In 2023, the luxury group LVMH became the first European company to surpass a value of US$500 billion, while similar businesses including Richemont have also reported upticks in sales. It’s a sure sign that the luxury fashion industry’s significant power and influence isn’t waning. Which raises the question: with as powerful as luxury brands are, how are they faring for sustainability?

Luxury brands certainly like to speak a big game about sustainability. At the Global Fashion Summit Copenhagen in 2023, Antoine Arnault, LVMH’s head of image and environment, said that luxury fashion is “sustainable by nature”, but our ratings tell a different story.

While the overproduction of cheap clothing isn’t an issue in luxury as it is with fast fashion giants like SHEIN and Temu, there are other factors that urgently need addressing across the industry—luxury included. And not least is the payment of living wages to workers throughout entire supply chains.

Read on to find out the most significant challenges facing the industry, and how the situation looks right now.

Is luxury fashion more sustainable than fast fashion?

Luxury fashion is often defined by exclusivity, high prices, and high quality. And while there are many sustainability issues within the luxury sector, much of the widely publicised destructive practices in the wider industry have been driven by the growth of fast fashion brands.

The explosion of overproduction, for instance, is a key problem within ultra fast fashion as popularised by the likes of SHEIN, Boohoo, and Temu, which reportedly add thousands of individual styles to their websites daily. Luxury fashion doesn’t manufacture products at the same excessive levels. There’s no doubt that luxury fashion has increased the number of collections that are put out through the year, and our fashion-as-entertainment era means luxury brands also play a role in creating the demand for fashion trends. But let’s face it—landfills in Chile and Ghana aren’t filled with Gucci loafers or handbags from The Row.

Another key consideration is how quality relates to longevity. Historically, luxury brands have given more attention, time, and artisanship to garment production, employing craft techniques and tailoring methods that undoubtedly mean an item of clothing will last longer than one that has been sewn together in a rush.

But “not as bad as fast fashion” is a low bar, and it’s not that simple when it comes to considering luxury fashion’s complex supply chains and historic lack of transparency. In fact, when we look at the ratings for leading luxury brands, we see many unsustainable trends, too. Some matters are bigger in luxury than in fast fashion, such as the use of exotic animal skin and fur, while others, like poor working conditions and a lack of transparency around water management, are just as prevalent at both ends of the industry.

So how does luxury fashion rate?

Our data shows that the majority of luxury brands are not doing or disclosing nearly enough to address the sustainability issues in the industry. An abysmal 75% of luxury brands received our two lowest ratings, “We Avoid” and “Not Good Enough”, including the world’s biggest luxury brand, Louis Vuitton. You’d expect better of the industry leader.

Only 10% are “Good” or “Great”. Notably, those with these two highest ratings are mostly small brands.

What are the biggest sustainability issues in luxury fashion?

So why do the majority of luxury brands rate so poorly? Let’s explore some of the most enduring sustainability issues within luxury fashion.

The use of animal skin and fur

Thankfully, in the last two decades, most of the biggest luxury brands and retailers have banned and even spoken out against the use of fur—historically an ultimate signifier of luxury. But the likes of Fendi, which was founded as a furrier, Louis Vuitton, and Max Mara continue to use it in their collections.

Exotic animal skin is more commonly used than fur and while there has been progress in eliminating the material, we’re still seeing far too many brands prominently incorporating it in their designs. Hermès, for example, attempts to justify its continued use of alligator, crocodile and ostrich by announcing what it positioned as “the first specific standards for supply chains for these precious skins.” “At the end of 2023, 100% of Hermès’ supply of crocodile hides came from certified sites,” the brand stated—which does nothing to address the fact that crocodiles are farmed and killed solely for the perceived luxury of their skins.

Human rights

The majority of luxury brands received our two lowest ratings for labour when we analysed the publicly available data. This underscores how there’s still a long way to go in this area.

Luxury brands like to be seen as advocates for responsible garment manufacturing, but this often involves sentimentalising techniques that are traditionally considered artisanal or highly skilled (and therefore more highly paid), such as embroidery, tailoring, and dyeing methods, while disregarding more general manufacturing skills such as machine sewing.

And in 2023, the Fashion Transparency Index published data showing that 99% of 250 of the world’s largest brands that it analysed don’t disclose the percentage of workers in their supply chain earning a living wage.

True sustainability for people in the fashion industry means upholding respect for all garment workers—and that just isn’t happening yet. A 2018 investigation by the New York Times uncovered a “shadow economy” in Italy’s fashion industry, in which “thousands of low-paid home workers create luxury garments without contracts or insurance,” with workers receiving as little as €1 for each metre they sew. And reporting since then has found many similar examples of labour exploitation in luxury supply chains. In 2024 Giorgio Armani is under investigation for labour violations and having “used subcontractors in the Milan area that employed undocumented migrants for the production of Armani bags, leather goods, and other accessories,” according the The Fashion Law.

There’s also a link to cultural sustainability here, and the appropriation of traditional techniques from cultures around the world in the name of luxury craftsmanship, without giving the necessary credit, payment or engaging in a dialogue with the communities at the heart of the crafts involved. Isabel Marant is one of many luxury brands called out by the Mexican government for appropriating Indigenous artisanship in recent years. (It’s worth noting this issue is common in fast fashion, too.)

99% of the world's largest brands don't disclose what percentage of workers get paid living wages.

Carbon footprints

Greenhouse gas emissions and large carbon footprints aren’t unique to luxury. The UN Environment Program has determined that as much as 10% of the global carbon output comes from the fashion industry broadly, though estimates vary—and knowing what percentage luxury fashion accounts for, in particular, is challenging.

The luxury sector has a responsibility to take meaningful action to mitigate its impact and demonstrate best practice to the rest of the industry.

And then there is carbon offsetting. Data from our recent report revealed that for brands, purchasing carbon offsets has become a distraction from actually taking meaningful action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. What’s more, the true effectiveness of carbon offset programs has been called into question by experts and investigators in recent years. And although our report covered the whole industry, we noted that luxury brands including Gucci, Saint Laurent, and Balenciaga, have all purchased offsets as a means to reach net zero. It’s worth noting that in 2024, brands are increasingly backing away from these net zero claims, partly due to regulatory action and proposed legislation. But the bottom line? We need to see brands taking real actions throughout their supply chain to reduce emissions, rather than buying their way out of them.

Transparency seems secondary to exclusivity

Luxury brands can be reluctant to be transparent about their supply chains because these manufacturers, fabrics, and artisans are what make the products exclusive or “special”. Although sometimes, a lack of transparency is because luxury products are made in the same factories that fast fashion brands use.

Exclusivity is also the reason why some luxury brands have opted to burn excess fabrics, clothes, and accessories—they’d rather uphold rarity than reduce waste. Reports of this unsustainable practice have caused outrage amongst consumers, and some of those responsible, like Burberry, have since committed to ending the incineration of unsold products, while France has recently banned it.

There are some signs that things are nudging in the right direction. In 2023’s Fashion Transparency Index, Fashion Revolution found that more luxury brands are sharing details of their factories, and notably, Gucci received a score of 80% for its transparency—the highest of any luxury brand analysed in the research. “Transparency has evolved to the point that it has become part of the identity of what it means to be luxury,” Liv Simpliciano, Fashion Revolution’s policy and research manager, told us. “When we started our work, we were told that luxury brands publishing their supplier lists was a distant dream but now, many do.”

Despite that, transparency in the industry is only improving at a snail’s pace, and we need to see luxury brands taking the lead and fully disclosing details of their supply chains instead of waiting for legislation to push them into doing the right thing.

Exclusivity is why some luxury brands burn excess fabrics, clothes, and accessories

Is the quiet luxury trend more sustainable?

Sometimes, brands masquerade as doing the right thing through aesthetics, price tags and perceived artisanship, and a case in point is the quiet luxury trend.

In theory, quiet luxury could be a sustainable approach to fashion. The concept of forgoing conspicuous branding and opting for high quality, usually minimalistic clothes that are carefully selected and designed to last sounds like a good idea. But, in many ways, it’s become merely another fleeting trend driven by influencers and distilled by fast fashion giants. While investing in a capsule wardrobe and committing to owning fewer timeless pieces are all good moves we can take as consumers, the most popular quiet luxury items tend to rely heavily on fabrics such as cashmere, leather, and wool—these can all have a significant impact on people, the planet, and animals.

What’s more, Good On You’s data shows that the brands championing quiet luxury are all rated poorly—Loro Piana, Brunello Cucinelli and Jil Sander are “Not Good Enough” for their sustainability efforts, while Max Mara and The Row both received “We Avoid” ratings. Slowing down your fashion consumption? That’s a good thing. But making the “slow fashion” aesthetic into merely another trend to chase? That’s the luxury status quo.

What are more sustainable luxury brands?

As long as those involved in luxury supply chains aren’t paid living wages, materials are not sourced responsibly, and parts of the industry remain shrouded in secrecy, the sector just can’t be considered sustainable.

But there are some brands leading the way, including Maggie Marilyn, Stella McCartney, Edeline Lee, and Mother of Pearl, which are all rated “Good” by our world-leading analysts. Our list of the top-rated more sustainable luxury brands has the full breakdown of “Good” and “Great” companies to know about.

Of the large luxury groups in the fashion industry, Kering arguably has the loudest voice on sustainability. Almost all of its owned brands (except Brioni) are rated “It’s a Start” in our directory, including Gucci and Saint Laurent, and while there’s lots of room for improvement amongst them, this is undoubtedly a step in the right direction. (So too, is Kering’s support for the London College of Fashion’s sustainable fashion e-learning course with the platform FutureLearn, which launched in 2018.)

Some might be sceptical, but we need luxury businesses with the most power to lead by example in order to transform the industry for the better.

The post Is Luxury Fashion Sustainable? Here’s What Our Ratings Say appeared first on Good On You.

A decade of pushing the fashion industry forward

Fashion Revolution has achieved a lot in its first decade. Founded by Orsola de Castro and Carry Somers, the organisation has launched highly visible campaigns like #WhoMadeMyClothes and Good Clothes, Fair Pay—taking the most pressing issues in fashion to a wide audience. It also created the Global Fashion Transparency Index, an annual research project that now charts the transparency of 250 of the world’s largest and most powerful brands in order to leverage citizens’ activism and call for regulation in the industry.

To commemorate the organisation’s tenth anniversary, we asked its activists where the most urgent change needs to happen and what their hopes are for the next decade in sustainable fashion.

Martina Mareková Kuipers, country coordinator, Slovakia

‘More design, less waste’—on hope for the next 10 years 

“As little textile waste as possible—in production and also in our wardrobes. More design, less waste. And it goes without saying that there should be some sustainability in the lives of garment workers producing these sustainable designs. The biggest changes need to be done in the legislation, and that will effect positive changes in the whole industry.”

Ysabl Dobles, country coordinator, Philippines

‘Holding brands accountable’—on where we need change

“The transformation I yearn for in the fashion industry centres on transparency—a beacon guiding us towards a more ethical and accountable future. Transparency isn’t just about shedding light on supply chains and production processes, it’s about holding brands accountable for their actions or inactions.

“Imagine a world where every garment tag tells a story, revealing not just its style, but also its journey from sourcing to creation, and the impact it leaves on both people and the planet.”

Melissa Tan, country coordinator, Malaysia

‘Cut off the puppet strings of marketing and greenwashing’—on hope for the future

“My hope is for our society and culture to significantly shift into a deep connection with our world and all living things. There would no longer be a differentiation between ‘sustainable’ or ‘mainstream’ fashion. Fashion would just be authentic self-expression centred in deep appreciation and care for the people and resources that went into every garment. The true beauty and joy of fashion.

“And I would like to see change happen in our relationship with fashion. Most of us are manipulated into thinking what we have and who we are is not enough. That we have to be something else, that there’s always going to be the next trend to chase, or outfit to buy and mimic.

“I want to see us all reinvent how we relate to fashion and transform it into healthy self-expression and creativity. We cut off the puppet strings of marketing and greenwashing, and become a society that has dismantled the programming of overconsumption.”

We cut off the puppet strings of marketing and greenwashing, and become a society that has dismantled the programming of overconsumption.

Melissa Tan – country coordinator, Malaysia

Shruti Singh, country coordinator, India

‘Designing for circularity’—on the urgent change we need

“The most significant change needed in the fashion industry lies at its very core: designing for circularity. Imagine a future where fashion is crafted with purpose at every decision—where shorter supply chains, culturally rooted practices, and the use of alternative planet-friendly materials become the norm.

“This means tackling overproduction, turning our backs on toxic dyes and materials, committing to durability, and ensuring that what is created is built to last and can be safely integrated back into fashion supply chains.

“I believe that radical and honest progress towards a regenerative fashion ecosystem demands open-source collaboration within the industry and a shared commitment to reimagining the future of fashion.”

A Fashion Revolution India event

Elise Epp, country coordinator, Canada

‘We can’t rely on corporations to ‘choose’’—on where we need change

“Fashion Revolution started with the question #WhoMadeMyClothes? yet issues of safety and justice for workers still need to be meaningfully addressed by the fashion industry. Brands will release “sustainable” collections focused on materials, but not a living wage collection or a safe working conditions collection.

“We cannot rely on corporations to choose to make these changes themselves—they have shown that they are not reliable self-regulators. Fortunately, there are movements working towards groundbreaking legislation that really could transform the industry. I hope these laws are passed with robust enforcement mechanisms and then replicated around the world.”

Haleema Mekani, country coordinator, Zimbabwe

‘The world has a lot to learn about how to embody the principles of circular living’—on where we need change

“As Fashion Revolution reaches its first decade milestone, I would like to see the most change happen in the way we see, report, and understand the ways small communities—especially in Africa—have championed a sustainable creative lifestyle not as a newfound need but as a natural way of being.

“The world has a lot to learn about how to embody the principles of circular living, sustainable practices, and working with nature as the most organic and innately logical thing to do, and this is a way of living that has existed in many Indigenous African communities for centuries. If we begin to change the perception of Africa and have more contextualised narratives to sustainability, a whole world of adaptable and meaningful tools can become available to change people and the world.”

The world has a lot to learn about how to embody the principles of circular living, sustainable practices, and working with nature as the most organic and innately logical thing to do… this way of living has existed in many Indigenous African communities for centuries.

Haleema Mekani – country coordinator, Zimbabwe

Ariane Piper, country coordinator, Germany

‘Consumers would understand that their shopping behaviour has a crucial impact’–on change in the future

“I wish that consumers would understand that their shopping behaviour has a crucial impact on our planet and people. Consumers need to understand that not only the style of clothing in their wardrobes are making a difference but their choices on the amount of clothing they buy.”

Fashion Revolution US attendees

Wangari Nyanjui, country coordinator, Kenya

‘Africans take up their rightful place as innovators’—on hope for the next decade

“My hope is that Africans take up their rightful place as innovators, creators and custodians of sustainable practices and knowledge.”

Macy Nguyen, country coordinator, Vietnam

‘Over-reliance on trends and the culture of constant consumption’—on what fashion should leave behind

“I hope that fashion will leave behind its over-reliance on trends and the culture of constant consumption and production that it fosters. The fast-paced trend culture perpetuates a rapid turnover of clothing styles, leading to excessive waste and environmental degradation.

“Instead, I hope the fashion industry will shift towards a more timeless and enduring approach to design, where quality, craftsmanship, and longevity take precedence. This would encourage consumers to invest in pieces that they truly love and will cherish for years to come, reducing the need for constant purchasing and minimising the industry’s footprint.

“It would also prioritise the preservation of traditional fashion practices and cultures. By valuing the rich heritage of various communities around the world, the industry can foster greater inclusivity and diversity, while also promoting sustainable practices that honour the planet and its people.”

Isabella Luglio, educational and project coordinator, Brazil

‘The conversation about degrowth in the fashion sector will be common ground’—on hope for the future

“I hope that in the next 10 years, the conversation about degrowth in the fashion sector will be common ground and people and nature will be placed above profits.

“I also hope that fashion leaves deforestation practices behind. It’s absurd that the industry still relies on biodiversity destruction in the Global South for the production of clothes.”

How to get involved in the Fashion Revolution

The great thing about Fashion Revolution’s global approach is that you don’t have to be in a specific place to help bring about change. From asking brands #WhoMadeMyClothes? to joining an interactive webinar, there are lots of actions you can take. Read our guide on what to do this Fashion Revolution Week, and then check out our interview with the person behind the Fashion Transparency Index, policy and research manager Liv Simpliciano.

The post 10 Fashion Revolutionaries’ Visions for the Next Decade in Sustainable Fashion appeared first on Good On You.

Fashion Revolution Week 2024

Fashion Revolution Week came about after the collapse of the Rana Plaza garment factory in Bangladesh on 24 April 2013, which killed 1,138 people and injured another 2,500. In the decade since the tragedy, Fashion Revolution has become a global movement calling for the industry to value people and the planet over growth and profit. Check out our interview with Fashion Revolution’s policy and research manager, Liv Simpliciano, to learn about the progress the organisation has made in the last decade.

The fashion industry is built on the exploitation of labour and natural resources, resulting in money and power being concentrated in the hands of a few. Because profit is prioritised over everything else, fashion brands are in a hectic race to produce more, at a quicker pace, and push us to increase the amount we’re buying and shop more often. Those at the top of the supply chain keep cashing bigger cheques, while the people who make our clothes are still underpaid and unable to meet their basic needs. We talk a lot about how brands can protect the earth and be more sustainable, but the truth is, there’s no sustainability without fair pay and safe working conditions.

2024 marks 10 years since Fashion Revolution, now the world’s largest fashion activism movement, first started actively campaigning. In that time, we have mobilised hundreds of thousands of global citizens to take action, engaged policymakers and lobbied for legislative change, and demanded greater transparency from the world’s largest fashion brands and retailers.

Fashion Revolution

This year again, ethical fashion lovers all over the world will be asking their favourite brands questions like #WhoMadeMyFabric? on social media. Throughout Fashion Revolution Week, the organisation will educate and inspire us on the real value of what we buy and wear.

During the week, you can attend many digital and a few physical conferences, exhibitions, workshops, and even online public demonstrations—all spreading the word about building a more ethical and sustainable fashion industry.

Want to participate and make your voice heard? Here’s how to join the Fashion Revolution online and offline this year.

Attend Fashion Revolution Week events and workshops

Fashion Revolution has planned an epic line-up of online events that will be streaming all around the world. Here are some of our favourites:

• Watch Fashion Revolution’s interactive webinar on “How to be a Campaigner”. Learn more about the organisation’s notable campaigns: Good Clothes, Fair Pay, and #WhoMadeMyClothes, and design your own campaign with fellow Fashion Revolutionaries. “If you’re passionate about social and environmental justice, want to engage citizens, brands or policymakers and are looking to connect with other changemakers, this is the workshop for you,” writes Fashion Revolution.
• Join Mend In Public Day: “The idea is simple: get out into your local community and stitch in protest against disposable fashion. Amidst busy Saturday shoppers, we will repair our torn pockets and broken seams and spark conversations on making Loved Clothes Last,” explains Fashion Revolution.
• Attend a clothes swap in Cape Town: on April 21st, Fashion Revolution South Africa will be hosting a clothing swap event. You can bring up to 10 of your pre-loved clothing items and accessories that you no longer need on the day.
• If you’re in Amsterdam, visit the Fashion for Good Museum, which tells the stories behind the clothes we wear and how our choices can have a positive impact. Fashion for Good believes that the industry can and must change, and strives to help raise awareness and share knowledge. A must-visit during Fashion Revolution Week, and any week before June 5th, as the museum will shift into an expanded co-working and community space after that date.

Browse all Fashion Revolution Week events

Post a selfie on your favourite social media platforms, tagging the brand you’re wearing and asking them #WhoMadeMyClothes? and #WhatsInMyClothes?

This is one of the easiest ways to get involved in Fashion Revolution Week this year—and every year. If the brand doesn’t respond, keep asking. And don’t forget to tag Fashion Revolution @fash_rev so they can stay up to date with how—and if—brands respond.

Spread the word

Download Fashion Revolution’s collection of promotional assets, including social media templates, posters and the official campaign branding pack, and get others involved in the movement.

Join the conversation

“Speaking with our family and friends about the global impact of our clothes is a powerful step to change the fashion industry,” says Fashion Revolution. On the organisation’s new site, you can map your conversations, taking inspiration from Fashion Revolution’s manifesto, and explore the discussions of other Fashion Revolutionaries worldwide.

Write to your favourite brand asking them #WhoMadeMyClothes?

Fashion Revolution has made this super easy to do by providing a PDF template.

And in the Good On You app, you can also send a message directly to a brand urging them to do better or asking a question. You can give positive feedback to brands you feel are doing great, too. To send your message, simply go to the “Your Voice” section at the end of each brand’s listing on the app.

The post How to Get Involved in Fashion Revolution Week 2024 appeared first on Good On You.

We spoke to Liv Simpliciano, policy and research manager at Fashion Revolution to find out all this on the eve of the organisation’s 10th anniversary. 

Meet Fashion Revolution’s Liv Simpliciano

Since 2014, Fashion Revolution has been campaigning for better transparency and accountability in the fashion industry to ensure the safety of the people involved in garment production, and the longevity of our environment. Founded in response to the Rana Plaza disaster, the organisation has since launched campaigns like #WhoMadeMyClothes? and annual research called the Fashion Transparency Index, which now charts the transparency of 250 of the world’s largest and most powerful brands to leverage citizens’ activism and call for regulation in the industry.

As policy and research manager at Fashion Revolution, Liv Simpliciano draws on her passion for protecting and advocating for the people who make our clothes, and the environment, to weigh in on how governments and those in positions of power can change the industry for the better. She is particularly interested in the just, clean energy transition in fashion and stopping waste colonialism.

