N: Naming & shaming – and beyond

In October 2012, Textile Exchange put the spotlights on ten companies that are committed to organic cotton. Anvil Knitwear, C&A, Dibella, Ethicus, Gossypium, H&M, Hess Natur, Nike, Patagonia and Veja all received a Future Shapers Award, a reward for their growing use of organic cotton and for their ambitions to adopt more biocotton in their future collections.

Textile Exchange is a non-profit organization that aims to accelerate sustainable practices in the textile value chain. It was founded in 2002 in the United States and works with clothing brands as diverse as Adidas, H&M, Patagonia, Anvil and Lenzing. The Future Shapers Awards ceremony was part of the annual Textile Exchange conference, which took place in Hongkong in October and celebrated the organization’s ten year anniversary.

Handing out awards to companies that have demonstrated a willingness to adopt sustainable practices seems to be more popular nowadays than the naming & shaming strategies that labour associations and organizations like the Clean Clothes Campaign have traditionally adopted. For instance, in 2012 a number of Dutch consumer groups launched the Push Fashion Forward campaign, which rewarded companies that publicly admitted to improve environmental and social standards in their supply chain. After critically reviewing brands such as Tommy Hilfiger, DIDI, Steps, Zara, Esprit, Mango, Only, Pieces, Jack & Jones and River Island, those that pledged to commit to more sustainable practices were surprised with a visit from a group of enthusiastic consumers. In the end, three Dutch brands – Hema, Sissy-Boy and Protest – received a Push Fashion Forward Award to celebrate their increased commitment to sustainable fashion.

Cynics will be quick to point out that it remains to be seen if mainstream brands such as Hema, C&A, H&M, Nike and Adidas will live up to the expectations that have been created by their elaborate CSR policy reports. I’m sure that organizations such as Textile Exchange and GoedeWaar.nl will keep an eye on that. And of course, let’s not forget that consumers can stimulate sustainable change as well, both through their buying behavior and by consistently pestering their favourite stores and brands about environmental and social standards.

T: Toxics

High levels of toxic phthalates, several cancer-causing amines and plenty of NPEs. That’s what Greenpeace found in a 2012 investigation of 141 clothing items produced by 20 well-known fashion brands. Hazardous substances were found in just under two-thirds of all garments tested. These include items sold in Europe by Zara, H&M, Mango, C&A, Armani, Calvin Klein, Tommy Hilfiger, Benetton, Diesel and Levi’s.

The hazardous chemicals found by Greenpeace – not only in this recent report but also in a previous investigation – pose a clear threat to the environment. Because so many garments are made each year – a staggering 80 billion world-wide – the apparently small quantities of a hazardous chemical such as NPEs, which in the European Union are legally allowed in clothing, cumulatively amount to the widespread dispersal of damaging chemicals across the planet. In rivers and lakes, these chemicals can accumulate in sediments and build up in the food chain, in fish and other wildlife. This happens not only in textile producing countries, but also – as a result of consumers washing these clothes – close to our homes.

For the past few years, Greenpeace has urged a number of well-known brands to commit to Zero Discharge of hazardous chemicals by 1 January 2020. Amongst others Puma, Nike, Adidas, H&M and C&A have already made this commitment.

In 2012, Greenpeace has also launched worldwide consumer campaigns, asking fashionistas, customers and activists to put pressure on amongst others Zara to put an end to the use of hazardous chemicals. Within 48 hours after its start, over 200.000 consumers had signed the petition urging Zara – which, because of the sheer size and scale of its production, could be a true catalyst for wider change within the clothing industry – to commit to the Zero Discharge joint roadmap.

And there’s more that we can do. Greenpeace recommends buying fewer new clothes, asking brands to act responsibly with respect to planet and people, and demanding governments to restrict the sales and import of products containing hazardous chemicals. Does that sound like a whole lot of work to do? Just start with coveting your current wardrobe and buying secondhand clothes, and take it from there. And rest assured that Greenpeace will keep the issue of toxics high on the agenda in the fashion industry.