,” considering the chaos caused by their proliferation in the absence of useful data for any comparison. In the European Union, only sustainability labels based on official certification systems created or approved by public authorities will be allowed in the future, and this is a truly significant development.

Another new element is the prohibition of claiming that a product has a neutral, reduced, or positive impact on the environment if these results depend on the use of emission offsetting systems. An example among many? Airlines will no longer be able to sell “climate-neutral” flights and encourage consumers to offset emissions by paying more.

The new rules will prohibit unfounded claims about the lifespan of products: it will not be possible, for instance, to claim that a washing machine will last for 5,000 wash cycles if this is not true under normal conditions. It will also be forbidden to encourage the replacement of consumables before necessary (e.g., printer ink) or to present products as repairable when they are not.

Furthermore, warranty information will have to be more visible, and a new harmonized label will be created to give greater prominence to products with an extended warranty period.

The Stakeholders’ Perspective

Regarding the durability and repairability of products, activists from the European Environmental Bureau (EEB) have spoken out, applauding the directive as a measure to combat greenwashing but accusing the EU of not being sufficiently proactive on the issue of planned obsolescence, the commercial practice that intentionally limits the lifespan of a product to encourage its replacement.

According to Biljana Borzan, rapporteur of the directive during its examination in the European Parliament and in negotiations with the Council, the directive on greenwashing nevertheless represents a victory for everyone. “We will move away from the throwaway culture, make marketing more transparent, and fight against premature obsolescence of goods,” she said. “People will be able to buy more durable, repairable, and sustainable products thanks to reliable labels and advertisements. Even more importantly, companies will no longer be able to deceive people by saying that plastic bottles are fine because the company has planted trees somewhere or by claiming that something is sustainable without explaining how and why.”

Experts in sustainable fashion are the first to lament the difficulty of obtaining useful information about the sustainability content of products. Think of clothes or fashion accessories: according to Francesca Rulli, CEO of Process Factory and creator of the 4sustainability system for the sustainable transition of fashion & luxury, at best, the label displays some certification marks that the average consumer does not know and therefore does not help them distinguish between one item and another. “More often,” she adds, “we find vague or ambiguous statements, or even nothing at all. I myself become unsure when shopping because I lack the elements to choose items with the environmental and social characteristics I would like. Who produced it and where? How do I know if what is written on the label is verified? Today, I can only rely on the reputation of the brand or technical information published online… I ask questions, but I am often disappointed. And the absurd thing is that certain items would have more than satisfactory sustainability requirements: it’s a shame that the supporting data is unavailable.”

Green Claims: Where Do We Stand?

A study conducted in 2020 by the European Commission on a sample of 150 claims found that 53.3% contained misleading or unfounded information about the environmental “benefits” of products, and 40% lacked supporting evidence. It is therefore good news that the Green Claims Directive is also proceeding in its approval process, with positions expressed by both the Internal Market and Environment Committees. The European Parliament aims to reach a plenary vote before the European elections, allowing the newly elected members to advance the measure from a legally valid position.

In the text presented in March 2023, the EU Commission had established the following:

• Companies must provide scientific evidence of the truthfulness of green assertions, considering the entire life cycle of the product.
• Environmental labels – estimated to be over 230 by Brussels – must be truthful, transparent, and verified by third parties.
• Scientific evidence of green assertions must be transparent and available to all via QR codes on the company’s website.
• Assertions or labels using an aggregated score of the overall environmental impact of the product in terms of biodiversity, water usage, etc., will no longer be allowed.
• Companies marketing their products using unproven environmental claims could face fines equivalent to at least 4% of revenue or exclusions of up to one year from participating in public procurement or subsidies.

Proposals from the Committees

The work of the Committees has generated a series of additional proposals to complement or modify the Green Claims directive proposal.

30-day Verification by Third Parties

Members have agreed that companies must obtain approval for green claims before being able to use them. Accredited verifiers will be responsible for this within 30 days.

Simplifications for Less Complex Products

The European Commission is expected to compile a list of indications and less complex products that could benefit from simplified verification in terms of timing and format.

Concern Regarding Hazardous Substances

According to the Committees, it is necessary to evaluate whether ecological indications on products containing hazardous substances should be allowed.

Exemption for Micro-enterprises

It is believed that micro-enterprises should be exempt from new obligations, and SMEs should have an additional year to comply with the new regulations.