Simpliciano leads the organisation’s annual Fashion Transparency Index—a key driver of improved transparency in the industry since 2017. And if you’ve ever been to one of Fashion Revolution’s events and seen Simpliciano speak then you’ll be familiar with her compelling presence—something that is not only tangible in person but in the interview that follows, too.

Read on to find out the issues she believes are most pressing to address, and the role that community has played in improving things so far.

8 Q&As on activism, policymaking, and more

1. Q: What are the biggest changes you’ve seen in sustainable fashion in the decade since Fashion Revolution Week started?

A: We know that whilst transparency alone cannot prevent tragedy, it certainly is an enabling force for change and remediation. When the movement for transparency began, transparency was a radical notion. Activists had to physically dig through the rubble at the site of the Rana Plaza collapse in 2013, then a few years later in 2017, 32 out of 100 brands disclosed their first-tier supplier lists in the first edition of the Global Fashion Transparency Index. Today, a little more than half (52%) of 250 of the world’s largest fashion brands and retailers are disclosing their first-tier supplier lists (among them luxury brands).

Transparency has evolved to the point that it has become part of the identity of what it means to be luxury. When we started our work, we were told that luxury brands publishing their supplier lists was a distant dream but now, many do. Increased transparency on its own does not translate to increased sustainability, but it is a key first step.

The big fashion industry has been unregulated and for the most part, untouchable for many decades so the growth of regulation over the last 10 years has been positive.

Increased transparency on its own does not translate to increased sustainability, but it is a key first step.

As an activist and transparency campaigner, I commend the progress but remain sceptical and unsatisfied with the pace of progress. For all the good, the last decade has also given rise to even faster fashion, on-demand models, more waste and in-work poverty deepening for garment workers. Issues are still not being addressed at the root—which gives all the more reason for our movement to continue demanding justice.

2. Q: What role has policy played so far? 

A: The system we have today was designed to be elitist, destructive, and exploitative. It’s working entirely as it was envisioned. Therefore, voluntary schemes are ineffective at protecting the environment and the people who make our clothes. The growth of greenwashing—deliberately misleading claims to instil confidence in consumers—is an example of how the industry cannot be trusted to fix itself. A foundational step toward driving change forward is binding legislation—it is essential for accountability.

It is encouraging to see policy developments emerging globally, but in particular within the EU, which is the largest importer of textiles and has a responsibility to regulate the industry.  Some encouraging examples include the CSDDD, CSRD, EU Textile Labelling Regulation, Waste Framework Directive and Forced Labour Regulation, to name a few. Similarly, the New York Fashion Act—with New York another epicentre of global fashion—is a bold and necessary legislation to regulate the industry through due diligence requirements, climate obligations, and fines for non-compliance.

This all signals positive steps toward addressing human rights and environmental abuses. However, we hope that the EU will focus on making these legislations impactful, resulting in positive gains for the people who make our clothes, impacted communities and the planet beyond just increased disclosure and transparency for transparency’s sake.

3. Q: How important is the role of activists in driving change—in particular, your global network of activists?

A: Community is essential for solidarity, belonging, and recharging energy levels. Tackling the global fashion industry on your own simply isn’t possible, which makes the role of individuals—united at scale and galvanised by hope—so powerful for driving change.

Our community holds globally diverse knowledge and experience which helps sow the seeds of change and transfer ideas. It includes activists, designers, academics, makers, researchers, menders, slow fashion advocates, policy experts, and leaders of all kinds, and we have had many incredible successes over the last decade. For example, our community has campaigned for national-level fashion policies in various regions; mobilised nearly a quarter of a million signatures across the EU for our Good Clothes, Fair Pay petition; and organised hundreds (if not thousands) of events throughout the years. Whenever the global network has an opportunity to meet in person, it is an immense privilege. It is energising and affirming to share what actions we are organising and how to progress our shared goals.

4. Q: What are the biggest challenges facing the industry in the coming years?

A: The industry’s biggest challenge is holding a mirror up to itself. Big fashion as we know it today has been forcefully enabled through environmental destruction and keeping wages artificially low for the people who make our clothes. The fashion industry is extremely indebted to all the resources and livelihoods it sacrifices in the name of massive profits.

The climate crisis is driven by overproduction and overconsumption. We are concerned that very few brands are disclosing a commitment to producing less, and many are indicating that they are, in fact, producing more products. In some cases, brands’ scope 3 emissions have increased since their science-based targets (SBTi) were set, and some brands’ net-zero targets have been removed altogether because their progress to date shows they won’t achieve them.

The biggest challenge facing the industry in the coming years is holding a mirror up to itself.

The coming years are an opportunity for course correction. As a key driver of the climate crisis, big fashion must enable a just transition led by the needs of suppliers and workers whose voices are critical in co-creating local solutions and mitigations to climate adaptation. Just transition is more than upskilling for a green economy—it is an opportunity to redress the extreme power imbalance that led us into the intersecting climate and inequality crises in the first place.

We know that when it comes to decarbonising the fashion industry, $1 trillion is needed over the next 30 years. With rising temperatures and the accelerating occurrence of disasters, the stakes are incredibly high. Our shared future is on the line—how do you put a price tag on that?

And that’s all before we’ve even covered the issue of living wages.

5. Q: Absolutely. And the latest Fashion Transparency Index revealed that most brands included still aren’t doing enough to ensure living wages are paid in the supply chain. Tell us more about that.

A: Living wages are not a luxury, they are a fundamental human right. Living wages—bar nothing—is the most pressing demand for the people who make our clothes. As an example, 99% of brands we review—which represents a sizable representation of the world’s biggest and most influential brands—still do not disclose the percentage of workers in their supply chain earning a living wage. And just 2% disclose a time-bound and measurable target to achieve living wages, which signals it is not a priority.

In theory, even if a fabric is dyed without using any water, is 100% natural, made without combusting any fossil fuels, and degrades at the end of its life with no negative impact on the environment, if the person who made it is earning poverty wages, then it still isn’t sustainable.

It takes just 4 days for a fashion CEO to earn what a garment worker would earn in their entire lifetime—some of the wealthiest people on this planet are fashion CEOs. The people who make their clothes are sacrificing their precious time to subsidise billionaires’ profits.  The fight for living wages will continue.

Liv Simpliciano at the Overheated climate event.

6. Q: We touched on climate change, but I don’t think many people really understand how that also ties in with justice for garment workers. Can you speak to that?

A: Garment production countries are some of those most vulnerable to the climate crisis, and we have already seen increasing examples of devastating floods, fires, droughts, earthquakes and other natural disasters caused by climate change affecting the fashion supply chain. We are concerned that for many brands, the strategy appears to be to relocate and source new suppliers and nearshore production when the supply chain is disrupted by disaster—rather than supporting existing suppliers and workers and helping to mitigate and prepare for the impacts of climate change.

7. Q: What policy changes do you want to see in the future?

A: I want to see the implementation of binding regulations, laws and government policies that require transparency and corporate accountability on environmental and human rights issues in the global fashion industry. This should include responsible purchasing practices so that the price paid by brands to suppliers reflects the cost of sustainable production. Progress made to date is welcome, but in its current forms it fails to deliver worker justice.

I also want to see the implementation of policy that finances the green transition in garment producing countries. For too long, big fashion has dismissed production countries as sacrifice zones, which have been historically saddled with crippling debt and are now facing debt crises in addition to being more vulnerable to the climate crisis. Financial support must be prioritised to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across global supply chains, while helping garment producing countries to adapt to and mitigate the impacts of the climate crisis. Most of all, suppliers must be able directly access the financial resources they need to help them become more resilient to climate change.

8. Q: How do you see Fashion Revolution’s work evolving over the next decade?

A: I would like to see more alignment and integration with other movements within civil society. I think fashion (outside of my echo chamber) is still seen as frivolous and not as important of a policy issue—which, of course, works in the favour of corporate companies that do not wish to change.

However, big fashion as we know it today is made up of intersecting crises of human rights, environmental destruction, climate crisis, institutional inequality and poverty, elitism, extractivism, disenfranchisement, and racism. There is so much power and opportunity in the intersectionality of our fight and we are stronger together. I hope we can continue to work alongside policymakers and help deliver accountability and change.

Ultimately, I wish our cause didn’t have to exist, but unfortunately, the overall glacial progress we have seen on critical human rights and environmental issues in the last decade means that for the next decade, we must continue.

Feeling inspired to get involved?

Fashion Revolution Week 2024 runs from April 15th to April 24th, and there are lots of ways to join in the movement, including plenty of online activities for those who don’t live near planned in-person events. Find the full list here, and then get even more energised to take action by reading eight questions with Fashion Revolution’s co-founder, Orsola de Castro.

The post Liv Simpliciano on What a Decade of Fashion Revolution Can Teach Us appeared first on Good On You.

What’s the problem with fast fashion?

Fast fashion. A term used so often in the past few years that one might begin to think of it as a buzzword instead of the business model it truly is. Fast fashion is defined as “cheap, trendy clothing that samples ideas from the catwalk or celebrity culture and turns them into garments in high street stores at breakneck speed to meet consumer demand.” Its model is based on trends and their popularity among consumers. In order to meet consumer demands, fast fashion brands must have the resources to not only manufacture these popular designs quickly, but also dispose of them with equal speed to make room for incoming trends. That’s why brands like ZARA and Forever 21 are so popular—they’re selling you the latest styles right when you want them, and taking them off the racks by the time you don’t.

As the name suggests, fast fashion has a fast-paced model that requires speedy production with little room for manufacturers and brands to consider the impact of their practices. By doing such things as using toxic, water-wasting materials to produce textiles, and neglecting safe workplace protocols as a means of acquiring cheap labour, the fast fashion industry has become a detriment to our environment, having a carbon footprint that rivals all other industrial productions.

The fashion industry today has been shaped by the fast fashion business models of the last three decades, so while many of the facts in this article cover the industry or textile production as a whole, it’s important to consider them within this fast fashion-driven context.

A fast-paced model that requires speedy production leaves little room for manufacturers and brands to consider the impact of their practices.

Water usage

A common misconception about garment production is that it only takes a mix of textiles and sewing methods to craft a t-shirt or pair of jeans—unfortunately, the mass consumption of water that occurs during the production process is often overlooked. But according to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s report: A New Textiles Economy: Redesigning Fashion’s Future (2017), as much as 93 billion cubic metres of water are consumed annually in textile production.

90% of garments sold in the US are made with cotton or polyester, cotton being a major section of the water-guzzling garment train. The plant requires large amounts of water and pesticides to grow successfully and at scale. And that polyester we mentioned? It has its own environmental problems, which you can read about in our dedicated material guide.

But fabric production isn’t the only thing impacting fast fashion’s water usage. Untreated wastewater from dyeing and the treatment of textiles is being pumped back into our water systems, contaminating its contents with toxins and heavy metals. Textile dyeing and finishing processes are responsible for a significant portion of the world’s clean water pollution (though the numbers around this statistic are hard to confirm). Not only does this negatively impact the health of the water itself, but also the health of the animals that consume it, including us as humans.

Textile waste

Facts about textile waste are notoriously tricky to certify, but a 2017 Pulse of the Fashion Industry report by the Global Fashion Agenda and Boston Consulting Group suggested that in 2015, 92 million tonnes of textile waste was created. Given that this statistic is almost a decade old and clothing consumption is ever-increasing, it’s likely that the figure is now far higher.

In 2019, the European Parliament found that while clothing purchases by EU citizens had increased by around 40% per person “in just a few decades” as a result of the fast fashion model taking hold, less than half of used garments were sent for recycling, and only 1% were actually recycled into new clothes (this is largely down to challenges around fibre recycling). Today, the constant trends and guise of “affordability” cause many to believe that the clothing they buy is disposable—because if you’re going to keep buying the latest trends, you have to feel comfortable getting rid of the old ones, right? But while people are purchasing new garbs, their tossed-aside garments are being sent to landfills.

Speaking of landfills—WRAP’s Textiles Market Situation Report (2024) found that 727.7 kilotonnes of textiles were sent for incineration or landfill in 2021, and that’s just in the UK—never mind the rest of the world. While not all of this is fast fashion waste, the cheapening and increased consumption of fast fashion clothes has certainly contributed to the problem.

And in many countries, including the US, unsold clothing is exported overseas to be “graded” (sorted and resized) and sold in low/middle-income countries. Due to the fragility of some of these countries’ municipal waste systems, whatever isn’t sold in these second-hand markets becomes solid waste, creating health hazards by clogging of rivers, greenways, and parks. The toxicity of textile waste is slowly choking our environment and poisoning our ecosystem, for nothing more than the disposal of garments that fast fashion brands overproduce on the daily.

Carbon emissions

The apparel industry is one of the biggest industrial polluters on the planet. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation estimated that the industry’s 2015 greenhouse gas emissions were more than the aviation and shipping industries’ combined output, with an astounding 1.2 billion tonnes coming from textile production.

These calculations account for emissions released during textile production, but there’s also the carbon that is released during global transportation, when textiles are stuffed into landfills, and through consumer processes, such as washing and drying, to consider.

The fashion industry producing carbon emissions is an inescapable fact, but the vast quantities of clothing that are manufactured, transported, and discarded by the fast fashion sector, in particular, push these emissions to an inexcusable level.

Environmental injustice and poor working conditions

The environmental damage that occurs during the manufacturing of fast fashion is cyclical. Overproduction leads to the overuse of water, resulting in wastewater. An excess of textiles leads to increased garment disposal, resulting in carbon emissions. A vicious cycle, but its effect isn’t just found on land and sea. A major portion of the industry’s impact is in the quality of life of those who work in garment factories and live in areas affected by these textile and wastewater dumps.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency defines environmental justice as “just treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of income, race, colour, national origin, Tribal affiliation, or disability, in agency decision-making and other Federal activities that affect human health and the environment.” Basically, it is the environmental equity of all people, ensuring they have access to such things as clean water, safe homes, and healthy food. But for fast fashion brands, the only way to offer garments at a cheap price is through contradicting these rights and enforcing cheap labour.

The majority of the world’s clothing is produced in low and middle-income countries as a means of cheap labour. This means the solid waste produced from textiles and the chemicals released by toxic dyes are being dumped in their ecosystems, jeopardising the health and wellbeing of the workers involved in the process and those living nearby.

Because of the oftentimes challenging infrastructures of these low/middle-income areas, occupational hazards aren’t taken into consideration. Safety standards in workshops often go unenforced. Lung disease is caused by cotton dust and synthetic air particulates. Injuries are caused by repetitive motions and lack of sufficient breaks. Deaths have also been reported due to these hazardous conditions, such as the 2013 Rana Plaza collapse in Dhaka District, Bangladesh. After discovering cracks in the foundation on April 23rd, the eight-story commercial building, known as Rana Plaza, had an immediate evacuation of all employees and businesses. But the building owners decided neglected these warnings and forced their garment workers to return. Rana Plaza collapsed the following day. 2,500 people were injured. 1,134 died.

This is one of the more extreme and highly publicised cases, but it’s not an exception. It shows the true extent of these occupational hazards and workplace neglect. Some might argue that a clothing brand can’t be held responsible for the choices made by building owners and factory managers, but these fast fashion brands have continued to choose unregulated forms of manufacturing, therefore placing affordability and fast production over safety.

What can change

Everything we have covered so far about fashion’s environmental impact might have come as a bit of a rude awakening, but don’t lose hope: some steps have been taken to pull back the industry’s footprint. Back in the summer of 2019, the global coalition The Fashion Pact was created, where luxury and fast fashion brands (including Adidas, Chanel, and H&M) developed a common agenda to begin more environmentally friendly ways of production. Unfortunately, this significant gesture has yet to be the saviour the industry needs. Only 59 brands have joined this coalition, which is low in comparison to the hundreds of brands out there. If all of these brands committed themselves to being more responsible, the industry’s carbon footprint could be significantly reduced by 2030. But it isn’t just the fast fashion companies that need to change.

We as consumers not only need to rethink who we’re buying our clothing from, but how we’re handling that clothing. This includes repairing, donating, or reselling our old garments, instead of just throwing them in the trash, where they will inevitably wind up in a landfill. It means adopting handwashing practices where possible, to avoid excess microfibres being dumped in our oceans from washing machines. We can also make sure all packaging is properly disposed of.

Good On You has long been committed to updating ratings methodology and content as the industry shifts, including guidance on which brands to embrace, and which to avoid. With more consumers interested and invested in more sustainable fashion, here’s hoping that enough pressure will be placed on the industry, and that fashion as a whole will begin to slow down.

The post Fast Fashion’s Environmental Impact: The True Price Of Trendiness appeared first on Good On You.

In the know

France’s lower house votes to limit ‘excesses’ of fast fashion with environmental surcharge (The Guardian)

A string of measures backed by France’s lower house of parliament could see fast fashion brands mandated to declare their environmental impact and apply a linked surcharge to every item sold. The measures, which would also limit fast fashion advertising in France, still need to be voted on by the Senate but could set a precedent for many more governments to hold the biggest fast fashion brands accountable for their actions.

Has Sustainability Fallen Out of Fashion? (Vogue)

Emily Chan reflects on the absence of sustainability during the autumn/winter 2024 fashion shows and questions whether it’s down to consumer disinterest, or a response to stricter regulation on sustainability claims coming into effect in the EU.

Rise of Fast-Fashion Shein, Temu, Roils Global Air Cargo Industry (Reuters)

The poor business practices of retailers like SHEIN and Temu aren’t just impacting the fashion industry—Reuters found that “the rapid rise of fast-fashion e-commerce retailers… is upending the global air cargo industry, as they increasingly vie for limited air-cargo space to woo consumers with rapid transit times”.

H&M Embraces New Venture to Buy 50% of its Recycled Polyester Supplies (Fashion United)

Fashion United reports that the H&M Group, in collaboration with Vargas Holding, has created Syre—an initiative focused on scaling up textile-to-textile recycled polyester to reach its goal of using 50% recycled materials by 2030.

Fashion’s Cotton Supply Chain is Broken. Will Brands Agree to Fix it? (Vogue Business)

Could a new blockchain technology change the cotton supply chain for the better? Vogue Business reports on a new initiative from Sourcery that’ll encourage farmers to track, record, and license data on their cotton, and has the potential to improve traceability throughout the supply chain.

Investors Push Zara Owner Inditex to Publish Full Supply Chain (Business of Fashion)

Ahead of Inditex publishing its annual results in mid-March, investors were lamenting the Zara owner’s lack of transparency around its supplier lists and locations in comparison to industry peers such as H&M and Primark.

Good On You Reaches Milestone 6,000 Brands Rated

In March, we revealed that Good On You has surpassed 6,000 total fashion brands rated. This is a major milestone that we’re proud to share and celebrate, as our goal is to empower consumers to make more informed choices so that we can create positive change for people, the planet, and animals.

‘Good’ and ‘Great’ news

Every month we publish news and product highlights from highly rated brands that have been assessed by our rigorous ratings system. Using our codes and links may earn us a commission—supporting the work we do. Learn more.

O My Bag Launches Equal Opportunities Program

Equal opportunities training by Swayam and O My Bag at its Springfield supplier

“Good”-rated O My Bag conducted its annual worker survey and found that: “Female employees have informed us that they feel like they don’t always get the same job opportunities as their male colleagues, and that they don’t always feel safe to express their ambition.” In response, the brand has created an equal opportunities program with Swayam, a Kolkata-based feminist organisation, dedicated to improving organisational structure and educating workers. Pilot training took place in February 2024 at its Springfield supplier.

The post 8 Things to Know in Sustainable Fashion This April appeared first on Good On You.

This is a sponsored article about a brand that was independently assessed by our rigorous ratings system. We’re proud to only collaborate with “Good” and “Great” rated brands. Learn more.

Denim today has changed a whole lot from the 19th and early 20th-century trousers that started it all. What was born from a need for clothes that could withstand the repeated abrasion, stretching, dirt and wear that came with long days of (often manual) work has, ironically, morphed into an industry rife with fast fashion brands creating trend-driven jeans and denim jackets that wouldn’t last a minute under those stressors.

But there is another way to do things. And “Great”-rated Nudie Jeans is showing the industry that transcending the take-make-waste fast fashion model can be done through creating more thoughtfully, and taking responsibility for garments long after customers have bought them.

Why designing for longevity is key

Nudie Jeans was founded more than two decades ago in Gothenburg, Sweden on the principle of making jeans that become part of your life long-term and only get better with wear.

Today, its range covers more than denim but the ethos remains the same. “We want to create clothes that you fall in love with, and that you have a relationship with and want to keep for a long time,” says designer Emma Andersson Sköld. “And if you ever need to get rid of the garment, we want that garment to find a new person who falls in love with it. That’s what we mean when we say we want to make vintage, not garbage.”

That starts with the design phase and thinking about garments that live beyond the microtrend of the moment, adds product manager Victoria Cederfeldt. “The whole hype around clothes is a problem. It’s not sustainable to buy new clothes, use them a few times, and then throw them away.”

We want to create clothes that you fall in love with, and that you have a relationship with

Emma Andersson Sköld – designer

‘Vintage’ is often used interchangeably with ‘old clothing’, but its true definition speaks to quality and lasting design—something Andersson Sköld says is fundamental for Nudie Jeans: “It’s easy to think that what becomes vintage is what has a timeless style, like workwear that has looked pretty much the same for several decades, and that’s true, but it could just as well be the opposite, something that is really unique and stands out and therefore becomes a garment that people remember and have a strong relationship with.”

Creating lasting denim: Behind the scenes of Nudie Jeans’ product manager Victoria Cederfeldt and designer Emma Andersson Sköld’s product development process.

Crafting ‘Forever Jeans’

Nudie Jeans dubs every pair it makes “forever jeans” because they’re made to outlast their owner and be handed down to generations to come—with a few repairs here and there, of course. And “forever jeans” isn’t just a campaign name or buzzy phrase, it is an overarching philosophy that guides the brand in its endeavours.

