Big fashion brands accused of failing to phase out fossil fuels, despite no promises

A new index ranking 47 major fashion brands in their quest to eliminate fossil fuels from their supply chains and products has delivered mostly failed ratings, with brands like Primark, Uniqlo and Marks & Spencer cited as sluggish.

NS ‘Fossil-Free Fashion Scorecard’ has been compiled by the non-profit Stand.earth, which compares each brand’s commitment to decarbonization with the actions it has taken to move away from fossil fuels in operations, supply chains and products. Up to this latest point, global production of virgin polyester has doubled since 2000 and will double again, with significant implications for emissions, according to the Changing Markets Foundation.

Stand.earth assigns each of the included brands a score for their efforts in climate advocacy, low-carbon logistics, low-carbon materials and low-carbon manufacturing. This last category takes into account energy efficiency and renewable energy procurement. An overall score is also provided for each brand.

Overall, none of the brands scored an ‘A’. The highest score, ‘B-‘, was awarded to Swiss outdoor clothing brand Mammut, while 20 brands received the lowest score, ‘F’. The F graded brands are American Eagle, Giorgio Armani, Booho, Capri Holdings, Espirit, Everlane, Hugo Boss, Dry, LVMH, Marks & Spencer, MEC, On Running, Pentland, Prada, Primark, Salvatore Ferragamo, SKFK, Under Armor and Uniqlo .

Many of the brands that have received F grades are signatories to one of several industry coalitions working towards net-zero. Such initiatives include the United Nations Fashion Charter, the WRAP Textile 2030 scheme and the Fashion Pact, coordinated by Dry.

Stand.earth claims that, despite major climate commitments – and broadly strong progress in decarbonizing direct operations – many fashion brands are failing to develop targets and strategies that meaningfully address their indirect (Scope 3) emissions. This is worrying because, for most companies with multinational supply chains, Scope 3 emissions will be significantly higher than those generated from Scope 1 (direct) and Scope 2 (power related) sources. Stand.earth claims the average major fashion brand will see 90% of its total emissions footprint represented by Scope 3 sources.

Only three of the 47 brands assessed – namely Asics, Mammut and REI, have set a target to reduce Scope 3 emissions by at least 50% by 2030. Climate scientists have repeatedly stated that halving global emissions by 2030 will be required to achieve net- zero by 2050. In addition, more than half of the companies assessed exclude shipments from their emission reduction targets for the supply chain.

Due to this lack of robust targeting, several companies assessed by Stand.earth were able to provide evidence that they are implementing renewable energy at scale across their supply chains. Only six brands provided evidence of that and only six provided details on how they supported suppliers to switch from coal-fired boilers. Advances in energy efficiency have been found to be equally weak.

The scorecard also details the poor progress in phase-out removing polyester and other synthetic fabrics made from fossil fuels. Only one of 47 brands – Icebreaker – is planning to eliminate all fossil fuels altogether. It has set a 2023 target for cessation. However, the scorecard acknowledges that several brands, including Allbirds, Levi Strauss and Dry, are already using very small percentages of fossil-based synthetics in their entire fiber blends, and that several other brands, including Zara’s parent company, Inditex, are working to make this happen. . 100% recycled synthetic.

“The runway is getting shorter for companies to go from commitment to action and take the necessary steps to drastically reduce their greenhouse gas emissions in the next decade,” said Stand.earth senior climate campaigner Muhannad Malas. “If fashion companies really care about solving the climate crisis, they need to remove coal power from their supply chains and say goodbye to fossil fuels like polyester.”

Lazy emphasizes that climate risk, for fashion companies, is likely to crystallize in terms of financial risk in the years to come, as investors increasingly demand climate action. This pressure is likely to affect active and outdoor clothing brands that market themselves as “healthy”, he added.

The findings from Stand.earth’s Scorecard are similar to the Fashion Revolution transparency index for 2021. Covering 250 major retailers, suppliers and brands, the index finds that only 26% of brands disclose emissions from processing and manufacturing. The proportion fell to only 17% for emissions related to raw materials.

Sarah George