Carbon Offset

The Union’s ban on making ecological statements based solely on so-called carbon dioxide offsetting schemes (Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive) is confirmed. The suggested addition is to allow companies to mention offsetting schemes if they have already minimized their emissions and to use these schemes only for residual emissions. The carbon credits from the schemes must be certified as established by the Carbon Removals Certification Framework.

Comparative Advertising

Special rules should be provided for comparative indications – those that compare two different products – even if the two products are from the same manufacturer. Companies, for example, should demonstrate that they have used the same methods to compare relevant aspects of the products.

Improvement

The two Committees believe that claims of product improvement cannot be based on data more than five years old.

What Lies Ahead

Will the two twin directives against greenwashing truly manage to change things? Will the accessibility of information on the sustainability of fashion products (and beyond) be sufficient to encourage more informed purchases?

“I believe that thanks to the upcoming regulations, I will finally be able to obtain much-needed information: in some cases easily, through clear and scientifically validated claims, and in others with just a few more questions. I will be able to know – explains Rulli – if the materials used reduce the impact and based on what evidence; if the supply chains are monitored and produce responsibly and if the brands support them; if the processes occur without the use of toxic and harmful chemicals… And so on. All information whose visibility on labels or on the manufacturer’s website or on social media or elsewhere will allow me to make purchases that are consistent with my values.”

It is clear that brands and supply chains will need to better manage traceability, collection, verification, and transparency of data, implementing structured and verifiable projects. In this sense, 4sustainability represents support in terms of implementation and a guarantee in terms of communication to the market: method and technology together are functional to a change that is necessary, today, also by law.

L'articolo GREENWASHING, THE DIRECTIVE FOR CONSUMER PROTECTION IS LAW proviene da 4sustainability.

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.

ManpowerGroup’s 2023 Green Jobs Report Highlights Widespread Shortage of Professionals Steering Businesses towards Sustainable Models.

According to a survey by ManpowerGroup, a leading multinational HR agency, 94% of employers confess to a glaring absence of in-house professionals essential for realizing their ESG objectives. This shortfall is particularly noteworthy in light of the market and legislative acceleration driving the adoption of sustainable business models. At the European level, an influx of impending regulations signals the mandatory rather than solely ethically-driven shift companies are compelled to undertake.

The Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, the Green Claims Directive, and the Regulation on Ecodesign for Sustainable Products (ESPR), which includes the pivotal Digital Product Passport chapter, serve as just a few examples. All align with the EU’s Green Deal, imposing requirements on one hand and incentivizing on the other, backed by a dedicated fund of 225 billion euros.
Within this dynamics, indicators and projections of investor preference suggest that poor ESG performance can negatively impact results by up to 21%.

Hunting for Green Skills

The culmination of these considerations and more results in approximately 70% of companies actively seeking “green talents,” prompting a widespread mobilization across all sectors, starting from manufacturing, operations, logistics, and IT.

Unfortunately, the ready supply of such professionals is in short order. While the demand for green skills significantly outstrips the available talent pool, a staggering 67% of job seekers prefer to apply to companies genuinely committed to reducing their environmental footprint. It’s a classic case of a vicious circle: the lack of necessary professionals hinders the realization of the transition, perceived by resources as a key factor in choosing one company over another!

Rising professions

In the intricate mosaic of the current job market, marked not only by profound changes but also by the lingering uncertainty of the economic landscape, one consistent feature emerges: the annual list of ascending professions by LinkedIn. This list provides a timely update on trends in a labor market navigating transformative shifts.

The 2023 ranking, spanning from January 2018 to July 2022, crowns two rapidly ascending roles, alongside a perennial frontrunner: the Business Developer, relentlessly sought after to acquire new clients and expand the company’s business horizons.

Of particular note are the third and second positions, emblematic of two interconnected drivers of competitiveness and growth: technological innovation and sustainability. Claiming the third spot is the SOC Analyst or Cyber Security Analyst, unmistakably signaling a focus on cybersecurity. The demand for technological expertise, in this case, responds to the indispensable need for data and network protection.

Securing the silver medal is the Sustainability Specialist, advancing three steps in the LinkedIn ranking in just one year. Tasked with implementing and overseeing a company’s sustainability strategies, the Sustainability Specialist must possess knowledge in environmental matters, CSR, reporting, and sustainable development – competencies that seem to be in high demand.