This starts with denim woven from organic cotton that’s sourced responsibly from select suppliers, which is then carefully sewn together by manufacturers that also align with the company’s values. You can see for yourself exactly where an item has been thanks to ‘Product Transparency’ notes alongside products on Nudie Jeans’ website, which details the suppliers involved in many steps of production.

The brand’s designers, including Andersson Sköld, also play a key role in ensuring that its products stand the test of time—“we often ask ourselves ‘is this too trendy?’ to avoid making something that’s just part of a short-term trend,” Cederfeldt explains.

Left: Berit jacket in Classic Blue, Clean Eileen jeans in Casual Blue; right: Gonzo Western Guitar Shirt in Black, Tuff Tony jeans in Rinse Onyx Selvage, Uno Everyday Tee

Left to right: Elsie Rib Tank, Rowdy Ruth jeans in French Blue, Danny Rinsed Denim Jacket Black, Tuff Tony jeans in Snake Eyes Selvage, Western Belt in Black

Wear, Repair, Repeat

When your jeans fade in the places they usually crinkle or fold, and when the yarns start to weaken and scuffs appear, then it’s a cause for celebration, not to throw them out. These patterns of wear and tear show a life lived and experiences had, argues the brand. “[Denim] is one of the few materials that people think becomes more beautiful with age,” says Andersson Sköld.

And when the denim does need some attention, repairs are free of charge at all of Nudie Jeans’ stores (customers who don’t live near one can seek out a Repair Partner or order a DIY kit). Since it launched in 2008, the initiative has proved highly successful, and the brand has breathed new life into around 500,000 pairs of its jeans by mending them.

But it doesn’t stop at repairs—customers can also trade their unwanted Nudie Jeans items for a discount on a future purchase, and in exchange, the brand will clean, repair, and resell the clothes to someone new. This is all part of its Reuse program, which helps to minimise the amount of products going unworn or reaching landfill, and in 2023, the brand collected around 20,000 pairs of jeans in its stores for the initiative, subsequently selling more than 4,000 repaired and reinvigorated pairs.

Denim is one of the few materials that people think becomes more beautiful with age.

Emma Andersson Sköld – designer

For shoppers, this program makes it easy to play a part in reducing waste in the fashion industry, and as many regular second-hand buyers can attest—there is a real sense of satisfaction in finding your new favourite piece of clothing and knowing you’re prolonging its life.

The fashion industry has changed dramatically around Nudie Jeans since its founding in 2001, but the brand has remained steadfast in mission is to create clothes that last a lifetime, and show the value in cherishing and rewearing the clothes you own. ”To truly make a change for the better, we have to make it stylish not to change our style every week,” it says.

The post Wear, Repair, Reuse: How Nudie Jeans is ‘Creating Tomorrow’s Vintage’ appeared first on Good On You.

There’s no way to track progress without transparency

Transparency is an important step to securing a better future for the fashion industry, because being as open as possible about what’s going on behind the scenes—including the extent to which important sustainability issues are being addressed—means that anyone can understand brands’ actions and hold them accountable.

Consumers have a right to know how a brand impacts the issues they care about, and it’s the reason why using only publicly available information is at the core of our methodology for rating brands on three key pillars—people, the planet, and animals.

By rating brands across up to 1,000 publicly available data points, we’re uncovering the companies that, on one end of the spectrum, do harm or don’t do enough, and on the other are showing how the industry can do better. When we give brands our two lowest ratings—”We Avoid” and “Not Good Enough”, we’re not just calling them out, we’re driving them to improve. And by consistently rating and reviewing brands, we’re motivating them to rule out harmful practices and empowering consumers to make choices with the most up-to-date information.

Gordon Renouf, CEO of Good On You says: “It should be as easy to understand how a product or brand impacts on the sustainability issues that are important to you as it is to know the price or features of a product.”

Holding brands accountable for their impact

Many consumers have been shocked to discover the impacts of a brand they shop from, such as the toxic chemicals workers are exposed to during viscose production, or the deadly working conditions that led to the Rana Plaza tragedy. If no one is calling for brands to share information on issues like chemical usage and garment worker safety, then it’s impossible to hold them accountable for any damage done. Equally, we want to celebrate brands that are taking positive steps, and we can only do that if the information and evidence is shared publicly.

We expect brands to fully, accurately, and consistently report on their practices to help transform the fashion industry for the better and shape regulation around critical issues, which can often involve sharing details of codes of conduct, accords they have joined or certifications they have received.

Unfortunately, there is still a long way to go in moving to a fashion industry where publicly available information is the norm. 0 of 40 of the most profitable brands received our “Great” rating, which demonstrates a complete lack of transparency and leadership from the industry’s biggest players.

Of more than 6,000 rated brands in Good On You’s directory, we found that 61% of large brands don’t disclose information about their water management, while 54% don’t share anything about their chemical usage. The situation is slightly better for environmental issues, but there’s still room for improvement—18% of large brands still do not publish details of their policies, and for small brands, that figure stands at 24%.

We expect brands to fully, accurately, and consistently report on their practices to help transform the fashion industry for the better

Another issue is highlighted by the fact that 81% of large brands with greenhouse gas emissions targets don’t state whether they are on track to meet them. Disclosure shouldn’t stop at publishing targets and policies, and to truly hold brands accountable, we need to see regularly reported information about how close they are—or aren’t—to reaching these goals.

Among several disappointing statistics from the 2023 Fashion Transparency Index are the findings that just 1% of major fashion brands disclose the number of workers in their supply chains who are paid a living wage, and that only 7% of major brands publish test results for hazardous chemicals in their suppliers’ wastewater.

Publishing sustainability information isn’t without its obstacles for brands, as Good On You’s ratings analyst Jessica Ouano explains. “Some large brands [have] mentioned to us that they aren’t disclosing information on all their sustainability initiatives because they need approvals internally to disclose everything. I understand that can make it more challenging,” she says.

“Despite that, we strongly believe that it is important for brands to be transparent since it encourages accountability. It also allows consumers and stakeholders connected to a brand to call them out when the information they do share about their initiatives is misleading or incorrect. I would think that is one of the reasons why larger brands are more careful with disclosing information.”

Small brands can rarely share the same information as large ones

It is undoubtedly more difficult for small brands to harness the levels of insight and influence over their sustainability issues than it is for large brands, which often have more finances, connections, and resources to aid reporting. We consider this in our ratings methodology, which distinguishes large and small brands according to the European Commission’s definition using the brand’s (or its parent company’s) annual turnover. As such, we rate large brands differently to small ones to account for the limitations and nuances that many small brands face, and the expectation that large companies should publish more in-depth information—particularly on policies and targets.

We also offer guidance on better sustainability communication for small businesses if they are concerned about their rating. Mostly, this comes down to being current, specific and honest in the information they publish, and in addressing the issues with the biggest impact first.

What if a brand isn’t doing enough, or isn’t publishing any data?

It’s better for a brand to explain where it is falling short rather than gloss over it and potentially mislead shoppers into believing that action is being taken behind the scenes.

If our ratings analysts find that a brand isn’t publishing any information on its practices, then we highlight that in our directory and app to help you understand when brands simply aren’t being transparent or detailed about their actions.

Ultimately, our mission is to encourage the industry to improve its practices and disclose them, so we are working towards a process that lets brands know we’re preparing to rate them. We’ll also give an indication as to what kind of disclosure and practices we’ll be looking for across our three pillars—people, the planet, and animals so they are able to make any information public that they do have.

We need greater transparency to tackle greenwashing

Greenwashing happens when brands hide the truth about their practices and don’t give specifics, instead offering a few sentences or sweeping statements on their general commitment to sustainability. If they aren’t challenged on that or pushed to do better then nothing changes, and the industry doesn’t move towards a more positive future where brands are taking real and effective action to minimise their impacts.

And then there is so-called greenhushing—a move from some brands to say nothing at all about their impacts in an effort to avoid being called out for not doing enough, accused of greenwashing, or falling foul of the increasing sustainability regulations from governing bodies around the world.

But removing all publicly available sustainability information isn’t the answer—in fact, it’s a huge step backwards for the industry as a whole. Sandra Capponi, Good On You’s co-founder, says: “Full transparency may not be easy for an industry with complex supply chains, but it’s really the bare minimum we should expect. Consistency in data and disclosure is critical to consumers’ ability to make informed decisions.”

That’s why we’ll never compromise on only using data in our ratings process that brands make available for all to see, and we’ll keep pushing them to be as comprehensive as possible in their disclosure.

The post Why Good On You Only Uses Publicly Available Information to Rate Brands appeared first on Good On You.

So you’ve looked through our ratings directory and read our guides on living wages, fair trade, and lower impact materials. Now you’re seeking out a brand’s sustainability report or webpage to dive deep into its impact—and that’s where things can get confusing.

What are sustainability reports?

Mounting consumer and governmental pressure means that lots of fashion brands are reporting on their sustainability targets and disclosing the impact their current practices have.

For example, European Union rules currently require all large and listed companies to report on the risks and opportunities that emerge from their impacts on social and environmental issues. More companies will soon be expected to do the same due to a new EU directive coming into effect for reports published in 2025, which will also require companies to report on a specific set of issues. This directive could also eliminate some of the red flags we’re seeing in sustainability reports at the moment. But since there’s currently no specific format for how the information should be presented, it’s all too easy for reports to lack substance.

And while there are some proposed reporting formats for companies to follow, the lack of harmony amongst them makes it difficult for readers to compare multiple reports.

Reading sustainability reports is one aspect of Good On You’s ratings process because we only use publicly available information to determine how a brand scores against our methodology. Brand disclosure is one of the many publicly available sources of data we use, which also includes the most robust third party indices (like the Fashion Transparency Index, and the CDP’s Climate Change and Water Security projects), as well as certifications and accreditations (like Fairtrade, Fair Wear Foundation, Cradle to Cradle, OEKO-TEX Made in Green, the Global Organic Textile Standard, and the Responsible Wool Standard). Our How We Rate page has more information about this process.

In other words, after rating more than 6,000 brands, our expert team of analysts has read a huge number of sustainability reports. They can confidently say what makes a good—or bad—one.

Who better, then, to help us understand this complicated world of epic word counts, dubious claims, and weird graphs? Here, Good On You’s Kate Hobson-Lloyd, fashion ratings manager, and ratings analysts Noriko Kakue and Katelin Opferkuch, have shared the best practices to look out for, plus their biggest pet peeves.

What are the most common red flags?

Sustainability reports that miss the mark can generate mistrust and mislead people to believe that a brand aligns with their values, so spotting problems within reports is key.

Hobson-Lloyd notes that one of the frequent issues our ratings analysts see in reports is: “Lots of targets for the future but little evidence of the actions a brand is currently taking—this is common, particularly in relation to material usage.” Here are a few more:

• Targets for “net zero carbon emissions by 20xx”. Usually, these claims are made by big companies that, instead of taking meaningful action to reduce emissions, pay for carbon offsets—which are often questionable programs that don’t have the impact they promise.
• More words than numbers. If brands are doing something good and want to showcase that effort, they will disclose the number or statistic, and how it has improved over a period of time.
• Large chunks of reports dedicated to listing the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and their focus points without clear explanations as to how the brand’s actions support them. It is important to check if the brand has specific initiatives aimed at those focus points. Many of the colourful visuals of SDGs are used to fill the pages—a practice dubbed ‘SDG-washing’.
• Information about a brand’s direct operations but not its supply chains—especially if the report bangs on about, say, coffee cup recycling in its offices but doesn’t provide information on supply chain waste, for example.
• The really big problem in too many reports from the biggest fashion brands: a failure to clearly define a brand’s key actions.

Opferkuch—a specialist in sustainability reporting who completed a PhD on the subject, says: “A weak sustainability report is a reflection of weak internal sustainability integration, such as strategic management processes, goal development, resource allocation, change management, implementation, monitoring, communication and much more. But sustainability reports, and the process required to collect data for them, can be a huge driver for companies to improve their sustainability integration overall.”

What makes a good report?

On a more positive note, there are lots of great reports out there: “We collect good examples of disclosure and reporting,” notes Kakue. She and Hobson-Lloyd explain that the best reports:

• Are well structured into categories.
• Contain clear and concise statements outlining a brand’s current actions and its progress to meeting targets—even if it is not on track to meet the target. This is especially important if a brand has set targets around, for example, greenhouse gas emissions or hazardous chemical elimination.
• Include clear data on material usage and any certifications involved.
• Have clear definitions of various stages of the supply chain and actions taken at each stage, plus details and locations of suppliers.
• Aren’t ridiculously long. Shorter reports filled with concise and clear points are more meaningful because they’re more digestible and accessible to a variety of readers, including customers, regulators and stakeholders.
• Have clear presentation and definition of any certifications the brand works with, such as GOTS or Fair Trade.

As you can see, great sustainability reports are clear and include accurate information that is backed by evidence—even if a company still has a way to go in improving its practices. If your favourite brand’s reporting isn’t up to scratch, then why not reach out to them and ask them to do better? After all, the more a brand realises that customers value better transparency, the greater its impetus to change will be.

The post The Biggest Red Flags in Sustainability Reports—and How to Spot Them appeared first on Good On You.

In the know

Can H&M’s New CEO Grow It Sustainably? (Vogue Business)

As the H&M Group appoints Daniel Ervér as its new CEO, Vogue Business dives into his vision for the company’s future in a world where ultra fast fashion brands like SHEIN (“We Avoid”) are forcing the industry into a race to the bottom.

Artificial Intelligence is Changing How Fast Fashion Retailers Pick Their Targets (The Fashion Law)

“The new wave of fast fashion retailers is readily changing the game, with the likes of SHEIN, Temu (“We Avoid”), and co. looking beyond the runway to fellow mass-market companies’ wares and the offerings of lesser-known indie designers for “inspiration”, reports Fashion Law.

CIDER: What You Need to Know about the Fast Fashion Brand Challenging SHEIN (Retail Week)

Retail Week looks at rising fast-fashion brand CIDER (“We Avoid”) and why it’s giving SHEIN a run for its money.

Cambodia: Fast Fashion Helps Fuel Blazing Kilns Where Workers Faint From Heat (BBC)

The BBC explores a new study aiming to document how sustained exposure to extreme heat is affecting brick kiln workers’ health. “How hot is too hot to work? It is a question researchers have found the answer to here, in Cambodia’s brick kilns, where people toil in some of the hottest working conditions in the world, fuelled in part by the scraps of fast fashion,” reports the BBC.

Why Some of Our Clothes Are Over 200 Million Years Old (Atmos)

For Atmos, Amy Powney, founder of “Good” brand Mother of Pearl, discusses the urgent need to “‘reframe the origin stories of our clothes.’ The majority of all clothing is made from fossil fuels, some of which were created pre-dinosaur, while viscose has in certain instances been linked to ancient forests,” writes Daphne Chouliaraki Milner.

‘Good’ and ‘Great’ news

Every month we publish news and product highlights from highly rated brands that have been assessed by our rigorous ratings system. Using our codes and links may earn us a commission—supporting the work we do. Learn more.

“Great”-Rated Brand Dedicated Introduces New Organic Material

Swedish brand Dedicated is already doing “Great” for the planet, using a high proportion of lower-impact materials in its designs and implementing a closed-loop system to reduce water use in its supply chain (most of which is certified by Fairtrade International). For its new SS24 collection, the brand is going one step further by introducing Regenerative Organic Certified (ROC) cotton. ROC is an agricultural certification based on requirements to help preserve and regenerate the soils in which the cotton is grown.

The post 6 Things to Know in Sustainable Fashion in March appeared first on Good On You.

In 2019, Gucci announced that it had become “entirely carbon neutral”. It seemed an impressive feat for a luxury brand whose supply chain and consumer base stretches across the globe, but fast forward to 2023, and the luxury brand dropped the claim—not because it had abandoned its sustainability commitments, but because what constitutes carbon neutral was in contention.

Like Gucci, many fashion brands—including Saint Laurent, Balenciaga, Reformation, and Allbirds, to name a few—have used carbon offsets to claim carbon neutrality, or “net zero” status. In fact, nearly half of the world’s public companies plan to use offsets to reach net zero.

But now, regulatory scrutiny around sustainability language in marketing is tightening, requiring brands to be more precise about the claims they make—and be able to back them up.

And a slew of investigations in the past two years has called the integrity of offsets into question, not only criticising their efficacy but also positing that they could, in fact, be causing harm. In the UK, the Advertising Standards Authority is set to ban the use of carbon neutrality claims unless brands can prove them—but as it turns out, proving a claim based on offsets might not even be possible.

Many experts are now concerned not only that carbon offsets are flawed, but that they’re distracting brands from the harder work of decarbonisation. And newly revealed data from Good On You’s ratings of the largest fashion brands paints a concerning picture: overall, brands purchasing offsets aren’t making much progress on actual emissions reduction activities.

What are carbon offsets? They sound good in theory

The focus on carbon neutrality and offsetting is due to a looming deadline set by the 2015 Paris Agreement, which was designed to stop global temperatures rising. The legally-binding agreement stated that emissions must be reduced by 45% by 2030 and then reach net zero by 2050. In other words, the world needs to remove the same amount of greenhouse gases (GHG) from the atmosphere as it emits so the overall balance is zero.

Carbon offsets seem like a convenient way to do that, at least in theory: if a tonne of carbon is emitted into the atmosphere somewhere in the world, purchasing offsets for a tonne of carbon would mean that it’s being absorbed, in equal measure, somewhere else. In effect, offsets promise to help polluters cancel out emissions.

The most commonly sold offsets are nature-based—because trees, plants, soil, and even the ocean naturally absorb carbon from the atmosphere. In this case, a fashion brand might calculate how much carbon it is going to emit per product or per year, for instance, and then it may choose to “offset” those emissions by buying carbon credits. The money from those carbon credits funds projects that plant trees, restore coastal habitats like mangroves and saltmarshes, conserve rainforests, and so on, to support nature’s ability to absorb and store carbon. Generally, you might see forestry offsets promoted by fashion brands such as popular “you buy X, we plant trees” programs.

There is little to no scientific evidence that any sort of carbon offset can reduce emissions at scale. I compare it to a mass delusion

Roshan Krishnan – policy associate at the Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition

There’s only one problem: there’s a growing consensus among both academics studying carbon markets and environmental justice activists that all too often, this system doesn’t result in real emissions reductions. “There’s been a lot of work to launder the image of the carbon market to make it [seen as] a reputable tool. There is [little to no] scientific evidence that any sort of carbon offset can reduce emissions at scale. I compare it to a mass delusion,” argues Roshan Krishnan, policy associate at the Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition.

The “delusion” stems from the fact that investigations find many of these nature-based offsets sold have been worthless, with independent reporting ultimately concluding they’re often a cash-grab “hustle,” as noted in a recent New Yorker magazine feature about how a leading offset firm, South Pole, sold millions of offset credits for “reductions that weren’t real”.

Beyond nature-based offsets, other kinds of carbon offsets fund actions to reduce carbon emissions in different ways, such as backing renewable energy projects or providing energy-efficient cookstoves to communities that traditionally burn wood for fuel. Again, they vary in rigour and reputation. But as a result of carbon offsets becoming “one of the bigger grifts” in the “bubble-hype market,” offsets have overall lost a lot of public trust, as an editorial in the Financial Times recently concluded.

Mangrove forests like this one are frequently used in carbon offsetting schemes

Newly revealed data on large brands that buy offsets

The Paris Agreement was intended for the world to reduce emissions as much as possible as the first priority. And that’s similarly what we should expect to see from fashion brands. But the problem is, some fashion brands seem to have skipped over the reductions part and ploughed head first into offsetting.

In other words, if brands that purchased offsets were really taking their carbon impacts seriously, then we’d expect them to disclose a lot more information about the actions they’re taking to reduce emissions. But according to newly revealed data from Good On You, large brands purchasing offsets don’t appear to be doing much more than large brands overall, explains Luis Rodriguez de Cespedes, manager of Good On You’s data systems. (We categorise brands as “large” based on annual turnover, following the widely adopted definition set out by the European Commission.)

Overall few large brands are adopting good practice when it comes to reducing their GHG emissions—and brands that purchase offsets are only somewhat more likely to be doing so than those that don’t.

Luis Rodriguez de Cespedes – manager of Good On You's data systems

We started by looking into the carbon reduction activities of a group of 30 brands that disclose they purchase offsets. We selected the sample of 30 offset brands based on their prominent disclosures of purchasing offsets—the overall number of fashion brands purchasing offsets is likely to be significantly higher, but we focused our data set on this sample that had clear disclosures to gain general insights into what actions these brands take beyond purchasing offsets.

We then compared that with a larger sample of brands that don’t disclose anything about purchasing offsets (for this sample, we selected 915 brands that do not disclose to CDP).

In comparing these two samples, we’re generally looking at the performance of brands known to purchase offsets with those that don’t. “The expectation is that brands should take meaningful reduction action before purchasing offsets,” says Gordon Renouf, co-founder of Good On You. “So our expectation would be that all brands purchasing offsets would be taking at least a few concrete actions [listed below] that would actually reduce their emissions. But the brands that have disclosed offsets are only somewhat more likely than their peers to be taking meaningful reduction activities.”

Our key finding is that most of the large brands that purchase offsets have not adopted best practice GHG reduction initiatives. Only 10% of brands that purchase offsets are taking action to reduce process emissions from manufacturing and only 5% report that they have initiatives to reduce emissions in raw material reduction, a high impact area.

As you can see in the chart below, when it comes to emissions reduction initiatives, most brands simply aren’t doing enough. And unfortunately, large brands that purchase offsets aren’t doing dramatically better as a group:

If large brands that bought offsets were taking carbon reduction seriously, you’d also expect to see them more publicly setting science-based GHG reduction targets and disclosing their progress against them. But yet again, brands that purchase offsets aren’t doing much more than large brands overall: 5% of large brands we assessed had set an approved Science Based Target—the current best standard for greenhouse gas emissions targets. For brands that purchase carbon offsets, the percentage was somewhat higher at 17%, but not as high as we might hope to see. And overall, as our latest data report on climate inaction underscores, the overwhelming majority of large brands overall aren’t disclosing their progress toward these targets even when they do set them.

