Interview: practitioners on Fashion and textiles — what they wish they knew earlier

The European fashion industry generates approximately 12.6 million tonnes of textile waste annually, with <1% of clothing currently recycled into new garments. In conversations with sustainability directors, supply chain managers, and circular economy consultants across Europe, a consistent theme emerged: the gap between measurement ambition and measurement reality has become the defining challenge of textile sustainability. This article synthesizes insights from practitioners who have navigated the complexities of data quality, standards alignment, and the ever-present temptation of measurement theater—offering hard-won lessons for those beginning their journey toward genuinely sustainable fashion operations.

Why It Matters

Fashion represents one of the most materially intensive industries on the planet, responsible for an estimated 10% of global carbon emissions and 20% of industrial water pollution. In the European context, the regulatory landscape has shifted dramatically. The EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles, adopted in 2024, establishes mandatory extended producer responsibility schemes across member states by 2025, while the proposed Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation will require Digital Product Passports for textile products entering the EU market by 2027.

The stakes for practitioners have never been higher. According to the European Environment Agency's 2024 assessment, textile consumption in Europe averages 26 kilograms per person annually—ranking among the highest globally. The European Commission estimates that achieving the EU's textile circularity targets could create 600,000 new jobs while reducing sector emissions by 45% by 2030. Yet practitioners report that current measurement infrastructure remains woefully inadequate for these ambitions.

"We spent eighteen months building what we thought was a comprehensive LCA framework," reflects one sustainability director at a major French fashion house. "Then we discovered that our Tier 3 suppliers were using completely different calculation methodologies. Our numbers were internally consistent but externally meaningless."

This disconnect between regulatory ambition and operational reality defines the current European textile sustainability landscape. The 2025 implementation of France's Anti-Waste Law for a Circular Economy (AGEC), Germany's Supply Chain Due Diligence Act, and the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) have created overlapping compliance requirements that demand unprecedented data granularity—yet the infrastructure for generating that data remains fragmented at best.

Key Concepts

Supply Chain Transparency refers to the ability to trace materials, processes, and impacts across all tiers of production. In textiles, this typically encompasses Tier 1 (finished goods assembly), Tier 2 (fabric production), Tier 3 (yarn and fiber processing), and Tier 4 (raw material extraction). European practitioners consistently report that visibility deteriorates dramatically beyond Tier 2, with fewer than 35% of brands able to identify all Tier 3 suppliers according to Fashion Revolution's 2024 Transparency Index.

Greenwashing in the textile context has evolved beyond simple false claims to encompass more sophisticated forms of misleading communication. The Dutch Authority for Consumers and Markets' 2024 investigation found that 59% of sustainability claims made by fashion retailers in the Netherlands could not be substantiated. This has prompted the EU to develop the Green Claims Directive, requiring third-party verification of environmental marketing assertions from 2026.

Unit Economics of Sustainability describes the cost-per-unit implications of sustainable material choices, circular design modifications, and end-of-life processing requirements. Practitioners emphasize that sustainable textiles often carry 15-40% cost premiums at the material level, requiring careful integration into pricing strategies and margin calculations. The critical insight from interviews: unit economics must be calculated across the full product lifecycle, not merely at point of manufacture.

Additionality represents perhaps the most contested concept in textile sustainability measurement. It refers to environmental benefits that would not have occurred without a specific intervention. In carbon offsetting for fashion brands, additionality failures have generated significant reputational damage—practitioners now insist on "insetting" approaches that drive measurable improvements within their own supply chains rather than purchasing external offsets of questionable provenance.

Measurement Theater describes sustainability activities designed primarily to generate impressive metrics rather than genuine environmental improvement. Practitioners identify common patterns: cherry-picked scope boundaries, inconsistent baseline definitions, and the proliferation of proprietary scoring systems that resist external comparison. One consultant characterized it as "the gap between what gets measured and what actually matters."

