Fashion's only logical path to sustainability is manufacturer decarbonization first, but brands still prioritise recycled materials and consumer solutions instead.
Anyone working in the fashion industry and expecting logic is perhaps the orchestrator of their own disappointment. Fashion is a consumer goods industry that beats to the arrhythmic heart of popular culture, celebrity, and commerce—it expresses our values and aspirations with an ephemerality that doesn’t abide logic, but the way it’s made most certainly must.
Fashion is dirty, and it’s getting dirtier. Like all industries, its collective climate target is to decarbonize to net-zero emissions by 2050, and it’s getting further from that goal, not closer.and the textiles they become require vast quantities of chemicals and hot water . Polyester is particularly greedy, requiring extremely high temperatures when dying, and is itself made from fossil fuels. It’s our favourite fiber, though—we consumed more than 77 million tonnes of it last year. But there is hope. If existing solutions were adopted at scale, emissions would dive by 47 percent—so why isn’t this happening? The answer is the great fashion divide. Solutions categorised that enable a net-zero fashion industry by 2050. Source: Aii & FFG Analysis 2021Until the 1980s, brands manufactured their own clothing in their own factories. However, in search of reduced costs and better customer value, they began 'contracting out’ their production to cheaper overseas suppliers, selling off their machinery and shedding their workforces until they were outsourced entirely by the early 2000s. In 1999, here’s how John Erminger, the president of Levi Strauss , explained the decision to lay off 13,000 staff and close factories in the US: “Our strategic plan in North America is to focus intensely on brand management, marketing, and product design to serve the casual wants..of the customer. Shifting..our manufacturing..to contractors throughout the world will give the company greater flexibility to allocate resources and capital to its brands.” This new business model was handsomely rewarded by Wall Street, with brands seeing a surge in stock price when unburdening themselves of their manufacturing facilities and workforces. The model was championed by advertising agencies, too; here’s what Peter Schweitzer, president of J. Walter Thompson, said at the time: “The difference between products and brands is fundamental. A product is something that is made in a factory; a brand is something that is bought by a customer.” According to his and others' marketing logic, brands should not use their finite resources on machinery upkeep or factory workforces but on resources that build their brands: sponsorships, packaging, expansion, and advertising.“The actual manufacturing process has been devalued to the point where manufacturers and garment workers are detritus—the stuff left behind.” By way of evidence, Klein calculated that one brand’s advertising expenditure leapt from $25M in 1987 to $500M in 1997. $500M a year spent on advertising; back in 1997. No wonder Schweitzer was quick to say the factory added no value and the branding all of it . What must that same brand's annual ad budget be today, almost 30 years later? Billions? I wonder how many solar panels and heat pumps you could buy with a billion dollars. The point is that brands, by and large, don’t value manufacturing—they value branding, marketing, and selling because that's their business. Convincing a brand to spend finite resources on a machine in a factory is asking them to opt back into the business they offloaded decades ago because it was too capital-intensive. That hasn't changed. Even though brands’ emissions targets depend on this decarbonization infrastructure, they continue to prioritise and spend premiums on solutions that have no hope of getting them to net-zero, like next-generation materials. Why? Because they're tangible, marketable, and a point of product differentiation., the industry coalition group Fashion for Good estimates they will offer around 10 percent of the total sector emissions reductions needed by 2050 to reach net zero. To put this in perspective, industry emissions increased bya case for investing in next-generation materials and decarbonisation, but not the former alone. The same goes for recycled materials. "Virgin polyester emissions are around 3.12 kg CO2eq per kilogram, while mechanically recycled polyester is around 0.68 to 1.56 kg—an average decrease of about 2kg of emissions per kilogram of fiber," explains water engineer, dyestuff chemist and lifecycle assessment analyst, Shivam Gusain. "If all virgin polyester production was