If large brands that bought offsets were taking carbon reduction seriously, you’d similarly suspect they’d show more leadership on renewable energy throughout their supply chains, not only in direct operations. But our analysis found that no large brands that purchased offsets had also installed and purchased renewables in a medium or large portion of their supply chain.

Ultimately, Rodriguez de Cespedes concludes that “overall few large brands are adopting good practice to reduce their own emissions—and brands that purchase offsets are only somewhat more likely to be doing so than those that don’t.”

Fashion’s emissions are certain, but nature-based offsets aren’t

But aren’t offsets doing some good, you might rightly wonder? Of course, growing forests and preserving vegetation does remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere because that’s what plants naturally do, explains Phillip Williamson, honorary associate professor at the University of East Anglia’s School of Environmental Sciences. But it’s not as simple as what carbon offsets promise: “The problem is that biology is dynamic,” says Williamson. Such offsets are temporary due to the natural carbon cycle: plants die and break down, and the carbon they’ve stored is released again. “You’re just sort of putting off the problem for a bit longer.”

Alongside the natural carbon cycle, many other forces outside the control of carbon markets can impact whether offsets result in meaningful reductions. A planted tree can be felled, a restored habitat can be cleared for agriculture years or decades later, and extreme weather like wildfires can quickly destroy “preserved” forests. For example, recent devastating wildfires in Canada have resulted in millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere, and some of it has come directly from vegetation burned at a carbon offset project site. Beyond this, as European NGO ECOS has noted: “There is simply not enough space or time on the planet to grow trees and offset our way out of the climate crisis.”

There is simply no way to accurately declare that the carbon credits a company buys will result in the removal of a specific amount of carbon.

These kinds of concerns don’t only pertain to forests. Other forms of nature-based offsets come with problems, too. For example, Williamson specialises in coastal blue carbon—ie carbon captured by coastal and marine organisms like seagrass. He’s studied how widely the estimates of the rate at which blue carbon habitats can remove carbon vary. And he’s found that the highest and lowest estimates for how much carbon can be stored in coastal habitats can differ by up to a factor of 600. That leaves a lot of leeway for overestimation of the impact of nature-based offsets.

There is simply no way to accurately declare that the carbon credits a company buys will result in the removal of a specific amount of carbon. But as a 2021 Friends of the Earth paper states: “offsets are sold regardless of whether they will work over the long term”. And that’s where the problems start.

Investigations find popular offsets are “junk” and “largely a sham”

There’s a growing consensus among the experts we spoke to for this report: many of the most popular offsets sold are not delivering the reductions they promise. And this is reflected in numerous recent independent investigations, which have stirred controversy.

In January 2023, a nine-month investigation by The Guardian, Die Zeit, and SourceMaterial into the world’s leading certifier Verra concluded that more than 90% of its rainforest offset credits were “phantom credits” and therefore “did not represent genuine carbon reductions.” An independent analysis stated that, of 94.9m tonnes of CO2E credits claimed by Verra, there have been just 5.5m tonnes of real emissions reductions. The investigation found that reports of threats to forests were vastly overstated, meaning that “preserving” them had no real benefit, and only a handful of forests studied showed deforestation reduction.

Verra has publicly disputed the results. However, the findings of the investigation are in line with a broader, growing scientific consensus about the fundamental problems with the carbon market, and chime with other investigations and expert statements that date back over a decade.

Many of the most popular offsets sold are not delivering the reductions they promise. And this is reflected in numerous recent independent investigations, which have stirred controversy.

Another independent investigation, which was published just a few months later, said oil giant Chevron’s carbon offsets are “mostly junk”, and in 2022, an industry whistleblower revealed that Australia’s carbon credit scheme was “largely a sham”. “What is occurring is a fraud on the environment, a fraud on taxpayers, and a fraud on unwitting consumers,” professor Andrew Macintosh said at the time. Even Verra has had to dig into potentially dodgy offsets—in 2023, it initiated a quality review of its rice farming offsets used by Shell, later banning them.

The ways in which offsets can be considered a “sham” or “junk” varies. Alongside the overestimates and impermanence covered earlier, a lack of so-called additionality is an underlying issue. For instance, carbon credits that go to fund hydropower projects are based on the claim that without that funding, the renewable energy project would not have gone ahead. But experts argue that in the case of hydropower credits, many of these projects would go ahead regardless. They are not additional. If a forest was not really going to be cleared but its “preservation” is funded by carbon credits, that’s not additional. If one patch of forest is saved, but another is cleared in its place, that’s not additional.

In an investigation into what some experts have framed as Alaska’s “climate fraud” plan to produce carbon offsets from its forests without actually decreasing timber harvests, writer and researcher Stephen Lezak succinctly summed up the “additional” issue with a metaphor: “A [hypothetical] carbon offset that paid vegetarians to reduce their meat consumption is not additional because the vegetarians wouldn’t have consumed meat anyway.”

The Alaskan government’s plan to lease areas of its Tongass Nation Forest, seen here, for carbon credits without reducing its timber harvests exemplifies a lack of additionality.

“CO2lonialism”: how carbon offsets impact people, too

Among the creative carbon accounting and the threats to brand reputation, carbon offsets have also come under fire for human rights violations. Indigenous communities’ traditional knowledge and land management are vital to the future of our climate. And yet many have been subject to forced evictions, had their homes torn down, had their long-standing ecosystems disrupted, been swindled with low-value deals, and cut out of the conversation entirely.

But because the carbon market is so prevalent and other investment is near non-existent, many Indigenous peoples have become beholden to offset-based funding.

“When I was working at Amazon Watch basically every community that we worked with, across the Amazon, was involved in a carbon market programme of some shape or form,” says Krishnan. “There were a few holdouts and generally they were able to be holdouts because they were receiving funding from some other revenue stream. [But] the pressure is just immense. You are trying to get a floor put in your schoolhouse or trying to just have resources in the community. And a lot of these populations are totally neglected by the state. They’re playing the hand they’re dealt, and it’s been a very intentional political process.”

There is no doubt that Indigenous peoples must receive funding to further their vital work, but it should not be dictated by Western powers and it should not be used as permission to continue to pollute.

The Indigenous Environmental Network coined the term “CO2lonialism” to describe the colonial nature of offsetting and other such business-first “green” ventures. Indigenous groups have, for decades, opposed the implementation of various carbon offsetting schemes. They have been classified as both a “false solution” and a “death sentence”.

There is no doubt that Indigenous peoples must receive funding to further their vital work, but it should not be dictated by Western powers and it should not be used as permission to continue to pollute, Krishnan says. He highlights the Shandia Fund and Kawsak Sacha as examples of direct funding paths that could be an alternative to the currently flawed markets.

Offsets do nothing to decarbonise fashion’s value chain

Ultimately, our data suggests that offsets are serving as a distraction from the many actions brands can take to reduce emissions and decarbonise their own supply chains.

Depending on their size and control of their supply chain, the meaningful emissions reduction activities brands should consider include:

• using renewable energy in their production facilities, not only in the head office;
• undertaking production in close proximity to key consumer markets to reduce transport;
• using lower-impact materials;
• using more energy-efficient machinery;
• educating consumers on lower-impact garment care;
• and moving toward more circular, less carbon-intensive models.

It’s these kinds of specific actions brands can take in their own supply chains that Good On You recognises in rating fashion brands. “Our entire methodology is looking at the direct action a brand is doing to reduce its own impact,” explains Kristian Hardiman, head of ratings at Good On You. In this way, “it doesn’t make sense” to award brands for the vast majority of offsetting schemes that are promoted as they don’t directly lead to true emissions reductions in the value chain. That’s why brands that only choose offsets do not score highly for greenhouse gas reductions in the Good On You methodology.

“Of course, some emissions are unavoidable,” he continues. “But brands need to be taking action to address their reductions as the first priority, and right now, our data suggests that’s simply not happening at the scale and pace needed.”

Brands need to be taking action to address their reductions as the first priority, and right now, our ratings suggest that’s simply not happening at the scale and pace needed.

Kristian Hardiman – head of ratings at Good On You

While the experts continue to discuss the deeper problems, nature-based offsets remain in high demand. Unfortunately, the carbon offsetting market isn’t only confusing to consumers—many small and independent brands are targeted by predatory consultancies, which sell well-meaning brands on dubious offsets. As small brands often have less control and influence over their supply chains compared with larger brands, offsets can seem like a way to take action with the limited resources the brand may have access to.

“There’s a lot of people making money out of it. I’m not blaming all consultancies, but I do think there’s an issue with offering offsets as a first solution,” says Hardiman. “You get people thinking that they’re really, genuinely making a difference.”

Meanwhile, there’s one big number that continues to climb: the fashion industry’s estimated share of carbon emissions. Those emissions are only getting worse with fast fashion’s runaway overproduction.

Offsets will not save us from the climate crisis. It may sound obvious, but if fashion brands want to reduce their emissions, they need to actually reduce their emissions.

The post What Are Carbon Offsets? A Distraction From Fashion’s Runaway Emissions appeared first on Good On You.

In the know

Fashion Firms Agree to Compensate Garment Workers in Mauritius (The Guardian)

Barbour (“Not Good Enough”) and PVH, owner of Calvin Klein (“It’s a Start”) and Tommy Hilfiger (“It’s a Start”), have announced they will pay £400,000 to garment workers in Mauritius after an investigation from labour rights organisation Transparentem found that migrant workers were forced to pay thousands of pounds in illegal recruitment fees.

Bangladesh Garment Factories Fire Workers After Protests, Unions Say (Reuters)

Garment workers in Bangladesh have been protesting since October for higher wages, only to be fired from their jobs and met with police brutality, arrests, and even death. “The government agreed in November to raise minimum wages by more than 56% to 12,500 taka ($114) a month, which many workers have still called too low,” reports Reuters.

Why Sustainable Label E.L.V. Denim Needs to Be On Your Fashion Radar (Harper’s Bazaar)

“I’m proud to be a thought leader in this space, however, this journey is not just for me and E.L.V. Denim. We want to lead by example and show others that upcycling can be incorporated with great design and luxury tailoring—this can be a successful business model. We all need to be part of this change,” said Anna Foster, founder of “Great” brand E.L.V. denim in an interview with Harper’s Bazaar.

What 2023 Meant for Sustainable Fashion (DAZED)

Journalist Sophie Benson looks back on everything that happened in sustainable fashion in 2023, including fast-fashion bans, new legislations, and, of course, flagrant greenwashing (remember when Kim Kardashian joked about the climate crisis to sell bras?).

Luxury Brands Aren’t Doing Enough to Eliminate Forced Labour, Report Says (Vogue Business)

According to the fourth edition of the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre’s (BJRRC) KnowTheChain Apparel and Footwear Benchmark, 27.6 million people experience forced labour globally, with garment workers of the 20 largest fashion companies being owed at least $75m in unpaid wages.

Inside the Landfill of Fast Fashion: “These Clothes Don’t Even Come From Here” (CBS News)

Every single second, the equivalent of a rubbish-truckload of clothes is burned or buried in landfill. And it’s only getting worse, as shown in CBS News’ coverage of the mountains of clothing waste dumped in Chile.

Fast Fashion Is Only Going to Get Faster in 2024 (Quartz)

The latest edition of Business of Fashion and McKinsey and Company’s State of Fashion report suggests that the competition between ultra fast fashion brand SHEIN and newcomer Temu will only increase the pace of clothing consumption.

Episode 187: Why New Clothes Are Kinda Garbage (Clotheshorse)

‘Good’ and ‘Great’ news

Every month we publish news and product highlights from highly rated brands that have been assessed by our rigorous ratings system. Using our codes and links may earn us a commission—supporting the work we do. Learn more.

‘Good’ Brand MATE Launches Organic Menswear and Mini Collections

After years of focusing on womenswear, “Good” rated brand MATE launched its new menswear and mini collections last week, featuring essential loungewear items designed for the everyday. MATE is a US-based brand that is proudly female-founded and predominately operated by women. Its essentials are made with GOTS certified organic fabrics and lower-impact dyes, and these new collections are no exception.

“Great” Activewear Brand Tripulse Publishes Costing Insights

Transparency is key to creating a more sustainable fashion industry, and to that end, Franziska Mesche, founder of “Great”-rated brand Tripulse, has published a “behind the price tag” explainer to help shoppers understand its product costs, business model, and the true cost of buying fast fashion sportswear. “Sometimes people ask me ‘Why are your clothes more expensive than those of other activewear brands?’… It’s questions like these that made me aware that there is a big lack of knowledge and transparency around pricing in the fashion industry—and that the fashion industry has programmed most of us to believe that clothing must have a low price,” Mesche explains in the article.

ISTO. Creates New Lower Impact Denim Work Jacket

“Good” brand ISTO. has announced its newest work jacket made with lower impact denim, which uses fewer chemicals and a new washing approach in its production at the Candiani denim mill. Aligning with its ongoing approach to transparency, the brand has published details of its suppliers and a costing breakdown to give customers greater clarity on what happens behind the scenes.

The post 8 Things to Know in Sustainable Fashion in February appeared first on Good On You.

Every second, the equivalent of a rubbish truck load of clothes is burnt or buried in landfill. Waste is prevalent in every part of the fashion industry, as a result of overproduction, over consumption, and problematic end-of-life solutions.

The fashion industry has a (huge) waste problem

Every second, the equivalent of a rubbish truck load of clothes is burnt or buried in landfill. This statistic, revealed by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, is scary.

Waste in the fashion industry is an increasing concern for many, and for good reason. How widespread is waste in the fashion industry, exactly? Why is there so much waste in the first place? What’s the solution? Who is paving the way for a new system? And what can we do as consumers and citizens?

In this article we tell you everything you need to know about waste in the fashion industry.

How widespread is waste in the fashion industry?

The short answer is: extremely.

The long, and more detailed answer is: we have some estimations, but it’s nigh impossible to say exactly how much waste the industry produces.

It’s estimated that 92m tons of textile waste is created annually by the fashion industry. It’s also said that textile waste is to increase by around 60% between 2015 and 2030, with an additional 57m tons of waste being generated annually, reaching an annual total of 148m tons. And even these numbers may be underestimations and likely outdated stats that don’t speak to the scale of overproduction, with the likes of SHEIN and other ultra fast fashion brands uploading thousands of styles to their website per day.

As journalist Faith Robinson reported in our piece on production volume: “In an industry infamous for misinformation, one basic number we should know by now is how many clothes are made each year. But no one in the industry has a clear answer.”

Producing too much

A lot of this waste comes from manufacturers and retailers themselves, who generate around 13m tons of textile waste every year. Why so much? Largely because they overproduce: every season about 30% of the clothes produced are never sold.

With the advent of fast fashion, retailers started producing clothes at breakneck speed, with the goal to get the newest styles on the market as fast as possible, so shoppers can snap them up while they are still at the height of their popularity and then, sadly, discard them after a few wears. It’s this toxic system of overproduction and consumption that has made fashion one of the world’s largest polluters. Fashion Revolution revealed that the number of garments produced annually has doubled since 2000 and exceeded 100bn for the first time in 2014. The unsold garments are often burned: in 2017, it was revealed that H&M had been burning 12 tons of unsold clothing every year since 2013. Textile overproduction, and the resulting waste, are harming our planet.

Buying more than ever before

Manufacturers produce a lot of clothes, but we, consumers, also tend to buy more as the years go by. Around 56m tonnes of clothing are bought each year, and this is expected to rise to 93m tonnes by 2030 and 160m tonnes by 2050.

We buy more clothes, and we wear them less: the average piece of clothing is worn 36% fewer times now than it was 15 years ago. And what do we do with the stuff we don’t wear? We throw it away: in the US alone, 85% of textiles thrown away are dumped into landfills or burned. The average American is said to throw away about 37kg/81 pounds of clothes every year.

Problematic end-of-life solutions

Contrary to popular belief, a lot of our clothes aren’t recyclable. It’s said that only 13.6% of clothes and shoes thrown away in the US end up being recycled and that just 12% of the material used for clothing ends up being recycled. This 12% will likely end up being shredded and used as furniture stuffing, or made into insulation or cleaning cloths. Less than 1% of what is collected will be used to make new clothing.

Can we be a little bit more specific and clear about what is used goods and what is waste? We also have this tendency to see waste as waste, where waste is actually a resource.

Pernille Weiss – Member of the European Parliament EPP, Global Fashion Summit 2023: Copenhagen

A lot of clothing these days is made out of plastic, which, as we know, can take hundreds of years to decompose. Even if clothes made out of natural fibres end up in landfills, they don’t break down as well surrounded by plastic and other household waste. Landfills are said to be the third-largest source of methane emissions in the US, which contributes to the pressing issue of global warming.

A note on donating clothes

Even if we decide to donate our clothes to thrift stores or charities, in some cases, charities are forced to spend money sorting and disposing of this material, of which an estimated 25% goes directly to landfill. An additional 40-50% is exported into the problematic global second hand clothing trade, which swamps the local textile market of countries such as Ghana and Chile, and ends up in landfills.

Luxury fashion brands aren’t blameless

H&M is not the only retailer burning its unsold stock. In the middle of 2018, a wave of outrage spread across the internet when it was revealed that Burberry, one of the world’s most recognisable luxury brands, had burned a big pile of unsold stock. £28.6m (US$37m) worth of clothes, accessories, and perfumes went up in flames. It was shocking. Burberry was the brand that sparked a big brouhaha, but waste in the luxury fashion sector is thought to be commonplace. Big names rumoured to have destroyed stock include Louis Vuitton, Michael Kors, and Juicy Couture. So why do they do it?

Before we look closer here, it’s important to note that luxury fashion and fast fashion are not one and the same when it comes to waste. As noted in our piece on ultra fast fashion, the new wave of e-commerce is basically selling styles as fast-moving consumer goods, and brands like SHEIN are the fast food of fashion. Objectively, these brands contribute more to waste than luxury brands in general. But luxury still deserves critique here, and it comes with its own unique set of problematic practices linked to waste.

Luxury brand excuse #1: exclusivity

Beyond the design and materials, the allure of luxury fashion is that not everyone can afford to wear it. It’s a status symbol. Burning excess stock, as opposed to selling it as a discount, maintains the brand’s value and sense of exclusivity.

Then there’s the “grey market” where genuine designer goods are bought cheaply and resold by others. Some brands even offer discounts to staff and industry insiders to reduce the amount of unsold stock out there, and prevent it falling into the hands of resellers.

In one high-profile case, Richemont, the parent company of fine watch brands such as Cartier and Montblanc, was caught up in controversy after it destroyed more than £400m worth of designer timepieces in a bid to stop them being sold by unauthorised vendors. In response, Richemont also said it had bought back some unsold stock and recycled some of the precious metals and stones.

Luxury brand excuse #2: tax breaks

Luxury brands may also have a financial incentive to destroy unsold stock. For example, brands have to pay all sorts of taxes and charges to import goods into the USA. But if the goods are unsold, and the brand exports them again or destroys them under US customs supervision, they can recover up to 99% of the taxes and charges they paid in a process known as “drawback”.

Luxury brand excuse #3: stopping the fakes

Some brands have argued that destroying stock protects them against counterfeiting. Counterfeiting is an enormous, illegal industry worth US$450bn. It’s also unethical in multiple ways, with vulnerable people often exploited for low-cost labour by the criminal gangs that profit from the counterfeiting. But it’s hard to see how burning unsold stock by itself is an effective response to counterfeiting.

Towards a new system

After its own stock-burning blow up, Burberry had a rapid change of heart and vowed to not to burn stock again. It has also been taking steps to address its climate impacts, and was witness to the UN Fashion Industry Charter for Climate Change in December 2018. This ambitious plan has a vision for net 0% carbon emissions from fashion by 2050.

Right now, what I think is important, is that we aggregate the leaders of this industry—the luxury industry—to work together.

Antoine Arnault – Image & Environment, LVMH, Global Fashion Summit 2023: Copenhagen

There are other brands taking some measures to reduce waste. Design samples are commonly wasted in fashion, but luxury suit giant Hugo Boss has said it will stop producing physical samples. Instead, it will use large touchscreens to showcase its latest designs, eliminating all resources needed in the production and saving time and money. Gucci has also implemented a Scrap-Less program where its tanneries reduce the quantity of leather treated. Gucci then saves on waste, water, energy and chemical use in its leather supply chain.

We know waste is a design flaw, and so for fashion designers at the top of their game, reducing waste should be a top priority. There needs to be a shift from a linear model to a more circular system that gives value to recycled and reclaimed goods, and focus is on the longevity and life cycle of our possessions.

Waste and Good On You’s brand ratings

Good On You rates brands across the three key pillars of people, planet, and animals. When it comes to environmental impact, brands are awarded points for taking concrete action and incorporating efforts and commitments to circular economy principles. Examples of measures brands can take to demonstrate a commitment to a circular economy and reducing waste include:

• using recycled materials or deadstock fabrics
• taking back and reselling second hand products
• minimising blends of fibres to ensure that clothes can be more easily recycled at the ends of their useful lives
• using lower-waste cutting techniques in their cut and sew processes
• collecting and re-using offcuts from their cut and sew processes
• offering a rental scheme

What you can do to help

Consumers play a key role in reducing waste in the fashion industry. From increased support for more sustainable models, we are seeing circularity seeping into supply chains, manufacturing, and at the final stage; after a consumer has finished with an item.