What's Working and What Isn't

What's Working

Collaborative Data Infrastructure: The ZDHC (Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals) Gateway platform has emerged as a functional model for shared sustainability data. By standardizing chemical disclosure across 160+ participating brands and 12,000+ facilities, ZDHC demonstrates that pre-competitive collaboration can solve data quality challenges that individual brands cannot address alone. Participating practitioners report 40-60% reductions in supplier audit duplication and significantly improved chemical compliance visibility.

Fiber-Level Traceability Technologies: Blockchain and isotopic tracing solutions from providers like TextileGenesis and Fibertrace have achieved commercial scale in European supply chains. H&M Group's 2024 pilot with TextileGenesis traced 50 million garments from fiber to finished product, demonstrating that end-to-end traceability is technically achievable. The key success factor: integration with existing ERP systems rather than standalone deployment.

Standardized Impact Calculation: The EU Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) methodology, despite initial industry resistance, has provided a common framework for comparing textile environmental impacts. Practitioners who invested early in PEF-compliant systems report that regulatory compliance preparation has become significantly more straightforward, with several noting that the methodology's prescriptive nature actually simplified rather than complicated their measurement programs.

What Isn't Working

Voluntary Certification Proliferation: The textile industry now features over 200 sustainability certifications, creating confusion for both practitioners and consumers. Interviews revealed that brands frequently invest in multiple overlapping certifications without clear understanding of their relative rigor or consumer recognition. The Global Fashion Agenda's 2024 analysis found that certification costs now exceed €50 million annually for the European industry while generating limited demonstrable impact improvement.

Scope 3 Estimation Methodologies: Practitioners universally identify Scope 3 emissions calculation as their most significant measurement challenge. The reliance on industry-average emission factors, rather than supplier-specific primary data, introduces uncertainty ranges of 30-50% in reported figures. "We're publishing numbers with false precision," admitted one sustainability manager. "Three decimal places on estimates that could be off by half."

Circular Business Model Scaling: Despite significant investment, textile rental, resale, and repair models have struggled to achieve profitability in European markets. Practitioners report that reverse logistics costs, garment refurbishment requirements, and consumer behavior barriers have prevented these models from moving beyond subsidized pilot status. The unit economics, they note, only work at scales that most brands have been unable to achieve.

Key Players

Established Leaders

Inditex (Spain): The Zara parent company has invested €2.4 billion in sustainability initiatives through 2025, including the Join Life program that now encompasses 45% of products. Their traceability platform tracks cotton from 1,100 farms across 12 countries.

H&M Group (Sweden): Operates the industry's largest garment collection program, recovering 18,800 tonnes of textiles in 2024. Their Circulator tool provides design-phase circularity guidance across 5,000+ design decisions annually.

Kering (France): Pioneer of the Environmental Profit & Loss methodology, quantifying environmental impacts in monetary terms. Their Materials Innovation Lab has catalogued 3,800+ sustainable material alternatives.

LVMH (France): The LIFE 360 program targets 100% traceability across strategic supply chains by 2026. Their internal carbon fund prices emissions at €30/tonne to drive operational decisions.

Zalando (Germany): The Sustainability Progress Report framework provides standardized assessment across 7,000+ brand partners, creating unprecedented visibility into the European fashion market's collective sustainability performance.

Emerging Startups

Circular.fashion (Germany): Their circularity.ID platform provides design-phase guidance and product-level passports, now integrated with 350+ brands. Raised €8 million in 2024 Series A funding.

Vestiaire Collective (France): Europe's largest luxury resale platform, achieving B Corp certification and €3 billion valuation. Their authentication and refurbishment operations process 15,000 items daily.

Renewcell (Sweden): Produces Circulose regenerated fiber from textile waste at commercial scale. The Renewcell 1 facility processes 60,000 tonnes annually, supplying H&M, Levi's, and other major brands.

EON (UK): Digital identity platform connecting products to data throughout their lifecycle. Powers Digital Product Passports for brands including Chloé and Pangaia across 10 million+ products.

Infinited Fiber Company (Finland): Produces Infinna regenerated textile fiber from cellulose-rich waste streams. Their flagship facility, operational in 2025, will produce 30,000 tonnes annually.

Key Investors & Funders

European Investment Bank: The EIB's €500 million Circular Economy Initiative includes dedicated textile transition financing, with €120 million deployed to date.