Francesca Rulli remarks, “The data confirms that the skills required for transition are both methodological for the implementation of sustainability projects and technological for data management support. The synergy between digital and sustainability for creating shared value, known as ‘twin transition’ in literature, forms the foundation of YHub, the first Italian holding for traceability and sustainability in fashion & luxury. YHub’s uniqueness lies in the synthesis of methodology, technological solutions, and the market-demanding expertise.”

In Demand: Sustainability Technicians and Managers

Manpower’s research, encompassing over 2000 ‘green’ positions in Italy alone, delves deeper into specificity. Among the coveted roles, we find the green mechatronics and industrial mechanics, the wind energy engineer, the environmental manager, the sustainable architect, the Zero-waste Program Manager, and more. Strategic and managerial profiles are also sought after, including the analyst for renewable energies, the Environmental Risk Manager, the aforementioned Sustainability Officer, the Project Manager ESG, and the Sustainable Manufacturing Innovation Director.

Hiring them is challenging; retaining them is equally daunting. This underscores that the challenge extends beyond recruitment – it’s about building loyalty and continually developing these professionals. In the realm of sustainability, this involves both upskilling and reskilling, essential activities to stay abreast of the constantly evolving landscape. Moreover, if external expertise is scarce, it becomes crucial to invest in internal resources that are either already aligned or willing to acquire the indispensable skills for sustainable growth.

Francesca Rulli notes, “Even in Italy, we’re witnessing a certain mobility among sustainability specialists. Driven by strong ethical motivations, these professionals refuse to settle for companies that merely treat sustainability as a marketing ploy and rightfully seek opportunities elsewhere. This is a factor companies must consider because once these valuable resources are found, they are retained only by engaging them in activities and projects genuinely aimed at ESG goals.”

L'articolo ESG OBJECTIVES: 94% OF COMPANIES LACK CRITICAL INTERNAL SKILLS proviene da 4sustainability.

What is vegan and what is sustainable? The two terms do not mean the same thing, quite the opposite. Consciously or not, many fashion brands misuse the former. And there are not a few cases of those who profess to be vegan without equal attention to the environment. Let’s set the record straight to help consumers make informed purchasing choices as well.

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.

Are Vegan and Sustainable the same?

It is quite intuitive that vegan means neither environmentally friendly nor sustainable. PVC is a perfectly vegan choice, but the toxicity of this material and its impact on the environment are well known.

The first distinction to be made is between ethics and sustainability. Ethics concerns the rights and welfare of workers, for example, but also the issue of animal exploitation: is what allows us to choose between what we think is right and not right.

Sustainability properly understood – which implies taking into account its three dimensions: environmental, social, and economic-organizational – includes ethics, but also key aspects such as the impacts of production on the environment and, therefore, the resources consumed, processes, management of chemicals and waste…

A vegan person may find it wrong to wear a leather garment that was once a living being because his/her sensibility and ethics prevent him/her from doing so. This is an understandable and respectable position, but we are talking about ethics, not sustainability.

Are Vegan and Cruelty Free synonyms?

There is also often confusion about the expression Cruelty Free, which is not necessarily a requirement of vegan fashion. Cruelty Free refers only to testing on animals and how they are treated: cruelty-free, in fact. A product not tested on animals, therefore, is for all intents and purposes Cruelty Free, but it may still contain ingredients of animal origin.

Is vegan fashion planet friendly?

It is difficult to solve the issue with a yes or no answer. If we look only at the CO₂ emissions caused by animal-derived materials versus those produced by vegan alternatives, the answer is generally yes. Life-cycle based assessments of products show that the production of bovine-derived leather results in higher greenhouse gas emissions than, for example, the production of cotton or polyester.

Some of these emissions come from methane produced by cows through digestion, others from food production and deforestation linked to the leather supply chain. Similar problems are for wool and silk, which require significant amounts of energy to be processed, and thus contribute more to global warming than synthetic alternatives such as polyester and acetate.

Durability, end of life-who wins?

To draw an intellectually honest conclusion about the vegan-sustainable comparison, one should consider all points of view, including the part that – comparative studies in hand – a leather good lasts on average longer than the corresponding product made from synthetic material. Idem for a wool sweater compared with vegan alternatives such as cotton, poly-cotton and polyester: in terms of durability, wool performs better.