Some key actions you can take to align with circular fashion and reduce waste in the industry:

• Know about the brands you buy by using resources such as Good On You
• Support more sustainable and ethical fashion
• Live by the five R’s of fashion
• Mend and alter clothes to keep them in your closet for longer
• Shop second hand where possible or consider renting for your next event
• Host and attend clothes swaps
• Ask “What are the alternatives?” before throwing away used clothing

Brands leading the way in environmental action

A lot needs to be done. But we have hope that those brands that are forward-thinking and more environmentally sustainable will lead the way.

The post Everything You Need to Know About Waste in the Fashion Industry appeared first on Good On You.

Quality matters

Good On You believes the most sustainable clothes are the ones that are already in your wardrobe, and if you have to replace items or fill in gaps, then you should aim to choose high quality, long-lasting garments. But what does “high quality” mean exactly? How can you tell that a garment lives up to those standards? And how does it relate to sustainability?

Sustainability researcher Sandra Roos says that, above all, wearing the clothes you already own is one the most eco-friendly things you can do, and in 2019, Fashion Revolution founder Orsola de Castro noted that lengthening the life of our clothing from 1 to 2 years decreases their carbon footprint by 24%. Making our clothes last longer is easier when they are high quality to start with.

Consider the longevity of a t-shirt that is unevenly stitched together from a thin, low-grade cotton versus a well-constructed t-shirt with a higher stitches-per-inch count, and a softer fabric woven from strong yarns. Which is more likely to break down after a few wears? And which one are you more likely to keep wearing and feeling good in?

So, if like us, you’re tired of investing in clothes that barely make it through one season, and want to reduce the impact of your wardrobe by learning how to pick out high-quality items, then keep reading.

Why you should prioritise quality

One of the most pressing reasons to prioritise quality clothes is the environmental impact of lower-quality fast fashion items. Cheaply made garments that are designed to be worn only a few times before falling apart contribute significantly to the fashion industry’s footprint. These items are often made from synthetic materials derived from fossil fuels and do not biodegrade, meaning they will sit in landfills for hundreds of years. In addition, the production of these items often involves exploitative labour practices and the use of harmful chemicals. While you might assume that higher-quality clothes are more respectful of people, the planet and animals, this is not always the case, which is why there are several factors shoppers should take into account when shopping for higher-quality garments. More on that later on.

“Given the speed needed to keep up with trends, it’s not physically possible to quickly mass produce something that is of a decent quality, ethically made, and affordable,” explained Izzie Ramirez, deputy editor at Vox, in a recent article. Indeed, choosing well-made garments that are designed for longevity counters the problematic throwaway culture that has become fashion’s norm, in which wearing an item once or twice before discarding it for something new is acceptable. Speedy lead times and ease of production are given the highest priority over the rights and needs of those involved in the supply chain, which often leads to increased waste, poor labour practices, harmful material sourcing, and much more. Ultimately, this system is harmful to consumers, garment workers, the planet and animals.

How to determine if clothing is high-quality

Fabrics

When it comes to determining the quality of clothing, fabrics play a crucial role. Look for clothing made from sturdy and comfortable materials. “When trying to determine the quality of a garment, I look at whether brands provide details about the manufacturing techniques used and whether they demonstrate the durability of the fabrics, and if so, how,” says Good On You’s fashion ratings manager and materials expert, Kate Hobson-Lloyd. “I also look at whether brands test the durability of their products, for example, with abrasion or pilling tests. Ideally, brands provide a minimum warranty of two years, as well as a repair service or clear guidance on how best to look after a product.”

In contrast, materials of lower quality—ones that are overly or unintentionally light and sheer, and look poorly stitched—tend to be less durable and may easily fall apart after just a few uses. “Be mindful of the fabric used—is the garment quickly losing its shape with wear? Is lightly worn knitwear showing signs of pilling too quickly? Are there noticeable changes in garment shape after washing?” asks Hobson-Lloyd. Lower-quality materials are often used in fast fashion items and contribute significantly to the fashion industry’s carbon footprint.

One of the most pressing reasons to prioritise quality clothes is the environmental impact of lower-quality fast fashion items.

Ideally, high-quality materials should also have a lower impact. Some common lower-impact fabrics include recycled cotton, recycled wool, and organic linen. These materials are often more sustainable than traditional cotton or wool because they require less water and energy to produce. And while we generally recommend staying away from more harmful synthetic materials, it is important to note that some of them can be very durable, like woven ripstop fabrics, which are often made from nylon to make them more resistant to rips and tears. For products such as swimwear and rainproof outerwear, synthetic material is more practical and currently the best option available, so keep that in mind when researching items.

The impact of fabric blends on durability and comfort should also be considered. While blends can sometimes be beneficial, they can also affect the overall feel and quality of the garment. For instance, a sweater made from a blend of wool and polyester may not be as comfortable and durable as a sweater made from 100% wool. Always read the tags and, if possible, feel the fabric before making a purchase.

Dyes and chemicals used in production can also affect the quality, durability, and comfort of clothing. Some waterproof coatings, for example, can make clothing less breathable. It’s important to look for garments that have been dyed with natural, non-toxic dyes and to avoid clothing that has been treated with harmful chemicals.

Construction and details

The construction and details of a garment are essential to consider when determining its quality. Well-made clothing should have strong stitching, durable seams, and hems that are finished neatly. “Look at garment stitching—are there any loose threads, and are the hems tidy and straight? Loose threads or uneven stitching can be a sign of poor quality,” adds Hobson-Lloyd.

In addition to these factors, specific construction techniques can significantly enhance a garment’s durability. For instance: garment linings; facings (the area of a garment that turns to the inside, giving a finished appearance, like on the collar); bindings (the strip of fabric attached to the edge of an item); and French seams, double seams and flat-felled seams (especially on denim and heavy garments) can all increase longevity. Areas like the shoulders, elbows, and pockets are particularly prone to wear and tear, so reinforcing stitches—like the bar tack you find on the pockets of your jeans—can help items withstand more stress. Paying attention to these construction details will help you identify garments that not only meet your style needs but also stand the test of time.

I look at whether brands provide details about their manufacturing techniques and whether they demonstrate the durability of the fabrics

Kate Hobson-Lloyd – fashion ratings manager and materials expert, Good On You

The quality of zippers, buttons, and other hardware is also an important consideration. High-quality zippers and buttons should be sturdy and easy to use—they should move freely and not catch on the fabric next to them, for example–and should not break or come loose easily. In addition, any hardware used in the garment should be securely attached and should not be prone to falling off or breaking.

What’s more, clothes made for mass production are cut and fitted based on an “average” set of body measurements to have the best chance of fitting as many people as possible. The result is a garment that has a passable fit on most people but rarely a perfect one, meaning the chances of you falling out of love with the item and wearing it infrequently are much higher than for something that fits and feels brilliant every time you put it on.

Understanding certifications

After identifying key signifiers of quality on the garment itself, shoppers can also look out for certifications, approvals and standards that are awarded when a company has been assessed for specific practices. Good On You’s recent research found that a majority of the luxury brands we usually associate with higher quality clothes don’t do enough for the people involved in the manufacturing process, so these certifications can be important indicators.

For example, fair trade organisations certify companies that meet rigorous social and environmental standards. Other certifications, such as the Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS), ensure that textiles are made from organic materials and that all workers involved in the production process are treated fairly. However, be aware that not all certifications hold the same weight, and some brands might over-promote a few certifications while disclosing little else. That’s why it’s important to dig deeper and look at a brand’s overall transparency and commitment to sustainability beyond its certifications.

Longevity in design

Design plays a crucial role in the longevity of our clothing. Choosing versatile pieces you can wear season after season over trendy items that quickly go out of style is one of the best ways to ensure that your wardrobe stands the test of time.

Capsule wardrobes and minimalist styles are great examples of classic designs that can be timeless. These approaches prioritise quality over quantity and often include clothes that can be mixed and matched. By investing in a few key pieces that can be styled in a variety of ways, we can reduce the need for new clothing and ultimately reduce the impact of our wardrobe on people, the planet, and animals.

Taking care of our clothing is also a key factor in making them last. Proper washing and storage can extend the life of our garments and minimise how frequently they need replacing. Some tips for making your clothing last longer include understanding fabrics so that you can wash them appropriately; folding knitwear instead of hanging it; storing delicate items in cotton garment bags; washing items in cooler water; air-drying whenever possible, and avoiding harsh detergents or fabric softeners.

Brands’ overall impacts

High quality isn’t just about the garment itself, but also about ensuring the item (and the brand that produced it) had a positive impact on people, the planet and animals. After all, if a seemingly well-made item is created using materials that are not sourced responsibly, or produced by garment workers who are not paid a living wage, then is it really of high quality?

Good On You doesn’t think so. That’s why we recommend researching a brand and checking its Good On You rating on our directory or app before you buy from them. We are the world’s leading source for fashion brand ratings—we’ve done the research and spoken to the experts, the campaigners, and the brands, to come up with robust but easy to use ratings for how each label impacts people, the planet, and animals.

We score brands on hundreds of issues and then give an overall rating from “We Avoid” and “Not Good Enough” through “It’s a Start” to “Good” and “Great”. Brands with higher Good On You ratings (“Good” or “Great”) are more likely to align with your values and support more sustainable fashion choices.

The post Is It Really High Quality? An Expert Guide to Choosing Clothes That Last appeared first on Good On You.

Are fair trade and Fairtrade the same?

There is fair trade, and then there is Fairtrade. The term “fair trade” refers to the general movement, which encompasses many different organisations with the shared aim of supporting producers and protecting workers’ rights and the environment. Fair trade describes a brand or an individual product that has been certified and labelled by an independent organisation because it meets specific standards.

Fairtrade, on the other hand, specifically refers to the certifying and labelling organisation Fairtrade International, which is the peak body for over 25 country-based Fairtrade labelling organisations. Each of these certifies products, allowing them to display the famous Fairtrade logo. On top of that, brands can choose to belong to organisations such as the Fair Trade Federation and the World Fair Trade Organisation.

Why fair trade?

To understand why fair trade is important we first need to examine some background on where this need came from. Why do we need special independent groups to get together and negotiate contracts between producers and traders? Why do we need auditing, certifications, and labelling?

Moving from “free” to “fair”

Aside from fair trade, we often hear talk of free trade. Unfortunately, free trade, as promoted by governments today, is often highly detrimental to workers around the world. Free trade agreements remove a country’s right to protect its workers through tariffs without necessarily providing any compensating benefits. Tariffs can be used on imported goods that are much cheaper than domestic prices. Cheap imports can drive down the price of a commodity within a given country and cause hardship and poverty among farmers and workers.

Although the economics behind this can be complicated and depend on specific circumstances, all too often the impact has been to allow multinational corporations to cherry pick lower-income countries in order to reap the benefits of cheap labour. Fair trade is a response that aims to ensure farmers and workers are not forced into poverty as a result of the pressures of unfettered international trade.

Why is fair trade important?

By buying fair trade products, you are helping to alleviate poverty in lower-income countries, ensuring that workers are being paid fairly, are working under humane conditions, and have sufficient labour rights, as well as encouraging more sustainable methods of production.

Supporting producers

Fair trade brings products from low- and lower-middle income countries (LMICs) into higher income economies. A minimum price is agreed on in advance to make sure that producers will be able to earn a living wage. This protects producers from market fluctuations that can cause prices to drop below production costs. This is a common problem in the conventional marketplace, and the 2022 drop in cotton demand and prices is just one example of how market fluctuations can impact producers.

Most fair trade groups also use and promote long-term contracts, which are meant to provide stability for producers. Some associations like Fairtrade International also charge a premium on top of the minimum set price, which is given back to the producers and invested in their communities, for example, in healthcare or education.

Ensuring workers are treated and paid fairly

Working conditions are audited by a certifying body to ensure that safety and health standards are being met, child and slave labour are strictly banned, and workers under fair trade have a protected right to organise and unionise.

Helping protect the environment

The fair trade movement emphasises the importance of protecting the environment. Without fair trade agreements, foreign companies can and do invest in farming and production in lower-income countries with little regard for environmental sustainability. One long-term and high profile example of the damage that can be done is the leather industry contributing to the deforestation of the Brazilian Amazon, with the rainforest increasingly being slashed and burned to create more grazing space for cattle. Sometimes it’s local industries that cause environmental damage out of desperation to cut costs and keep afloat in an increasingly competitive market. Because of this reality, fair trade initiatives have stressed the importance of enforcing more sustainable practices. These practices include water conservation, restricting various chemicals, prohibiting genetically modified organisms, encouraging biodiversity, and ensuring waste is responsibly disposed of.

Some good news

The realities of the conventional marketplace are a true nightmare. But there is a real shift happening. Consumers are increasingly interested in where and how their goods are produced. In fact, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit report commissioned by WWF, there was a staggering 71% rise in online searches for sustainable goods globally from 2016-2021.

There is a massive and exciting movement toward selling and buying more ethically made products. And no, these systems and organisations are not perfect yet. Each has its flaws, but it is the demand for fair trade that is most crucial and most encouraging right now.

There is growing public concern over the ways our commodities are produced. As a consumer, you have the ability “to put your money where your mouth is” and buy products that more closely reflect your values. And fair trade is just one way to make that task a little easier.

Discover our favourite fair trade clothing brands

The post What Is Fair Trade? And Why Does It Matter for Fashion? appeared first on Good On You.

Modern fashion’s ‘sacrifice zones’—a system rooted in racism

What constitutes “luxury”? Handcrafted garments from heritage labels in France or Italy are often the first examples that spring to mind. Meanwhile, luxurious handcrafted textiles and garments from the Global South are seen as less valuable, less fashionable, and less, well, white Eurocentric. There’s no way of getting around it: racism is built into the modern fashion industry at all levels, from luxury down to fast fashion’s cultural appropriation.

The fact that modern supply chains are built on the legacies of colonialism and systematic racism is itself not a new observation. In 2016’s Imperialism in the Twenty-First Century, for example, the author and researcher John Smith traced the typical supply chains of several iconic consumer goods—t-shirts, iPhones, coffee—to paint a grim picture of the current state of imperialism on a global scale. Diving deeper into the fashion context, Aja Barber’s groundbreaking 2021 book Consumed explores the connection between colonialism in fashion’s supply chains, overconsumption, and “the need for collective action”, as the subtitle reads.

Thanks to the ongoing work of labour leaders, unions, and human rights advocates, there’s growing global awareness of how fashion brands infamously exploit garment workers, the majority of whom are women of colour.

But far less discussed is modern fashion’s direct negative impacts on local and Indigenous cultures, which has its roots in the same destructive systems as labour exploitation.

Throughout history, the fashion industry has thrived by appropriating textiles, garment styles, and designs from other cultures to cater to western tastes, essentially built on colonial exploitation.

Niha Elety

The racist sin at the core of colonialism was not only exploitation, but a systematic aim to “civilise” colonised peoples whose cultures, histories, and creativity were deemed “less socially advanced”. This resulted in a forced and violently policed “westernising” of the way colonised communities presented themselves.

The outcome? The eradication of diverse, rich cultures and ways of dressing in favour of homogenous fashion, where all people across the world wear the same type of clothing regardless of their original culture. Anthropologist Sandra Niessen describes these as fashion’s “sacrifice zones”—natural and cultural systems considered expendable for the growth of the fashion industry in the Global North.

The fight against these powerful imperialist forces is often framed as “cultural sustainability.” That may sound like another buzzy phrase, but it’s far more urgent than that. Cultural sustainability must become central to fashion’s agenda in order to achieve labour and environmental justice for those negatively affected by the contemporary fashion system.

“Throughout history, the fashion industry has thrived by appropriating textiles, garment styles, and designs from other cultures to cater to western tastes, essentially built on colonial exploitation,” Niha Elety—a cultural sustainability advocate, influencer, and founder of the brand Tega Collective—tells me. “Today, many fashion brands continue to mass produce textiles and silhouettes associated with cultures to which they do not belong.”

Without a significant course correction, we simply keep repeating colonialism. And a slightly more environmentally friendly approach to colonialism is, obviously, still colonialism.

How imperialistic fashion harms local Indigenous culture

The mainstream global fashion system, whether it’s luxury or fast fashion, has many impacts on cultures across the world. In the Global South, it’s responsible for declining demand for locally made products that represent the culture of a specific place which ultimately results in the disappearance of valuable traditional craft skills.

This is how Eva Ilul, weaver and member of the Yakan Indigenous community in the Philippines, describes it to me: “My grandmother mentioned to me that we used locally available natural fibres like cotton and natural dyes from turmeric and gumamela flowers. However, this was not passed on to the next generation,” she recounts. “When foreigners came to the Philippines, polyester yarn started to become available and from then the tradition of using natural fibres and dyes disappeared.”

“My grandmother told me that 100% cotton yarn was widely available during her time but now it is so difficult to find. Not a single member of the community recalls how to do natural dyeing,” she explains. Ilul founded Tuwas Yakan weavers to help promote and sell handcrafted products made by her community.

Cultural appropriation’s very real consequences

Another undeniable factor is cultural appropriation, which further contributes to the loss and devaluing of cultural heritage and tradition. In numerous situations the crafts of Indigenous communities have been exploited by fashion brands without acknowledgement or economic benefit to the Indigenous artisan communities that the craft originated from.

While some of these cases lead to legal proceedings, there are few protections in place to safeguard Indigenous material culture, allowing fashion brands to freely use the cultural heritage of others as a source of inspiration despite public backlash.

The continued appropriation of patterns and embroidery from Indigenous communities makes headlines on a regular basis: Take Carolina Herrera’s resort 2020 collection—intended as a homage to Latin America, it featured patterns that prompted the Mexican government to accuse Herrera of plagiarising Indigenous communities. The development of legal protections for the country’s intangible cultural heritage has since been set in motion. In 2019, Max Mara faced accusations from the Laos-based Traditional Arts and Ethnology Centre that it had stolen embroidery and appliqué designs of the Oma people. And Isabel Marant’s spring/summer 2015 collection, which copied a traditional Mexican blouse from Oaxaca, resulted in a lawsuit in France.

While some of these cases lead to legal proceedings, there are, unfortunately, few protections in place to safeguard Indigenous material culture, allowing fashion brands to freely use the cultural heritage of others as a source of inspiration despite public backlash.

Certainly, in some cases, fashion brands and designers may unintentionally contribute to the problem, but that makes the consequences no less real. Fashion schools can help by more forcefully teaching their students to value and respect cultures beyond their own.

In cases where seemingly well-meaning brands carry out social impact projects, we still too often see it in the spirit of eugenics. As noted in Francesco Mazzarella and Migle Radziunaite’s 2023 report, Reality, Reciprocity, Resilience: Scoping a Decolonised Process of Designing for Cultural Sustainability with Refugee Communities, “designers are sometimes ‘parachuted’ into marginalised communities with the assumption that they can bring their knowledge and expertise to solve [the communities’] problems.” This has often resulted in top-down solutions that do not effectively address the specific needs and aspirations of diverse local communities, nor honour the cultures from which they originate. Ultimately, it demonstrates the urgency for culture to be considered a key pillar in fashion sustainability in order to decolonise the industry

“Brands can continue to support us by using our textiles in their work,” Ilul says. “If we don’t have buyers then we might not continue weaving and that would mean we can longer pass on our weaving traditions to the next generation.”

What do we mean when we say cultural sustainability?

In the context of fashion, cultural sustainability is a growing movement seeking to rectify the biases of the past and reform the current system to one that recognises and cultivates diversity in fashion and the wider sustainability discourse. The Cultural Intellectual Property Rights Initiative® stands out as a key organisation leading this work, and in the process of my own research into the subject, I attended Cultural IP Month – Cultural IP Rights are Human Rights programming, an accessible entry point for anyone looking to dive deeper into the topic.

But what do we mean when we say cultural sustainability? Building on definitions from CIPRI and the wider range of experts I spoke with for this piece, it’s about the access, use, and adaptation of cultural heritage while ensuring the communities that are custodians of this heritage and future generations are not harmed in the process. That also requires us to shift the narrative to focus on the skill and labour behind it all—recognising the value of craftsmanship and continued craft innovation, shifting to a paradigm where we see Cultural IP Rights as Human Rights, as conceptualised by Monica Boța Moisin, founder of CIPRI.

“Cultural sustainability helps to amplify and pass cultural knowledge and practices to future generations by honouring the people and work before us,” says Elety. “Textile craftsmanship plays a vital role in preserving cultural legacies and shaping distinct cultural identities through the traditional attire of various global communities and Indigenous groups. These textiles go beyond design, symbolism and storytelling, their actual creation is sustainable in itself.”

Indeed, cultural sustainability initiatives have been recognised as an important lever of sustainable development that have potential community-wide social, economic, and environmental impacts.

“Many of our ancestral practices—such as regenerative agriculture, natural dyeing, block printing, hand-loom weaving, growing native bio-regional fibres, and stewardship by Indigenous communities—are used when creating clothing,” Elety says. “Communities have reciprocal relationships with the environment and labour. These practices offer promising solutions to our climate crisis by Indigenising fashion supply chains to create a thriving ecosystem.”

How can fashion brands approach cultural sustainability?

Why, then, isn’t cultural sustainability widely discussed in the fashion industry?

The cynical answer is uncomfortable but familiar: in our globalised, capitalist world, fashion brands are for-profit companies that would rather focus on sustainability projects that can quickly deliver the greenwashing spin, says Elety.

“Given their large-scale operations, [the most profitable] brands tend to gravitate toward ‘one-size-fits-all’ solutions,” she explains—whether that’s carbon offsets to back up a net-zero claim or pivoting to recycled polyester as a “conscious” choice, as goes the story with many fast fashion brands.

The more nuanced answer is that cultural sustainability is hard but necessary work. “To tackle the multifaceted challenges, we must integrate various approaches to address location-specific needs, uphold human rights, and provide reparations to communities and countries affected,” Elety says.