Horizon Europe: The EU research programme has allocated €180 million to textile circularity projects through 2027, including the Re-Fashion and CISUTAC initiatives.

Fashion for Good (Netherlands): Backed by founding partners including Adidas, C&A, and PVH, this innovation platform has invested in 170+ startups since 2018.

Mirova (France): This impact investment firm manages the €300 million Circular Economy Fund with significant textile holdings, including Renewcell and several chemical recycling ventures.

Circulate Capital: While primarily focused on packaging, their €200 million fund has begun textile circular economy investments in European markets, recognizing the polyester-PET recycling synergies.

Examples

Example 1: Decathlon France's Traceability Transformation

Decathlon's "Care" program, launched in 2023, demonstrates large-scale implementation of product-level environmental scoring. Working with Bureau Veritas, Decathlon now publishes environmental impact ratings for 95% of products sold in France—covering 23,000+ SKUs across 85 sports. The methodology incorporates eight environmental indicators including climate impact, water use, and resource depletion, calculated using supplier-specific primary data for Tier 1 and Tier 2 facilities. Consumer research indicates 34% of French Decathlon customers now factor environmental scores into purchase decisions. The program required €12 million investment over three years and integration with 1,200+ supplier systems.

Example 2: Bestseller's Supply Chain Carbon Reduction

Danish fashion group Bestseller (owner of Jack & Jones, Vero Moda, and Only) achieved a 33% reduction in supply chain carbon intensity between 2019 and 2024 through systematic engagement with manufacturing partners. Rather than offsetting emissions, Bestseller deployed a supplier energy efficiency program that installed solar capacity at 47 factories across Bangladesh, China, and Turkey. The approach emphasized additionality verification: each installation was subject to third-party assessment confirming that the renewable energy deployment would not have occurred without Bestseller's intervention. The program required €28 million in direct investment and supplier co-financing, generating annual emissions reductions of 92,000 tonnes CO2e—equivalent to the entire Scope 3 footprint of brands twice Bestseller's size.

Example 3: Armedangels Germany's Radical Transparency Initiative

German sustainable fashion brand Armedangels has pioneered what practitioners describe as "uncomfortable transparency"—publishing detailed supply chain information including supplier names, locations, wages, and audit findings for all production facilities. Their Detox Progress Reports, aligned with Greenpeace standards, document specific chemical discharge levels at each facility. When a 2024 audit revealed labor violations at a Turkish supplier, Armedangels published the findings alongside their remediation plan rather than quietly terminating the relationship. This approach, while creating short-term reputational risk, has generated significant stakeholder trust and differentiated market positioning. Sales increased 24% in 2024, with customer surveys indicating transparency practices as the primary purchase driver for 41% of new customers.

Action Checklist

• Audit current sustainability data sources and document confidence levels for each metric category, distinguishing between primary data, supplier-reported data, and industry-average estimates
• Map regulatory requirements across operating markets, identifying gaps between current measurement capabilities and 2025-2027 compliance mandates including CSRD, ESPR, and national EPR schemes
• Establish supplier-specific carbon intensity baselines for Tier 1 and Tier 2 facilities using the GHG Protocol Scope 3 Category 1 methodology with primary activity data
• Implement Digital Product Passport infrastructure aligned with EU requirements, starting with high-volume product categories representing >60% of sales
• Calculate true unit economics of sustainable material transitions, including certification costs, supplier premiums, quality adjustment requirements, and end-of-life processing liabilities
• Develop additionality verification protocols for all supply chain improvement claims, requiring third-party assessment of baseline conditions and counterfactual scenarios
• Join pre-competitive data sharing initiatives relevant to your supply chain geography, prioritizing ZDHC Gateway, Higg Index, and Open Apparel Registry participation
• Conduct measurement theater audit: identify metrics that generate impressive reports but do not drive operational decisions, and either improve their utility or discontinue collection
• Establish supplier capacity building programs that treat sustainability measurement as collaborative improvement rather than compliance policing
• Create internal carbon pricing mechanisms that make supply chain emissions visible in procurement and sourcing decisions