Another relevant issue is that of microplastics released into waterways during the washing of synthetic garments. And then there is end-of-life management, which for garments and accessories with synthetic components poses some problems. Plant-based leather alternatives such as Piñatex, or Mylo, produced from pineapple waste and mushroom waste, respectively, are no exceptions: both have synthetic components and are therefore not fully biodegradable. Which, however, is also true for certain animal leather, whose biodegradability depends on the tanning process adopted to treat it.

What conclusions should be drawn?

With so many variables to take into account, no one wins in the end because there is no absolute best option. The issue is primarily cultural and involves all stakeholders in the system, including consumers who can push in one direction or the other with their purchasing choices.

“As with many aspects of sustainability, simplifying risks only aiding greenwashing. And comparing products with vegan features to products with reduced environmental impact is no exception”, explains Giovanni Graziani, Process Factory Consultant specializing in Environmental Footprint and LCA Analyses. “We need to consider all the variables of sustainability in order to strive for products ideally able to tell their own story, giving evidence of information about the supply chain, production models, raw materials, use of chemicals, attention to people…”.

The smarter goal is to work together to make all materials and products, vegan and nonvegan, sustainable. At that point, using animal or non-animal garments and accessories will truly be a personal ethical choice.

“Let’s think of a product composed of raw materials of animal origin, but from a recycling supply chains”, continues Giovanni. “Couldn’t we consider this approach both sustainable and ethical? Of course, we need to be able to rely on credible working tools that can handle complexity. Like the 4sustainability® framework, among others”.

L'articolo VEGAN VS SUSTAINABLE: FIND OUT THE DIFFERENCES proviene da 4sustainability.

What is reshoring? Since the early nineties, the fashion industry has focused largely on the relocation of production, driven mainly by issues of margins and labour costs. For some years, also thanks to the increase in the prices of resources and raw materials, we have been witnessing the opposite phenomenon: the so called reshoring.

By reshoring – or nearshoring – we mean the return of production to the country of origin or in any case geographically closer. This is not a brand-new theme and not only in Italy, but the supply difficulties that we have been experiencing for several months now has made it more topical than ever.

Some numbers

Several studies have analysed the phenomenon.  At the European level, one of the most valid analyses was carried out  between 2015 and 2018 by the European Reshoring Monitor, an organization arising from the  collaboration between Eurofound and a group of researchers from several Italian universities to monitor cases of reshoring in the European Union  and in the EFTA area (European Free Trade Association).  The project recorded 253 cases of reshoring, 60% of them between 2016 and 2017. The largest number of production repatriations were, in order, the United Kingdom, Italy and France. If we take into consideration the countries where production had been delocalized, absolute primacy belongs to China  with 30% of cases, followed at a distance by India and Poland with 6%.

A nice and good choice

Our domestic textile and fashion sector seems to be doing great:  in the first quarter of 2022, Italian weaving grew by 34%, with a + 46% in exports and  this in spite of the shortage of skilled labour and above all the costs of raw materials, energy and gas.
To urge textile and fashion companies to adopt zero-kilometre solutions is not so much a problem of costs –  or at least, this is not the reason at the origin of the trend – when the need is to guarantee services at its historically high levels and also the opportunity to consolidate its reputation in the environmental field.

High labour costs have long served to justify offshore production. Today, however, the volatility of supply chains, shipping complications and costs, duties, uncertainties generated by socio-political instability  and the proliferation of automation technologies,  which lead to a  significant reduction in the number of workers needed to carry out many processes, make reshoring a profitable, practical option.  and, ultimately safer.  A sustainable choice because it also helps to contain excess production: supply centres far from the reference markets, in fact, imply cumbersome forecasting of demand and consequently higher  risks of overproduction.

The recovery of the short supply chain

SMI: vital to redistribute value

According to Andrea Crespi, vice president of Sistema Moda Italia, the positive implications of reshoring for the manufacturing sector are obvious but pay attention to what  happens upstream and downstream.  “Upstream of the supply chain, the exorbitant costs of energy risk defusing the good that there is in reshoring from the start. Many companies are already in  serious difficulty, despite having significant orders booked. And this is a paradox that is everyone’s responsibility to avoid, because if one link in the supply chain is skipped, the whole system crashes down to the valley. Redistribution of value along the entire supply chain, is the challenge to be won quickly! So welcome relocation.”

L'articolo SHORING AND RESHORING: THE SHORT-RANGE SUPPLY CHAIN IS BACK IN FASHION! 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.