Determining best practices in this context can be difficult, because every community is different. For example, the goal of preserving and celebrating Indigenous cultures may not always be applicable depending on an individual’s experience of their own culture, particularly if it involves trauma. Plus, research on cultural sustainability in fashion is currently in its infancy. To this end, in my role as ratings analyst at Good On You, I’m currently collaborating with the ratings team on approaches to better integrate cultural sustainability into Good On You’s methodology, which is constantly reviewed and updated to comprehensively address the ethical and sustainability issues in fashion supply chains. Elements of current best practices are already factored into how we rate brands on some issues, and we also recognise how frameworks are evolving.

There is a tension between the ambition to sustain cultural heritage and the responsibility to let people embrace other cultures as a vehicle for social integration.

Francesco Mazzarella – senior lecturer, London College of Fashion

Despite the nuanced landscape, there are clear ways forward for brands that want to do better and consumers who want to support them, thanks to the work of academics, designers, entrepreneurs and activists.

Francesco Mazzarella, senior lecturer in fashion and design for social change at the London College of Fashion, is the principal investigator on the project Decolonising Fashion and Textiles: Design for Cultural Sustainability with Refugee Communities.

“In my project, there is an ambition to sustain cultures and foster a sense of belonging through fashion and textiles,” Mazzarella says “But we also need to be mindful of not being tokenistic. Some refugees have very traumatic memories of their home countries, and they want to erase their own culture, and try to integrate in the new place of resettlement, also through the clothes they wear… There is a tension between the ambition to sustain cultural heritage and the responsibility to let people embrace other cultures as a vehicle for social integration. It is very tricky”.

‘Collaborate with Indigenous craft communities as partners instead of stealing their work’

In approaching cultural sustainability, Mazzarella recommends first considering what is needed on a local level in order to adapt the best practices.

It’s similar to what’s recommended by CIPRI’s 3Cs’ Rule: Consent. Credit. Compensation©, which aims to address issues of cultural appropriation and power imbalances within the fashion industry, promoting respect, collaboration, and equitable partnerships with Indigenous communities. Fashion brands are encouraged to adopt this in their engagement with Indigenous artisan communities. The 3Cs stand for, as defined on CIPRI’s website:

• Consent (“Free, Prior and Informed Consent of the craftsperson, indigenous or local community”);
• Credit (“acknowledgement of the source community and inspiration”);
• Compensation (“monetary, non-monetary or a combination of the two”).

Ultimately, conversations about cultural sustainability—and related instances of cultural appropriation—should lead back to the power that brands have to forge a different and better path than the colonial, racist dynamic that has become the status quo. Consumers, too, can choose to support the brands that take cultural sustainability seriously.

“Fashion brands can collaborate with Indigenous craft communities as partners instead of stealing their work,” Elety concludes. “It means partnering with communities that are already trying to make profits from their craft, moving towards localised systems, restoring native-fibre farming practices and use of garments, expanding the aesthetics we idolise, and reckoning with the way we value clothing.”

The post Cultural Sustainability: Colonialism, Appropriation, and What Justice Looks Like appeared first on Good On You.

Is local always better? It’s not that simple

On the topic of international shipping and shopping more sustainably, things can get complicated. If we are purchasing responsibly fashion from the other side of the world, surely any positive impact gained is negated by a negative impact from carbon emissions?

Well, it’s not quite that simple. Every action has a reaction, so what choice has the least negative impact? We break it down for you below.

The journey of a piece of clothing

When understanding the impact of our individual purchases, we need to consider the entire journey the item has taken before it gets to us. Chances are, no matter how responsible a fashion brand might be, that item of clothing has, at some point and in some form, travelled around the world. Bummer.

The standard life cycle of an item of clothing looks something like this:

Source: Common Objective

As the diagram indicates, the journey is complex and lengthy. It’s extremely rare for raw materials to be grown, processed, sewn, and sold all in one location. Each stage of the supply chain has some form of impact on the environment.

When we look at shipping specifically, the impact on the environment is considerable. Ships handle roughly 90% of global trade, transporting nearly 10bnmetric tons (11bn tons) of goods per year. It has been estimated that shipping accounts for 2.5% of of the world’s total CO2 emissions and a 2021 report from the European parliament estimated that number could rise from 2015 levels by as much as 34% by 2050.

Despite this pretty major carbon impact, transport via boat is actually the cheapest and most carbon-efficient option we have right now. A big ship will emit about 10 grams (0.4 ounces) of carbon dioxide to transport 1 metric ton of cargo 1 kilometre (2 tons of cargo 1 mile). That’s roughly half as much as a train, one-fifth as much as a truck, and nearly a fiftieth of what an aeroplane would emit to accomplish the same task. This last point is important—we’ll come back to it shortly.

So, what’s better? Buying online, or buying locally?

The truth is, locally made isn’t always better. Regardless of whether we buy a piece of clothing online or on our local high street, that item has likely already travelled around the world in some form, and had a considerable impact on the environment up to that point in its journey.

Due to harmful time- and cost-cutting initiatives, a high street ‘fast fashion’ item will have a considerably higher carbon footprint overall than its lower-impact counterpart, even if the lower-impact item is coming from the other side of the world.

Fast fashion is often made out of cheap synthetic fibres such as polyester, which uses fossil fuels as its base, and requires a considerable amount of water and energy to produce in comparison to more sustainable options. It’s likely that the clothing has been coloured using synthetic dyes which can not only release chemicals when they come into contact with your skin (not cool), but can leak toxic waste into waterways, resulting in significant environmental and human damage.

The supply chain of a fast fashion brand is also incredibly inefficient with waste. It’s estimated that 35% of all materials will end up as waste sent to landfill. Then we must consider the carbon emissions from the shipping itself, as the item gets sent around the globe to utilise the cheapest labour at each stage of its production.

While the responsible t-shirt you buy online likely has a smaller footprint than the one you’d buy at your nearest H&M, it’s still important to be aware of greenwashing. Many brands, including small and local labels, now put “ethical” or “sustainable” on their Instagram bio or website, with no solid evidence to back up their claims. Don’t be afraid to ask brands where their clothes are made, and remember to use our app or directory to help you decide which brands to support.

There is no perfect solution. However, avoiding fast fashion, buying fewer, quality, and second hand pieces is guaranteed to help shape a better future for all people, the planet, animals.

How to reduce your fashion’s carbon impact

So, how can we reduce our fashion’s carbon impact, even if we are already buying more ethical and sustainable brands? Here are some recommendations:

Support ‘circular’ or anti-waste brands

The number one way to reduce your fashion carbon footprint when buying new is to support brands that champion circular or anti-waste production practices. They will have the lowest carbon footprint of any fashion brand. A completely circular supply chain is difficult to achieve, but there are a number of brands that are making great progress in this space. Look out for the Cradle2Cradle certification and double check the brand’s rating on the Good On You directory if you’re unsure.

• MUD Jeans (“Great”) uses a high proportion of lower-impact materials including GOTS certified cotton and it creates high-quality, long-lasting products. Every step of the life cycle for all of its products has circular principles fully embedded including for design, materials, production techniques, and end of life.
• Greek brand Théla (“Great”) creates handcrafted fashion and lifestyle accessories with plastic waste. Witnessing the increasing reliance and problems around disposable plastics and over-consumption, founder Diti Kotecha is on a mission to inspire change, diverting plastic from filling landfills, polluting oceans, and harming wildlife.
• Neem (“Good”) designs and makes stunning menswear from recycled materials.  With a purchase of their Wear Well Bag, customers receive a compostable returns bag to send in their unwanted shirts to be recycled into new shirts and £30 credit towards their first order. Helping to protect the planet, one shirt at a time.
• A.BCH (“Great”) is an Australian-made fashion label focused on circularity and driven by a mission “to transform the way people buy, wear, and discard clothing.” The brand focuses on eliminating material and energy waste through pre-user, user, and post-user phases whilst creating beautiful, design-led clothing for its customers to love and enjoy. And when the garments reach the end of their life, send them back to A.BCH for effective recycling.
• Malaika New York (“Good”) is a minimalistic, more sustainable clothing brand with a focus on anti-waste clothing and accessories. The US-based brand aims to eliminate fashion’s harmful environmental effects by using lower-waste patterns and maximising wearability.

Support brands that support environmental organisations

The next best thing is to support brands that donate money towards organisations that are helping to combat climate change. Look for brands that have environmental protection at the heart of their mission, and support organisations such as 1% for the planet or are B Corp certified.

• TAMGA Designs (“Good”) has made it their mission to fight deforestation. Through 1% for the planet, every sale donates 1% to the Sumatran Orangutan Society (S.O.S) and Orangutan Information Centre (OIC), both of which actively work to re-plant the Sumatran rainforest. The brand also uses forest-friendly, more responsible fibres in all of its clothing.
• Patagonia (“Good”) belongs to both the Sustainable Apparel Coalition and 1% For The Planet. It rejects fast fashion by creating high-quality, long-lasting products, and offers a repair and reuse program. It even goes so far as to discourage customers from purchasing too many of its products.

Don’t use fast shipping

Selecting the fast shipping option means that your item will be delivered to you via aeroplane instead of a cargo ship. As we mentioned earlier, transporting via aeroplane results in significantly more carbon emissions than via ship.

Use in store or centralised pick-up options

If you have the option, using these delivery options will reduce your personal carbon footprint as it will mean less courier van transport—couriers can deliver bulk deliveries to these locations instead of having to go door-to-door. Collect your items via public transport, by bike, or on foot for bonus points.

Try to reduce your consumption generally

Adopt a minimalist approach with a capsule wardrobe, and only purchase items that you really need, that are high-quality, and will last you a long time. Or try to find pre-loved items from your local vintage boutique. See our guide on how to build a capsule wardrobe, or the best spots for second hand shopping.

The single best thing we can do for the planet is to keep our gear in use longer and cut down on consumption.

Patagonia

Other downsides of international shipping

Of course the environmental impact of international shipping may not be your only concern. Many counties apply import taxes, so make sure you understand the additional cost before placing that overseas order or you may be in for a nasty surprise. Returns are also a hassle, so be aware of that risk if the sizing is wrong or there is another problem with your order.

The post Fashion’s Carbon Footprint: The Ins and Outs of International Shipping appeared first on Good On You.

Highlights from the 2023 Animal Welfare in Fashion report

International animal welfare organisation FOUR PAWS recently launched its 2023 Animal Welfare in Fashion report, once again using Good On You’s brand rating system.

The third annual report aims to highlight the progress of animal welfare in fashion over the last two years and identifies where industry efforts can be prioritised to maximise impact for animals on the ground, while supporting the industry’s sustainability objectives.

To get a clear view of how the industry is doing for animals, Good On You rated 100 fashion brands from 15 countries across nine market segments including luxury, sports, and fast fashion.

These are a few of the key findings:

• Some signs of progress across the board: 17% of the brands selected in 2023 have improved their overall Good On You rating for their impact on animals since 2021. But overall, only 15% of the rated brands achieved Good On You’s top ratings of “Good” or “Great” for animals.
• More brands are publishing animal welfare policies: a growing number of brands that use animal-derived materials are disclosing animal welfare policies—up from 65% in 2021 to 77% in the latest report. The report also found that more brands have engaged and made progress in improving animal welfare, especially in the use of certified wool and down, and the adoption of fur-free policies.
• Use of certified materials, by the numbers: 61% of brands now disclose that they used at least some animal-derived materials certified to recycled or animal welfare standard. However, the progress is far from enough, as only 9% of brands used certified materials for 50% or more of their total animal-derived materials.
• 18% of brands still used wild animal materials: such as fur, exotic skins, and decorative feathers, despite the severe animal welfare deficits and public health risks associated with them.
• Brands aren’t investing in next-gen materials: only 4% of brands disclosed that they’re invested in developing next-generation alternatives to animal-derived materials. Finding innovative solutions that don’t rely on fossil fuels is key to planet and animals.

In short, the fashion industry could be on the cusp of a significant transformation, driven by a growing awareness of its environmental and ethical impact. Consumers are increasingly demanding animal-friendly products, sustainable practices, and transparency throughout the supply chain. And in response, a few forward-thinking fashion brands are leading the way in adopting various strategies to address these concerns. But, overall, the fashion industry’s status quo still causes too much harm to animals (and people and planet) throughout the supply chain.

To put it all into perspective, we at FOUR PAWS have reflected on what we’ve learned in our work campaigning for an animal-friendly fashion industry. Here’s what we see behind the numbers and how we, as consumers, can help accelerate the pace of change.

Animal welfare is firmly on the agenda for many major fashion brands

Over the last decade, we’ve seen how fashion’s impact on people and the planet have reached mainstream levels of awareness amongst the public. We have seen how this has come about through popular documentaries such as The True Cost or RiverBlue and international coverage of damning reports over the fashion industry, including the Rana Plaza disaster in 2013, fast fashion’s impact on the environment, and the uncovering of forced labour in the production of cotton in Uzbekistan and more recently in China.

Still, fashion’s impact on animals from the use of “conventional” animal-derived materials such as wool, leather, down, cashmere, alpaca, and mohair or from the use of wild animals for fur, exotic leathers, and decorative feathers, remained sidelined from the list of “material issues” by most major brands until now. This is despite similar levels of coverage and awareness afforded to the environmental and human rights concerns associated with the production of leather.

Positively, greater awareness by consumers over animal cruelty in fashion supply chains and greater interest in sustainable animal-free fashion driven in part by concerns over the environmental impacts of fashion—both heightened as COVID-19 swept across the globe—have made a compelling case for many major fashion brands to address some animal welfare issues in recent years.

As a result, brands are more often storytelling the types of animal-derived materials they choose and their rationales for choosing them. This now involves educating their customers about the consideration for animal welfare and the environmental impacts of the animal-derived materials brands are using.

Today, you will see many brands with a published animal welfare policy. The purpose of the policy is to outline brands’ expectations for the treatment of animals that end up in their supply chains and their requirements for the animal-derived materials they source.

But buyer beware—brands still need to make their policies more meaningful if they are to be held properly accountable for the conditions and treatment faced by animals in their supply chains. This is where the power of informed and engaged consumers, who raise concerns over animal welfare issues and are interested in the provenance of their products, can turn brands’ growing recognition of their responsibilities to animals into tangible action.

‘Higher welfare’ products are a possibility in fashion

You may be more familiar with the term “higher welfare” when it comes to animal-based food products such as eggs, dairy, fish, or meat. However, with the proliferation of animal welfare certifications for fashion supply chains in recent years, this term now extends to the animal-derived fibres found in clothing such as wool, down, cashmere, alpaca, and mohair.

The good news is that brands are increasingly sourcing animal-derived materials certified to animal welfare standards. Especially those which also aim to ensure more environmentally and socially responsible practices in production. But challenges still remain.

While animal welfare certifications for fashion items can be helpful for consumers who are aiming to make more informed purchasing decisions, decoding certification labels for good animal husbandry and other responsible practices being claimed on such labels is much more complicated than we’d like it to be for the average consumer.

The good news is that brands are increasingly sourcing animal-derived materials certified to animal welfare standards. Especially those which also aim to ensure more environmentally and socially responsible practices in production. But challenges still remain.

In short, animal welfare certifications don’t all ensure a consistent baseline standard of animal welfare, nor do they all offer the same rigour in traceability from farm to finished product. This can make it difficult for consumers to discern the wide-ranging claims being made between different certifications and to identify which ones are higher quality or more impactful for the animals that end up in certified products.

That’s why FOUR PAWS shares its animal welfare expertise with Good On You to enable the comprehensive “animals” rating to do the work for you.

So, the best thing you can do to encourage higher animal welfare standards through harnessing the power of fashion is to shop from brands that rate at least “Good” for their impact on animals and overall. Brands that are rated “Good” for animals use the best animal welfare certifications available for the animal-derived materials they source, and those rated “Great” for animals leave animal-derived materials out of the equation altogether.

Buying less means more for animals, people, and the planet

Did you know that animal agriculture is a key driver of our warming climate? Responsible for one-sixth of all human-induced greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), it contributes more emissions than the entire transport sector. Used for feed production and grazing pastures for farmed animals, animal agriculture is a leading cause of deforestation.

Also well documented by now is the fashion industry’s notorious volumes of production and waste through immense virgin resource depletion. Fashion is a major contributor to key environmental consequences that exacerbate our climate crisis, such as water scarcity and loss of biodiversity.

A staggering five billion animals are being used just for fashion each year with extraordinarily little oversight of the treatment and conditions faced by animals daily.

What’s more, a staggering five billion animals are being used just for fashion each year with extraordinarily little oversight of the treatment and conditions faced by animals daily. The demand for animal-derived materials (the production of which occurs alongside the food industry) by brands and consumers, therefore, results in a double negative. Firstly, it leads to the compounding effect of the fashion industry’s already sizeable environmental footprint. Secondly, it incentivises and therefore perpetuates the routine cruel practices and poor standards of animal welfare that cannot be escaped by intensive farming systems.

Reducing the industry’s reliance on animal-derived materials is, thus, not only a critical step to addressing fashion’s carbon footprint. It’s also a preventive measure of future pandemics and crucial to achieving excellent standards of animal welfare worldwide. It isn’t just fashion brands that can help to achieve this goal, either. We all can make a difference to the lives of billions of sentient beings and secure a healthy future for animals, people, and the planet by reducing our purchases of animal-derived fashion items, too.

The bottom line for animals in fashion

Of course, there will come a time when you’re in need of purchasing something new, whether for yourself or someone you know. In such cases, seeking products with higher animal welfare credentials may be a good start.

Animal welfare certifications can be an important economic incentive for producers overall to lift their standards. And at FOUR PAWS, systemic change is what we are counting on for the billions of animals that are currently farmed.

Certifications are also proving an effective tool to encourage greater transparency by fashion brands. This is an important win if we are to hold the industry accountable for its impacts on animals, people, and the planet.

Nonetheless, the bottom line for an animal-friendly fashion future is that choosing more sustainably produced items made from animal-free materials will do most to limit the adverse animal welfare and environmental impacts of the clothes we wear.

For the love of animals, let’s harness the power of fashion for good

With the help of the Good On You brand ratings to guide you towards kinder and more sustainable fashion choices, why not take your commitment towards sustainable fashion to the next level and sign up to the FOUR PAWS Wear it Kind pledge? Find out more on what it means to take a stand for animals via the FOUR PAWS website.

The post 5 Billion Reasons to Care: Animal Welfare in Fashion 2023 Report Puts the Focus on Solutions appeared first on Good On You.

Delve into the latest collaborative efforts of Oxfam Italia and LVRSustainable, unveiling a new initiative for championing women and bolstering gender equality.

Gender Equality Means Growth campaign

Oxfam Italia and LVRSustainable have joined forces once again, this time for a women’s empowerment initiative that aims to foster economic growth through mentorship programs. These programs are designed to both enhance women’s skills and capabilities and support women’s leadership at all levels, and take place across the world, so far running in Nepal and Sierra Leone. Running from November 29th, 2023, to February 1st, 2024, the campaign focuses on supporting women in unlocking their full potential and achieving economic independence.

How gender equality transforms entire communities

Oxfam, a humanitarian organisation committed to fighting inequality, recognises that gender equality is integral to economic, social, and environmental justice. By championing women’s rights and empowering them, Oxfam Italia seeks to create a transformative effect that extends beyond individual empowerment to positively impact entire communities.

On average, women worldwide are paid 24% less than men, and unpaid work equals three times the time invested in the same field by men.

Oxfam Italia

Achieving gender equality is a fundamental step for a fair and improved society. Oxfam Italia emphasises its significance, pointing out that achieving economic fairness involves addressing the pay gap and ensuring women aren’t burdened with an unfair share of unpaid work. Real economic parity is essential for shaping economies that are fair and accessible to everyone.

However, it goes beyond the financial. Gender equality acts as a catalyst for creating a balanced and inclusive social and economic environment. It’s about dismantling outdated systems that exclude or hinder individuals, fostering an atmosphere where everyone’s rights are respected. In the environmental space, gender equality contributes to sustainable development by ensuring diverse voices in decision-making processes, promoting a balanced approach to ecological challenges.

Gender equality also plays a crucial role in combating violence and discrimination. Empowering women economically and socially reduces the likelihood of them facing harm. This shift is critical for creating a society where individuals, irrespective of gender, can live free from fear and discrimination. By supporting women’s rights and enhancing their financial standing, we set in motion a ripple effect that uplifts families, communities, and global society. So, it’s not merely an ideal; it’s a necessary step for a fair and continually progressing world.

Women-to-women economic growth mentorship programs

The heart of Oxfam’s initiatives lies in providing mentorship programs that enhance women’s skills and capabilities through fostering the development of female entrepreneurship, actualising business ideas, and launching initiatives. “Through all these years and continuous work that has been done with Oxfam Italia, we aim not only to raise awareness but also to contribute to gender equality and women’s growth projects,” shares Fernanda Hernandez, Head of Sustainability at LuisaViaRoma. By fostering economic growth, the programs aim to fortify women’s autonomy, power, and decision-making abilities. This collective effort recognises the powerful concept of women supporting women, acknowledging that empowering women contributes to broader positive progress.

If women had equal access to resources compared to men, global poverty would decrease by 17%, saving 150 million people.

Oxfam Italia

Oxfam’s work in Nepal and Sierra Leone illustrates the transformative impact of such initiatives. Through comprehensive training, Oxfam has dedicated itself to enhancing the technical, leadership, and financial capacities of women’s groups. These women have gone on to play pivotal roles in their communities, contributing to leadership in various projects, launching microenterprises, and actively participating in decision-making related to disaster management.

You can learn more about the campaign or also donate money directly to the campaign to give women a chance at a better future.

#GenderEqualityMeansGrowth #Women4Women #LVRSustainable #OxfamSiamoNoi

The post Championing Women: Oxfam Italia Launches Gender Equality Campaign appeared first on Good On You.

What’s the fuss with vegan fashion?