FAQ

Q: How can we distinguish meaningful sustainability certifications from greenwashing credentials? A: Focus on certifications with robust chain-of-custody requirements, third-party verification, and publicly accessible standard documents. The EU's forthcoming Green Claims Directive will require substantiation of environmental claims, making this distinction increasingly consequential. Priority certifications for European textile operations include GOTS (organic textiles), OEKO-TEX (chemical safety), and Fair Trade (social sustainability). Evaluate certifications against three criteria: audit frequency and rigor, transparency of non-compliance consequences, and recognition in your primary retail markets. Avoid certifications that rely primarily on self-declaration or that lack clear, measurable requirements.

Q: What's the minimum viable approach to Scope 3 textile emissions measurement? A: Begin with a hybrid approach: collect primary activity data from your 20-30 largest suppliers (typically covering 70-80% of procurement spend), then apply secondary emission factors for the long tail. Use the Sustainable Apparel Coalition's Higg Facility Environmental Module for standardized supplier-level data collection, recognizing its limitations while benefiting from industry-wide comparability. The GHG Protocol Scope 3 Technical Guidance provides calculation methodologies appropriate for varying data availability. Most importantly, document your methodology transparently—including uncertainty ranges—rather than publishing precision-implied numbers that obscure significant estimation assumptions.

Q: How should we prepare for EU Digital Product Passport requirements? A: The Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation requires DPPs for textile products from 2027, with implementing acts specifying detailed requirements expected in 2025. Preparation should focus on three areas: establishing unique product identifiers that persist through manufacturing, distribution, and sale; integrating supply chain data systems to populate passport fields with verified information; and developing consumer-facing interfaces that make passport information accessible and useful. Early implementers like H&M and PVH have shared implementation learnings through industry forums—studying their architectural approaches will inform your investment decisions.

Q: What are the most common pitfalls in textile circularity measurement? A: Four patterns emerge consistently from practitioner interviews. First, measuring collection volumes without tracking actual recycling outcomes—textile collection programs often route materials to downcycling or export rather than genuine closed-loop recycling. Second, claiming recycled content credit for pre-consumer waste that would have been recycled regardless, violating additionality principles. Third, establishing circularity metrics that inadvertently incentivize design decisions counterproductive to actual garment longevity. Fourth, comparing circularity performance across products with fundamentally different use cases and lifecycle expectations without appropriate normalization.

Q: How do we balance transparency demands with competitive sensitivity in sustainability reporting? A: The tension is real but often overstated. Pre-competitive spaces like the Open Apparel Registry demonstrate that supplier disclosure rarely creates meaningful competitive disadvantage—most major brands share significant supplier overlap. For genuinely proprietary innovations, consider time-delayed disclosure approaches that protect first-mover advantages while eventually contributing to industry-wide learning. Regulatory requirements increasingly mandate disclosure regardless of competitive preference, making proactive transparency a strategic choice rather than a competitive sacrifice. Brands like Patagonia and Armedangels have demonstrated that radical transparency can itself become a competitive differentiator.

Sources

• European Environment Agency. (2024). Textiles and the Environment: The Role of Design in Europe's Circular Economy. Copenhagen: EEA Publications.
• Fashion Revolution. (2024). Fashion Transparency Index 2024. London: Fashion Revolution CIC.
• European Commission. (2024). EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles: Implementation Report. Brussels: Publications Office of the European Union.
• McKinsey & Company and Global Fashion Agenda. (2024). Fashion on Climate: How the Fashion Industry Can Urgently Act to Reduce Its Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Copenhagen: Global Fashion Agenda.
• Textile Exchange. (2024). Materials Market Report 2024. Lamesa, TX: Textile Exchange.
• ZDHC Foundation. (2024). ZDHC Impact Report: A Decade of Collaborative Chemical Management. Amsterdam: ZDHC Foundation.
• Quantis and ClimateWorks Foundation. (2024). Measuring Fashion: Environmental Impact of the Global Apparel and Footwear Industries Study. Lausanne: Quantis International.