switched to mechanically recycled, around 124.4 million tonnes of CO2eq, or 7.25 percent of the industry’s total emissions would be saved", he says, drawing on data from Textile Exchange’s 2023 Materials Market Report, the Ecoinvent 3.11 database and the EF3.1 database. Gusain also cautions that, by comparison, polyester textile recycling involves several more complex processing steps and yield loss. The analystto model a lower footprint than mechanical recycling, meaning that the 'North Star’ of textile-to-textile recycled polyester isn't offering a calculable path to net zero.These are the numbers Gusain has been crunching as he grows ever more frustrated with the fashion divide. It frustrates the Transformers Foundation, too, a charitable organisation acting as the voice of garment manufacturers. They releasedin 2024 recommending that each value chain partner divert 1 percent of sales revenue to be disbursed as grants to finance supply chain decarbonization. It’s a model that would share the financing burden and fund industry-wide infrastructure, but brands are still most lured by what adds customer value within their business, and heat pumps are not it. Gusain, a former employee of Fashion for Good, may have a novel solution in an open-source model he’s calling the Double Dividend Protocol. He says the Protocol’s logic-based sequence of financing and governance steps solve two significant problems: the decarbonization investment gap and procurement of next-gen materials at a premium that would otherwise make them unaffordable .It works like this: a supplier identifies a decarbonization pathway using heat pumps that requires, for example, $2.1 million capital expenditure; once operational it will reduce their operational expenditure by $700,00 each year.Using the double dividend protocol, three brands invest the capital required in proportion to their production volume with the supplier:Once upgrades are complete and the supplier saves $700,000, the funds are contractually allocated to 'next-generation’ fiber procurement for the brands. At a $1.50 per kilogram premium, the supplier could acquire 466,667 kilograms of these 'preferred' fibers per year without raising its net cost base. The fibers would then be distributed to the brands proportionally, in line with their capital contribution.The Protocol ensures critical decarbonization, brands avoid fiber premiums, and innovators achieve commercial scalability. Crucially, the use of operational savings means the Protocol"Fibers matter. They are essential to the long-term redesign of this industry. But they are not the first crisis to solve. They are not the defibrillator when the heart is already failing," says Gusain, who further expands on his Double Dividend rationale That ephemerality dislikes logic is no longer a problem—the Protocol allows fashion brands to retain their aesthetics and invest in value-adding future fibers, securing their innovation and delivering logical and dependable decarbonization, too. Which brands will take the logical leap toward sustainability first?
Decarbonization Net Zero Next-Gen Materials Recycled Textiles Recycled Fashion Fashion Trend Consumer Goods Fashion Manufacturing
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
‘The Truth Is’—Marc Guiu Makes Honest Admission About Barcelona ExitMarc Guiu joined Chelsea mere months after making his debut with Barcelona.
Read more »
Woman in Labor Crushed by What She Hears Nurse Say—Then She Learns TruthLabor and delivery nurse Yancy Guzman, 30, from North Carolina, told Newsweek of the incident: 'I was mortified.'
Read more »
Amy Poehler Continues Saturday Night Live TrendAmy Poehler as Leslie Knopf and Aubrey Plaza as April Ludgate on SNL
Read more »
Kendall Jenner Styles Fall 2025's Track Jacket Trend With Classic Loafers and White PantsAmy Mackelden is the weekend editor at Marie Claire, where she covers celebrity and royal family news. She was the weekend editor at Harper’s BAZAAR for three years, where she covered breaking celebrity and entertainment news, royal stories, fashion, beauty, and politics.
Read more »
Natalie Portman's Fashion Choices: Mary Janes and Grounded Footwear TrendNatalie Portman's recent fashion choices highlight a trend towards grounded, archive-coded footwear, particularly mary janes with playful details like crescent-moon charms. The article also mentions related trends and other celebrity footwear choices.
Read more »
From Trend To Truth: Logic Dictates Decarbonization First For FashionFashion's only logical path to sustainability is manufacturer decarbonization first, but brands still prioritise recycled materials and consumer solutions instead.
Read more »