In 2019, researchers at Oxford University published a paper concluding that switching to a plant-based diet can positively impact our health and the environment. This is excellent news for those of us who care about the wellbeing of people, animals, and the planet. But did you know veganism isn’t just about food? People who follow a vegan lifestyle also choose not to wear animals, either. And some people may choose to support cruelty-free fashion even if they aren’t vegan in their day-to-day life. So, let’s take a look together to answer the question: what is vegan fashion?

In the fashion sphere, the vegan trend isn’t new—technically, our basic organic cotton t-shirt or ubiquitous jeans, for example, are vegan in that they contain no animal substances. However, brands’ use of terminology such as “vegan” and “cruelty-free” has been gaining prominence over the years. This uptick is partly thanks to conscious consumers keen on extending their vegan principles to all areas of their life, beyond the plant-based food and animal-free cosmetics they may already purchase. In a poll of 14,000 people by our friends over at global animal welfare organisation FOUR PAWS, “almost 90% of respondents want the fashion industry to prioritise animal welfare alongside environmental protection and social standards.” This is fantastic news for animals and the future of vegan fashion.

But even if you don’t call yourself vegan in everyday life, you may still be tempted by vegan or cruelty-free fashion. Why? Because the interesting thing about it is that it seems to win hands down over conventional fashion in terms of several human, environmental, and of course, animal welfare impacts—although it’s worth noting that vegan doesn’t inherently mean better for the planet. Let’s see what all the fuss is about.

A few definitions

Most of us will be familiar with the terms “vegan” and “cruelty-free” in the context of food and beauty products. Whilst there is no overarching legal definition of these terms, the beauty industry has typically defined them as follows:

• vegan: a product that contains no animal, or animal-derived, substances; and
• cruelty-free: a product that has not been tested, and whose ingredients have not been tested, on animals

In the beauty industry, these terms refer to two different things: one is the product elaboration process (is it carried out without involving animals?), the other is the finished product (does it contain any substances of animal origin?). Here’s the tricky—and slightly misleading—part: a product can be vegan but not cruelty-free if it contains no animal products but was tested on animals. And vice versa: it could be labelled “cruelty-free” due to no animal testing but contain animal substances, thus resulting in a non-vegan product. So for discerning consumers, the distinction is important.

In the fashion industry, there is less of a distinction between the terms “vegan” and “cruelty-free” for the simple reason that there is no obligation to carry out animal testing for apparel and accessories. So in fashion, the terms tend to be used interchangeably. That said, for the super-conscious consumer, understanding what goes on in the beauty space can help us make certain choices in fashion. For example, if a company sells “vegan” clothes, would we still buy them knowing that the same brand tests its fragrances and cosmetics on animals?

What’s going on with animals in fashion?

Animals are being exploited on fur farms, cattle ranches, and abattoirs, to name a few, and the lack of transparency and traceability on the part of brands means that consumers can’t know in what conditions the animals ending up in our fashion items were reared, transported, or slaughtered.

Global organisations such as Humane Society International and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) have documented widespread abuse of animals for the sake of fashion. Some of us will remember PETA’s campaign featuring supermodels bearing the slogan: “I’d rather go naked than wear fur”.

Granted, not everyone is tempted by or can afford fur—though it is often found in relatively inexpensive trimmings and accessories, too. But take good old leather, widely present in both fashion apparel and accessories. The leather industry is rife with animal cruelty, lack of regulation and enforcement, and labour abuses, including tanneries employing underage children and harming their workers and communities with toxic chemicals. Due to complex supply chains, most of the world’s leather is untraceable, so it could also be contributing to deforestation in the Amazon. And don’t get us started on the fallacy of leather being a by-product of the meat industry, about which we’ve written previously.

Even for those of us who would choose not to wear anything originating from a dead animal, such as fur, leather, or other skins, it’s still worth bearing in mind that animals used (as opposed to killed) for fashion suffer immensely. So if you are concerned about animal welfare, you may want to consider moving away from wool, angora, and all other animal-derived materials, too.

Due to a combination of hard-hitting public campaigns and consumers demanding greater accountability from companies, the fashion world has seen major shifts towards a more compassionate approach. Fashion weeks such as London, Amsterdam, and Melbourne have become fur-free—with Helsinki going one step further by also becoming leather-free and skins-free. Likewise, fashion heavyweights such as Prada, Gucci, and Burberry have dropped fur from their collections. Mulberry and Diane von Furstenberg have dropped exotic skins, whilst Chanel is the first luxury house to have dropped both fur and exotic skins. And high street brands are on it, too: H&M and Nike, for instance, have both dropped exotic skins. Of course, as some of those brands might still use leather, wool, and other animal-derived materials, they cannot be called vegan brands.

Nonetheless, such changes are a step forward not only in terms of animal welfare but also from an environmental impact perspective: a Pulse of Fashion report released in 2017 concluded that from the perspective of environmental degradation, three out of the four worst fabrics are animal-derived, the four fabrics in question being: leather, silk, conventional cotton, and wool—yet another reason to choose vegan fashion. For a concise guide on the environmental impacts of animal products in fashion, check out our existing article.

All that is vegan is not green

A discussion on vegan fashion wouldn’t be complete without addressing the greenwashed elephant in the room: plastic. Unfortunately, what technically counts as vegan fashion can also be incredibly damaging to the planet. Specifically, fossil fuel-based (AKA plastic) materials may technically not contain any animal-derived products or by-products, but these fabrics are some of the most harmful to the planet of them all.

And so vegan fashion faces its own set of challenges that stem from its materials and manufacturing processes. While the industry aims to distance itself from the environmental impact of traditional animal-derived materials like leather, a significant concern arises in the form of fossil fuel-based fashion. Many vegan alternatives, such as synthetic fabrics like polyester and nylon, heavily rely on non-renewable resources and contribute to environmental degradation.

Additionally, the prevalence of vegan plastics raises ethical questions regarding their true sustainability. The production and disposal of these materials can result in pollution and contribute to the global plastic crisis. As the demand for ethical and sustainable fashion continues to grow, addressing these issues within the vegan fashion sphere becomes paramount, urging consumers and industry stakeholders alike to re-evaluate the true environmental impact of their choices.

Thankfully, there are plenty of brands making fashion from plastic-free vegan materials, and more and more plastic-free alternatives to animal-derived materials popping up all the time.

Let’s get dressed

If you are that way inclined, switching to vegan fashion is, in fact, extremely easy.

Here are a few suggestions:

• refer to the Good On You ratings—we’ve done a lot of the hard work for you, so if you’re unsure how a brand fares with animals, check our directory. Alongside the labour and environmental pillars, animal welfare is our third pillar when we rate brands. We’ll tell you whether a brand has a formal animal welfare policy in place and how much transparency there is in its supply chain. You’ll also see which (if any) animal products it uses, including fur, angora, down, exotic hair and skins, wool, and leather
• some brands have been vetted by PETA from an animal welfare perspective and are authorised to carry the “PETA-approved vegan” logo, which you can keep an eye out for
• check your clothes labels—here are some suggestions for lower-impact vegan fabrics
• look out for the innovative vegan fabrics already out there and currently being developed: from lab-grown silk or silk derived from citrus residue to vegan leather alternatives made from fruit to leaves and back again (including the burgeoning fungi-derived Mylo leather, developed thanks to collaboration among prominent industry players), to recyclable nylon known as ECONYL made from abandoned fishing nets, the future of vegan fabrics is promising

Choosing vegan fashion can be a great choice for animal welfare and environmental reasons—and, particularly in the case of leather, often for social sustainability reasons, too—and there are plenty of ways you can ensure that your wardrobe benefits animals, people, and the planet.

We’ll leave you with these words, which highlight the interconnectedness of the two:

Compassion towards animals deserves to be added as a UN Sustainable Development Goal because it is an issue of justice and science that is tied to some of the most harmful industries on the planet

Joshua Katcher

Check out our favourite vegan fashion brands

The post What Is Vegan Fashion? appeared first on Good On You.

A responsible wardrobe on a budget? It’s totally doable

Are you worried that your budget might compromise your desire to embrace ethical fashion? You’re not alone. In a world that often pits financial constraints against the desire to shop responsibly, finding a middle ground can seem challenging. To help out, we’ve compiled a comprehensive guide to help you navigate the fashion landscape, providing tips and tricks to create a versatile and responsible wardrobe that aligns with your values without emptying your wallet.

Below, we’ll debunk the myth that ethical fashion always comes with a hefty price tag. From revamping your existing wardrobe to embracing second hand treasures, we’ll explore practical strategies for mindful fashion consumption. Learn how to make the most of your clothing, be environmentally-conscious during the laundering process, and discover the impact of better fibres on sustainability.

Here are our top tips for rocking a responsible wardrobe every day without busting your budget wide open.

Fall back in love with your wardrobe

There’s no use throwing out the clothing you already own and rebuilding your clothing collection from scratch. The deed has been done and it shouldn’t go to waste. Instead, it’s time to fall back in love with your wardrobe. Style your existing pieces with different accessories, reinvent them with a DIY project, or try combining that top with a different skirt. Find the hero items that always make you look and feel great and wear those babies as much as you can. After all, the most ethical wardrobe is the one you already have.

Be mindful during the laundering process

The consumer use phase, AKA wearing, storing, maintaining, washing, and drying all the clothes you buy, is a key contributor to the overall energy consumption and GHG emissions associated with clothing, not to mention the deal with microplastics. Doing laundry better is an essential step to keeping your clothing around for longer and reducing your impact.

Go for non-synthetic fibres

Non-synthetic fibres (we’re talking cotton, linen, hemp, wool—preferably recycled, organic, or second hand) tend to require less laundering, especially in summer. You can just hang your clothes out to air overnight, and they will be fresh as a daisy in the morning. Unless something is visibly dirty or on the nose, take the challenge to wear your garments at least three times before they hit the laundry. If you’re not sure where to start, check out our ultimate material guide.

Invest in some good coat hangers

Most plastic and wire hangers will stretch out the shoulders of your tops  and leave you with saggy clothing. Despite being a little more expensive, wooden hangers will last longer and take better care of your garments. For more tips on caring for your clothes, check out our ultimate guide to clothing care..

Take those high investment pieces in need of repair down to the tailor

Tailoring is the ultimate sustainable style tip: a new zip or an extra inch on the waist will set you back as little as $30. Or why not empower yourself by learning those skills yourself? There’s nothing quite like the feeling of adding a new skill to your repertoire. Learning to sew, repair, and re-fashion your own clothing puts the power back in your hands. Here’s three simple tricks to mend your clothes from Fashion Revolution founder Orsola de Castro.

Upcycle, upcycle, upcycle

Upcycling is a way of tweaking an item to make it even better than the original. This means taking something that doesn’t fit or is stained/torn and refashioning it as a fabulous new piece. There’s a wealth of upcycling videos and how-to guides or you could take a class at your local community college.

You really don’t need to pay $300 for ripped and distressed denim. Grab a cheese grater and some scissors and try it yourself.

Faye de Lanty

Taking control over your wardrobe also means you no longer have to put up with clothing that “just isn’t quite right”—you can tweak things as your style changes, getting optimum wear from your well-loved items—and earning yourself some bonus bragging points.

Before you reach for your wallet, first ask yourself these three questions: How much will I wear it? How much do I already own? How long will it last?

Invest in quality pieces

Resisting the impulse to buy huge numbers of cheap items in favour of investing in quality pieces not only makes your look more streamlined, it also reduces the amount you consume overall. Saving your hard-earned dollars for quality is really a win-win.

Although shopping at responsible retailers may seem like a more pricey up-front commitment, taking the time to curate a careful and worthwhile wardrobe of items you love will be much gentler on your wallet—and the planet—in the long run.

Even a gorgeously tailored black dress isn’t worth much to you if you already have 10 just like it. A $15 t-shirt is no bargain if it’s worn out after a few washes. And those jeans on sale aren’t worth $40 if you’ll wear them just twice before consigning them to the back of your closet.

Mark Bain

Create a list of items that you’d be ecstatic to own. Focus on quality—which doesn’t just mean more expensive. It can include organic materials, well-made rather than on-trend, perfect-fitting, and preferably made by a brand that makes an effort to be more ethical and sustainable. As well as being better for the planet, people, and animals, higher quality pieces will often last longer due to superior materials and overall construction.

Start by browsing clothing online while checking their ratings using the Good On You Directory or app. Place the items you want in your virtual cart, add them to the wishlist feature on the sites, or create a Pinterest board. Pin images that include what you have in your wardrobe so you can see how they’d all work together. The more you mull over the options and revisit your choices, the less you’ll probably want any of it, and the more certain you’ll be to love the pieces you finally end up purchasing.

Shop second hand

According to resale platform thredUP, “if everyone bought one item used instead of new this year, it would save 5.7bn lbs of CO2e.”

Op shops are a treasure trove for fashionistas who love beautifully crafted vintage pieces and unique pre-loved items. Buying something feels even better when you know that the proceeds are going toward projects making the world a better place. Not sure where to start? Stylist and op shop guru Faye De Lanty says it’s important to “Shop the whole store, not just your section. Some of my favourite pieces came from the men’s section. (Oversized boyfriend shirt anyone?!).”

Local markets are often packed with quirky and unique finds you just can’t get anywhere else. Buying second hand from a local market means you’re not only recycling clothing and accessories that might otherwise end up in landfill, you’re supporting local enterprise and giving back to the community.

Look into rental fashion

For some of us, the idea of turning up to every formal event in the same gown and that one pair of trusty heels is just not on. But neither is a wardrobe overflowing with barely worn formalwear or a maxed out credit card from buying clothes we can’t afford. So what can we do? It’s time to look at the rental market. There’s a huge variety of fashion rental businesses who provide designer dresses and accessories, like GlamCorner in Australia, in the US with Rent The Runway, and in Europe and the UK with Le Closet and Frontrow. You can also browse most sites via occasion and designer to give you some inspiration.

Swap your clothes

Fun and free ethical wardrobe additions? Yes, please. Clothes swapping is another more sustainable way to find a new outfit without spending a cent, and it’s also a great opportunity to meet other fashionistas like yourself.  Swap events can be big formal affairs or just a casual get together with you and friends. For example, The Clothing Exchange hosts events in venues around Australia with guidelines to ensure everything is fair and fun. Keep an eye on your council’s community events page for swaps happening in your neighbourhood, or better yet, organise one yourself.

Embrace ‘less is more’

A capsule wardrobe refers to a small collection of seasonally appropriate, mix-and-match clothes. Back in 2015, Harper’s Bazaar art director Matilda Kahl shared her experience of adopting a “work uniform”. This consisted of a crisp white shirt, black pants, a unique accessory, and optional black blazer. The idea came to her after a classically frustrating morning trying to find the right outfit only to feel uncomfortable in her chosen look. Years after pinning down her Monday to Friday uniform, Kahl has continued to stick with her chic, minimal ensemble as a way to save time, energy, and money.

There’s so much you can borrow from the uniform concept, like investing in responsibly-made basics to build a capsule wardrobe à la Jennifer L. Scott.

Wait for discounts

While many well-made fashion brands can be pricey, most companies host amazing deals at some point during the year. Stalk the sale sections in stores and online. Sign up for emails to receive coupon codes, and befriend shop owners to find out when sales are approaching.

You can also shop off-season for the best prices. Stock up on your winter jumpers in spring so that you’re prepared to rug up when winter rolls around again. Also make sure you check out our special offers for a weekly selection of offers from better brands.

Remember to shop sales responsibly, though, and not use them as an excuse to overconsume. If you have curated a list of key items you need for your wardrobe and you still feel the gap by the time a sale comes up, you know it’s a good time to invest.

Put Good On You to good use

Want to understand which brands are doing better by people, the planet, and animals before purchasing? We’ve already done the research for you. Check our easy-to-understand brand ratings using the Good On You Directory or app.

If you don’t like what you see when searching the brands you typically shop, check our suggestions for similar brands that do better, or you can send a message to the brand asking them to do better. While we typically recommend supporting brands rated “Good” or “Great”, sometimes an “It’s a Start” brand may better meet your needs when building your wardrobe, and that’s okay. Progress over perfection.

You can also browse via clothing category, such as “jeans”. Then filter by price, location, and more to make sure the results are spot on. Save the brands you love and refer back to them when you need to update your wardrobe. Check out our article for more tips on using our directory.

The post The Ultimate Guide to Creating a More Ethical Wardrobe on a Budget appeared first on Good On You.

In the know

Organisations Helping in Sustainable Manufacturing (Apparel Resources)

Apparel Resources highlights the best non-governmental organisations across the globe actively helping the fashion industry move forward with sustainability initiatives by providing certifications, rankings, and sharing essential knowledge.

Towards a Collective Approach: Rethinking Fashion’s Doomed Climate Strategy (Transformers Foundation)

Transformers Foundation’s latest in-depth report examines the failings of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and how fashion must take a collective approach to reducing its footprint.

Thread Carefully: Your Gym Clothes Could Be Leaching Toxic Chemicals (The Guardian)

The Guardian reports that workout wear made from synthetic fabric is treated with chemicals, which research shows can be absorbed through skin.

Why Fast Fashion Brands Are Getting a Visit From a Textile Waste Zombie (Dazed)

In an effort to encourage responsible fashion practices, The Or Foundation teamed up with artist Jeremy Hutchinson to send a clothing waste zombie into high street shops. “I’m trying to trigger this sort of hysterical response, the feeling deep down that we know when we put our shit in trash bags and send it off to somewhere else, that it hasn’t disappeared,” said Hutchinson.

Preaching Sustainability While Hawking Fast Fashion—Meet the Greenwashing Influencers (The Guardian)

Sarah Manavis talks through the epidemic of brands “sticking an influencer on it”, including those that preach responsible fashion but earn money through affiliate links to fast fashion giants like Zara and H&M.

Leading Sustainable Fashion Organisations Seek Next Gen Voices to Inspire Change (Global Fashion Agenda)

Global Fashion Agenda has launched the search for seven leading Next Gen voices in the fashion industry to participate in the Next Gen Assembly, in collaboration with its Academy Partners, London College of Fashion’s (LCF) Centre for Sustainable Fashion (CSF) via the Fashion Values Programme, and Eyes on Talents.

Stella McCartney on Why Fashion Needs a Seat at the Table (Atmos)

Sustainable fashion pioneer Stella McCartney speaks with Atmos about attending COP28, incentivising responsible business practices, and why pushing for accountability in an otherwise unregulated industry has not been the easy route.

‘Good’ and ‘Great’ news

Every month we publish news and product highlights from highly rated brands that have been assessed by our rigorous ratings system. Using our codes and links may earn us a commission—supporting the work we do. Learn more.

Collaboration Beats Competition, Say Better Brands DAWN Denim and JAN ‘N JUNE

Two better brands, DAWN Denim (“Great”) and JAN ‘N JUNE (“Good”), have come together to collaborate on stylish denim that emphasises the importance of working with each other to ensure a more sustainable fashion future for all: “Together we have developed two styles that combine the high quality and sustainability standards of DAWN and the signature minimalistic design of JAN ‘N JUNE.”

The two fits, ALBA and SELENE, are high-waist jeans, with the ALBA having a straight leg fit and the SELENE having a wide leg fit. Both fits have been launched in three colourways⁠, made from 99% cotton and 1% elastane while maintaining the rigid denim look. “We believe that none of us are as smart as all of us. We want to use this potential even more and are pleased that JAN ‘N JUNE sees it the same way and that we can release our first joint capsule collection together with the Collaboration beats Competition for AW23.”

LVRSustainable for Oxfam: Gender Equality Means Growth Campaign

From November 29th, 2023, until February 1st, 2024, LuisaViaRoma’s LVRSustainable commits to supporting Oxfam’s women-to-women economic growth mentorship programs. In all its programs, Oxfam is committed to championing women’s rights and empowering them to unlock their full potential. Supporting a woman, fortifying her autonomy, power, and skills becomes a catalyst for uplifting her family and community, fostering positive progress.

The concept of women supporting women is a powerful one, as it recognises that empowering women has a transformative effect on the entire community. By providing economic independence to women, the benefits extend beyond individual empowerment, positively impacting the entire community and contributing to the strength of the economic system. In practice, Oxfam’s initiatives focus on enhancing women’s skills and capabilities to ensure the achievement of gender justice in all areas and supporting women’s leadership at all levels, enabling them to gain greater decision-making power and control over their own lives.

“To eliminate all forms of exclusion and oppression, we must recognise that social and economic growth are interconnected. Therefore, it is necessary to rethink our collective wellbeing in terms of positive rights: full participation, complete emancipation, and the thorough recognition and respect of others,” shares LVRSustainable. Shopping on LVRSustainable assists in the empowerment of women worldwide and supporting initiatives that create lasting positive change.

The post 9 Things to Know in Sustainable Fashion in January appeared first on Good On You.

Another milestone year for Good On You

2023 hasn’t been smooth sailing, with the cost-of-living crisis still reshaping spending habits and impacting businesses worldwide.

Through all of the ups and downs of 2023, one thing remained unchanged: our commitment to our mission of using the power of consumer choices to drive positive change. This year again, the Good On You team actively worked towards achieving our vision to create a more sustainable future, by empowering millions more consumers and accelerating our impact through strategic partnerships, innovations, and data-driven reporting on the fashion industry.

From rating 6,000+ brands and deploying Good Measures globally to deepening collaborations and actively shaping industry conversations, let’s look back on everything that made this year another milestone for Good On You.

We innovated for impact

This year, we pushed our ratings to new heights; grew our community; and launched and refined innovative tools and platforms to drive progress in the fashion industry—before it’s too late.

We achieved a big milestone with 6,000 brands rated

Accelerating our impact means rating more brands than ever. By the end of the year, we’ll have rated 6,000 brands, a significant milestone.⁠ In fact, no one has ever so comprehensively rated so many brands before on publicly available data.

⁠Every single brand we rate undergoes a rigorous evaluation against our comprehensive rating system. Our methodology captures the intricacy of sustainability, analysing up to 1,000 data points across 100 key issues for each brand.⁠⁠

To ensure the utmost integrity, our ratings are based solely on transparent and publicly available information. We rely on credible third-party indices, certification schemes, and standards, along with brands’ own public reporting. Our expert team of analysts verifies and assesses this data meticulously, so consumers can trust that the information is reliable and accurate.⁠

This year, we rated 2,391 new brands, a massive increase compared to previous years. As always, we listened to our community and prioritised brands that our app users requested, including reviewing the ratings of the ten most searched brands on Good On You, to empower them with the information they’re looking for. We also rated brands to help our retail partners measure their portfolio, source brands doing better on important sustainability issues, and promote the leaders with confidence to their customers.

Our community thrived in 2023, with millions using Good On You to make more sustainable choices

This year, over four million people used Good On You to make more sustainable choices. That’s only on our own channels. Many millions more used Good On You’s ratings through our partners, like FARFETCH, Microsoft Bing, and Klarna. And the numbers keep growing.

Simultaneously, our team flourished, growing to 24 individuals, as five new talented members joined the team across tech, ratings, and social media. Good On You remains dedicated to empowering consumers, fostering community growth, and attracting passionate professionals to further our mission.

We kept improving our tools to help you make better choices

In our ongoing commitment to improve user experience and help you make more sustainable choices more easily, we’ve revamped the Good On You directory.

Our updates included improved discovery features for brands selling specific categories and product types, along with the addition of rating-based filters and enhanced functionality for plus-size options. Navigating the directory is now more efficient, allowing you to seamlessly search brands, styles, and countries.

We broadened our impact through strategic partnerships

We improved Good Measures, our sustainability hub for brands

Building on our commitment to empower brands and consumers, Good On You expanded our sustainability hub, Good Measures. Developed in collaboration with FARFETCH, the platform enables brands to review their Good On You rating, get personalised advice on how to improve their sustainability performance, and submit publicly disclosed updates for review by analysts. Last year, the innovative hub rolled out to over 300 FARFETCH brands and was made available to other Good On You partners like Otrium who is actively inviting their brands to the platform.

Many improvements have been made this year to help brands do better, track improvements, and better communicate their achievements to consumers. 88 brands are currently using Good Measures to better understand and improve their impacts, and it is now available to both brand and enterprise customers. If you’re an interested brand, get in touch via our partnerships page.

We launched our Good On You ‘for business’ homepage

We introduced a new partnerships website tailored to serve fashion brands, e-commerce platforms, and retail leaders. The success of our collaborations with Farfetch and Klarna, for example—two key players in the fashion world—is testament to the importance of our mission to empower consumers to make better choices.

A new partnership with retail giant URW marked another significant milestone

We were proud to announce our partnership with Unibail-Rodamco-Westfield (URW), owner of premier retail assets including 75 shopping centres in 12 countries, to co-create a new Sustainable Retail Index (SRI).

The SRI is part of the evolution of URW’s Better Places sustainability roadmap and is the first-of-its-kind index to evaluate retailers’ sustainability commitments, ambitions, and performance across company, product, and store operations levels.

It’s made possible by Good On You’s robust ratings and efficient tech—Good On You assessed 800 brands for URW in eight weeks.

Teaming up with a retail powerhouse like URW means we're now bringing greater transparency to iconic shopping destinations all around the globe—and accelerating the sustainable evolution of the industry. Our partnership marks just the beginning. We’re already planning our work together on future developments of the SRI, especially in expanding its coverage from fashion to other retail branches, starting with beauty.

Sandra Capponi – Good On You co-founder

With Good On You’s trusted sustainability ratings and URW’s global reach, it’s another leap forward towards our big vision: helping consumers vote with their wallets and supporting brands and retailers to do better.

We launched in Japan

Good On You expanded its global reach by partnering with UPDATER in Japan, aiming to facilitate more ethical and sustainable choices for Japanese consumers.

In December, UPDATER launched Shift-C to give Japanese consumers access to Good On You’s comprehensive ratings, and from 2024, will support Japanese brands to use our scalable sustainability hub, Good Measures.

“At Good On You, we want it to be as easy as possible for every consumer to make choices aligned with sustainable outcomes, and partnerships like those with UPDATER help us get there,” says Good On You’s CEO Gordon Renouf.

Collaborative efforts with industry leaders yielded substantial results

Good On You’s strategic collaborations with industry leaders yielded remarkable outcomes, reinforcing our commitment to catalysing positive change within the fashion landscape.

We were proud to see YOOX NET-A-PORTER’s ongoing dedication to sustainability commitments. The Considered Edit on The Outnet, powered by Good On You ratings, played a pivotal role, accounting for an impressive nearly 11% of the total offer on the site in 2022. This showcases the growing influence of more sustainable choices in shaping consumer preferences and purchasing behaviours.

Diving into our extensive data on hundreds of brands for FARFETCH’s Conscious Luxury Report, we uncovered promising trends in the luxury fashion sector’s approach to sustainability. According to the report, searches for conscious-related terms on FARFETCH.com surged by 78% last year. Notably, among the large brands rated by Good On You for FARFETCH, 46% have implemented worker empowerment initiatives.

We led important conversations to catalyse action

In 2023, Good On You not only broadened its impact through strategic partnerships but also continued to lead transformative conversations, setting the stage for a more sustainable and accountable fashion industry.

We pushed our original reporting to new heights

In 2023, Good On You elevated its content, publishing 280 articles to help our community access the latest insights on sustainability in fashion. Our team’s guides, such as our co-founder Sandra Capponi’s exploration of greenhushing, provided in-depth insights, while contributions from journalists and experts—like Megan Doyle’s Needle Movers List—spotlighted emerging technologies and topics, offering compelling perspectives. We also featured book excerpts, such as Andrea Cheong’s Why Don’t I Have Anything to Wear?

We updated our climate change report, the largest survey of its kind in the industry

Our collaboration with Sophie Benson on our deepest data report ever for COP28 looked at new data on an astonishing 5,900 brands’ environmental track records and highlighted the fashion industry’s lack of urgency regarding the climate emergency.

We joined the most important conferences and forums

Good On You’s founders actively participated in crucial industry forums, demonstrating our commitment to transparency and accountability. From Marie Claire to Textile Exchange, Westfield, Fashion Declares Conference, and the Global Fashion Summit, our involvement underscored our role as thought leaders, advocates, and drivers of change within the sustainable fashion movement.

2023 in numbers

Most searched brands

All in all, it’s been another fantastic year for Good On You, and it’s all down to you.

So thank you. Thank you for your support and for helping us change the fashion industry for the better, even when times are tough. We couldn’t do what we do without you, and we can’t wait to see what next year has in store for us and the sustainable fashion movement as a whole. We’re so glad to have you here.

2024 will come with more exciting challenges and changes that we can’t wait to share with you. Bring on 2024!

Want to learn more about Good On You’s milestones? Check out our 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022 highlights

The post Good On You’s Year in Review: Our 2023 Highlights appeared first on Good On You.

The tiny plastic particles permeating the planet

Likely you’ve heard that washing some kind of clothes means inadvertently releasing lots of “microfibres” or “microplastics” into the environment. But why is that a bad thing, how does it work, and what can we do about it? Read on to discover what to do about microfibres in clothing.

What are microfibres?

Synthetic materials used in clothes like polyester, nylon, and Lycra are essentially made from plastic. Plastic doesn’t “biodegrade” or break down in the environment. So in the case of synthetic fabrics, tiny pieces of “microplastics”—more commonly referred to as “plastic microfibres” in fashion—which are thinner than a human hair and often invisible to the naked eye, are released into the air and our wastewater systems, and from there into our rivers and oceans. It’s important to note that microfibres can refer to tiny particles shed from any fabric composition, plastic and otherwise, while microplastics refers only to the plastic-based synthetic shedders. 

According to research commissioned by Friends of the Earth, washing one load of synthetic clothes releases millions of microplastics into the wastewater system. But it’s not only washing that causes a problem. In 2020, we found out that polyester garments release microfibres into the air just by being worn. A study in the Environmental Science & Technology journal estimates that total releases from wearing polyester clothes are about the same as those from washing.

Microfibres are thinner than a human hair and are often invisible to the naked eye. They are released into the air and our wastewater systems, and from there into our rivers and oceans.

Why are microfibres a problem?

Once released into the environment, microfibres are a magnet for organic pollutants and absorb toxic stuff from detergents and fire retardant chemicals they meet in the waste systems. Once in the ocean, they are ingested by sea creatures like plankton, who mistake them for food, and then larger fish and whales scoop up the plastic along with their dinner. Eventually, these marine animals are eaten by one particular animal in the food chain: you guessed it, humans. Shockingly, a quarter of the seafood we consume contains microplastics, and this number will only rise if the problem isn’t addressed.

The impact isn’t just significant on people and animals, though. Everything is linked, and sadly the environment also suffers enormously, as microplastics are one of the biggest sources of ocean and shoreline pollution. Not only does this pollution cause a waste problem that won’t go away on its own, but it also absorbs and releases those harmful chemicals we mentioned before, so it’s bad news on top of bad news.

Once released into the environment, microfibres are a magnet for organic pollutants and absorb toxic stuff from detergents and fire retardant chemicals they meet in the waste systems.

Which textiles shed microfibres?

“The shedding of plastic microfibres is a huge concern, but it’s important to remember that all garments—including those made from natural materials and recycled materials—will also shed microfibres during washing and wearing. It should also be noted that microfibres are shed during fabric and garment manufacturing processes, so there is a huge impact here,” says Good On You ratings analyst and materials expert Kate Hobson-Lloyd.

While all fabrics can technically shed microfibres, it’s the non-biodegradable microplastics that we need to watch out for. More than 60% of clothes are made with synthetic textiles derived from oil, like acrylic and nylon (AKA polyamide or PA), but mostly polyester. Fashion brands love them because they are cheap, durable, readily available, and easy to adapt to many purposes. But those synthetic fabrics shed large amounts of harmful microfibres, especially when machine washed with detergent, but also while being manufactured, and even just worn.

Plastic particles washed off from products made with synthetic materials contribute up to 35% of the primary plastic that is polluting our oceans. Every time we do our laundry, an average of nine million microfibres are released into wastewater treatment plants that cannot filter them.

Ocean Clean Wash

Should we just switch to ‘natural’ fabrics like cotton and wool?

Not so fast. Fabrics like cotton, linen, wool, hemp, viscose, modal, and TENCEL are not made from oil and do not shed microplastics. But while these fibres are biodegradable in their untreated state, the application of chemicals and dyes to these fibres has an impact on their ability to biodegrade. And many of them, especially cotton, have other harmful environmental costs. The production of cotton requires large quantities of insecticides and enormous amounts of water. Viscose is made from trees and harsh chemicals—lots of them. And so far, it’s proving much easier to create a circular economy in fashion—one where resources are used over and over again—with synthetics, which are easier to recycle than most natural fibres. The claim that “natural” fabrics are always best for the environment is questionable at best, as every fabric has its pros and cons, though there are of course better options.

Beyond that, there’s little chance that brands and shoppers are going to abandon synthetics anytime soon. For some products, like swimwear and rainproof outerwear, synthetic material is just way more practical and the best option we currently have.

So what can we do to reduce microfibre pollution in the ocean and the air?

Now that we’ve covered the background, it’s time to get practical. Let’s look at what to do about microfibres in clothing on a case by case basis.

Buy less (new) stuff

The number one way to reduce the environmental impact of our clothing choices is to buy less stuff, especially less new stuff. Consider spending (less) of your hard-earned dollars on second hand clothing to extend the life of fabrics already in existence.

Check out The Five Rs of Fashion and Capsule Wardrobes for practical tips on how you can make a difference here but still look great

Choose clothes made from lower-impact materials

Where possible, buy clothes from brands that use the highest level of lower-impact materials, including organic hemp, organic linen, recycled cotton, recycled wool, or the next best options like organic cotton, TENCEL, and Monocel.

If you do choose a synthetic, choose a tightly woven one

An Italian study found that fewer microfibres are released to both the air and in the wash for garments with “a very compact woven structure and highly twisted yarns made of continuous filaments, compared with those with a looser structure (knitted, short staple fibres, lower twist).” This step may be easier said than done, however, and so we’re looking for manufacturers to take note of this advice, change their textile choices to reduce microfibre releases, and communicate what they are doing to shoppers.

Change how you wash

You likely own clothes made with synthetics, particularly swimwear and activewear, and maybe basics, warm underwear, outerwear, and more. Unfortunately for consumers, it’s machine washing that causes the most problems. Here are some useful tips to change up your washing habits and minimise the number of those pesky microfibres being released by your clothes.

• Hand wash where that’s an option, such as removing a stain on otherwise good to go jeans.
• Use a shorter washing cycle at a lower temperature (often marked “eco”). The longer the wash, the more time for microplastics to be released. This step is a bonus for climate change and your budget.
• Wash similar textiles together. Fibres can be released as tougher fabrics rub up against softer ones.
• Wash less often. You’d be surprised how much odour is reduced by simply hanging whiffy clothes in the sun for a while.
• Do full washes rather than half full washes, as less space allows less friction which is helpful here.
• Use liquid detergent instead of powder—another thing to help with that friction.
• Make sure you throw out your lint filters in the trash rather than down the sink.

What about washing machine filters, bags, and balls to catch microfibres?

There is talk across the globe of requiring manufacturers to fit microfibre filters to all washing machines before sale, with some rules being set in motion, notably in the UK and Europe. Campaigners are pushing for a new regulation requiring all new washing machines to be fitted with plastic microfibre filters from 2025. However, until such legislation is global, and while many of us own a washing machine already, there are some relatively accessible and affordable options to look into.

The Cora Ball is a pinecone-esque laundry ball that catches microfibres in the wash; the XFiltra, LINT Luv-R, and PlanetCare are filters that attach to the washing machine outflow, and a Guppy bag is a self-cleaning fabric bag made of a specially designed micro-filter material that you wash your clothes in.

Studies suggest that these products reduce microfibre releases to varying degrees. While the Ocean Conservancy working with the University of Toronto found the Cora Ball caught 26% of fibres in the machine, and the LINT Luv-R captured 86% of the rest, a recent peer-reviewed study from the University of Plymouth had different findings. XFiltra stood out, catching the most microfibres at 78%, while the Lint LUV-R and Planet Care filter systems trapped only 25% and 29% of fibres respectively. The stalks of the Cora Ball ensnared 31% of the fibres, though more than one ball could be used. The Guppy bag claims to reduce microfibre releases by 90%, but the same study mentioned above found it collected 54% of microfibres. While the number is significantly lower than projected, it is still the second-highest score, so worth looking into if you can’t fit a filter. 

“It’s promising that consumers are gaining awareness of microfibres and that devices such as washing machine filters are becoming more commonplace in helping to tackle the issue,” Hobson-Lloyd shares. But for further impact, she stresses, “it would be great to see more brands participating in initiatives such as The Microfibre Consortium and setting time-based targets around using low-shedding materials.”

Tips for reducing shedding in specific clothes

Recycled synthetics

More and more responsible brands are using fabrics like ECONYL and Repreve made from recycled plastics from PET bottles or fishing nets rescued from the ocean.

Reusing resources is good for the environment—generally, the impact on many environmental dimensions is much lower than sourcing new. But a fleece made from recycled polyester will still release microfibres, so follow the washing steps mentioned earlier and consider popping the garment into a washing bag.

Swimwear

The most common fabrics for close-fitting swimwear are nylon blends, typically 80% nylon, 20% elastane/spandex/Lycra to give stretch. Nylon blends are soft, comfortable, form-fitting, and dry quickly.

Competitive swimwear is more likely to be made from polyester blends, as is swimwear with prints—it’s much easier to print on polyester than nylon.
You could always look for non-synthetic swimwear, but cotton doesn’t wear that well in harsh environments like pools and the sea, and poly-cotton blends still release microfibres.

Luckily the best way to look after your swimwear—gentle handwashing—is the best way to reduce microfibre release, too. It also makes the most sense since swimwear is often worn for a short period and should rarely require a machine wash.

Fleece, faux fur, acrylic knits, and other products with loose fibres

Avoid machine washing these heavy-shedding synthetics where possible. Spot clean any fleecy garments when you can.

Activewear

Activewear is tricky, as it is almost always made of synthetic, plastic-shedding fabrics and is usually the type of clothing that needs the most washing. We are still hanging out for fabric innovations here, but until then, consider buying recycled plastic versions to reduce some impact and washing in a Guppy bag. It’s worth looking into TENCEL activewear as a lower-impact alternative, and other non-polyester based activewear by better brands.

Older synthetics

There’s evidence that older synthetic clothes shed more microfibres. By all means, get your 30 wears, but maybe not 130 wears unless they can be spot cleaned, as mentioned above. The good thing about purchasing long-lasting, more sustainable clothing now means that when it comes time to say a final goodbye to, for example, your favourite 100% organic cotton top, you can compost it.

Biosynthetics

Biosynthetics are made entirely from natural sources but have some of the desirable properties of synthetics. As they’re not made from fossil fuels (plastic), there are zero plastic microfibres. However, despite being derived partly from bio-based raw materials, bio-based polyester is ultimately still polyester and is not biodegradable. In terms of a practical, commercially available product, we’re not quite there yet. Watch this space.

The post What to Do About Microfibres in Clothing appeared first on Good On You.

In the know

OECD Investigates SHEIN in France (Fashion Network)

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has initiated an inquiry into the social and environmental practices of SHEIN in the French market, reports Fashion Network. Triggered by a referral from French MPs, the investigation will look at eight issues, “starting with whether SHEIN respects local law in producing and selling its products in France (including labour law), and whether its activity meets duty of vigilance requirements,” says Fashion Network.

Advancing Post-Consumer Textile Recycling: Emerging Technologies Shaping Sustainable Fashion (Fibre2Fashion)

Fibre2Fashion explores the transformative role of cutting-edge recycling technologies in post-consumer textile recycling, including the potential of closed-loop systems, offering a glimpse into the promising evolution of sustainable practices in fashion.

Workers for Fast Fashion Brands Fear Starvation as They Fight for Higher Wages (The Guardian)

The Guardian reports on the plight of garment workers in Bangladesh, producing clothing for UK high-street brands, who express concerns over plans to increase their monthly pay to £92. Workers argue that this amount is insufficient to meet basic survival needs, leading some to steal and scavenge for food in fields and bins to feed their families. The protests persist as these garment workers demand a minimum wage that ensures their families are not pushed into starvation, underscoring the challenging conditions faced by millions in the industry.

Fast Fashion: Boohoo Breaks Promises on Ethical Overhaul (BBC)

A BBC Panorama investigation uncovers that fast fashion giant Boohoo has failed to uphold its promises of improving clothing production practices. An undercover reporter stationed at Boohoo’s Manchester headquarters witnessed staff exerting pressure on suppliers to lower prices, even after establishing agreements.

Why You Should Buy Clothes to Last (Almost) Forever (The Washington Post)

The Washington Post explores the benefits of opting for long-lasting fashion choices. Instead of succumbing to the allure of immediate upgrades or discounts, the article urges us to consider the lasting impacts of our clothing choices. It provides insights on discerning if a garment can endure for a decade or even longer, emphasising the value of building a wardrobe that lasts beyond fleeting trends.

SHEIN Is the Fast Fashion Juggernaut That’s Only Getting Bigger—Its Rise Should Concern Us All (The Independent)

For the Independent, writer Olivia Petter examines the rapid rise of SHEIN, the Chinese-founded retailer notorious for selling complete outfits for less than £10. SHEIN’s global expansion, including its recent acquisition of Missguided, raises concerns about the potential setback it could inflict on efforts to combat the environmental impact of fast fashion. Petter delves into the implications of SHEIN’s growth and its possible consequences for sustainability in the industry.

It’s Time to Break up With Fast Fashion (Vox)

Vox delves into the moral complexities of fashion choices, emphasising the need to shift away from fast fashion. “Clothing isn’t frivolous. It’s something that touches every human being on the planet,” said JD Shadel, editor-at-large at Good On You, to Vox. “I don’t think we have a right to transgress the human rights of other individuals for our own stylishness. Fast fashion has sold us the lie that to be a whole person, we need more cheap clothes, and that’s not true.”

‘Good’ and ‘Great’ news

Every month we publish news and product highlights from highly rated brands that have been assessed by our rigorous ratings system. Using our codes and links may earn us a commission—supporting the work we do. Learn more.

LVRSustainable Collaborates with Oxfam for Women’s Economic Growth Mentorship Campaign

From November 29th 2023 to February 1st 2024, LVRSustainable by LuisaViaRoma embarks on a partnership with Oxfam to support women’s economic growth mentorship programs. This initiative aims to foster female entrepreneurship, bring business ideas to life, and launch impactful initiatives. With each LVRSustainable purchase, customers contribute to one hour of economic growth mentorship for women. The campaign, extending beyond individual empowerment, advocates for a fashion industry that supports both environmental initiatives and the empowerment of women.

Swedish Activewear Brand Tripulse Features in New Circular Economy Book

The founder of “Great” rated activewear brand Tripulse, Franziska Mesche, has contributed to the recently published book Circular Economy: New Solutions for a Better Tomorrow, using Tripulse as a case study and representing circular models in the fashion industry. This book is not only filled with carefully curated hands-on knowledge about the circular economy, but also backed up with incredible case studies of actual companies from various industries that are implementing circular business models. “One of my biggest motivations of doing business is using business as a force for good and as a driver for positive change—and finding new, better ways that will benefit our planet, people, and the economy. Being part of this book together with lots of other inspiring individuals and changemakers, I feel deeply humbled and thankful”, shares Mesche.

The post 9 Things to Know in Sustainable Fashion in December appeared first on Good On You.