Fashion Revolution to Brands: ‘Put Your Money Where Your Emissions Are’ | Sustainable Brands

It would only take an investment of roughly 2 percent of their annual revenue
for big fashion brands to drive a just transition away from fossil fuels to
renewable energy to power their manufacturing sustainably. So says the latest
report from Fashion Revolution, the
world’s largest fashion activism movement.

What Fuels Fashion? — a special edition of the watchdog’s annual
Fashion Transparency Index — analyzes and ranks 250 of the world’s biggest
fashion brands and retailers (turnover of USD$400m or more), based on their
public disclosure of climate and energy-related actions. The in-depth report
covers 70 data points across accountability, decarbonization, energy
procurement, financing decarbonization, and just transition and
advocacy.

Fashion remains one of the most polluting industries, with fossil fuels burned
at every stage of production — not to mention those that make up some of our
most popular
fabrics.
However, the report finds that despite the escalating climate crisis, big
brands’ reduction targets are not ambitious enough to meet the global goal of
limiting temperature rise to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Instead of
investing in a fair transition away from fossil fuels to renewable energy
sources to power fashion’s supply chain in a clean way, many brands are shifting
the costs onto the factories they work with — burdening workers and communities
with fixing a problem they didn’t create.

While extreme weather could cost nearly 1 million
jobs
in the sector, Fashion Revolution research also reveals that most big fashion
brands are not protecting their supply chain workers. Only 3 percent (just seven
brands) disclose efforts to financially support workers affected by the climate
crisis. This is critical given the weak social protection in garment-producing
countries and the poverty wages and high debt levels of these workers. Frequent
climate events including heat waves, monsoons and droughts are devastating their
livelihoods; Fashion Revolution urges big fashion to urgently provide
compensation mechanisms for these workers — not as charity, but as a matter of
justice.

“ By investing at least 2 percent of their revenue into clean, renewable energy and upskilling and supporting workers, fashion brands could simultaneously curb the impacts of the climate crisis and reduce poverty and inequality within their supply chains,” asserts Maeve Galvin, Global Policy and Campaigns Director at Fashion Revolution. “Climate breakdown is avoidable because we have the solutions — and big fashion can certainly afford it.”

Other key findings include:

• Nearly a quarter of the world’s biggest fashion brands disclose nothing on
  decarbonization, signifying that the climate crisis is not a priority. With the 2030 deadline to limit global warming to 1.5°C approaching
  in tandem with record-breaking
  heat waves,
  the industry faces a critical challenge. Only four out of 250 have ambitious
  emissions-reduction targets that meet the level of ambition called for by
  the United
  Nations. Meanwhile, of the 117 out of 250 brands with decarbonization targets, 105
  brands disclose updates on their progress — but 42 brands report increased
  scope 3
  emissions
  against their baseline year.

• The fashion industry is lagging significantly in achieving climate targets
  and reducing emissions — with 86 percent of companies lacking a public
  coal phase-out target, 94 percent without a public renewable-energy target,
  and 92 percent without a public renewable-energy target for their supply
  chains. Less than half (43 percent) of brands are transparent about their
  energy procurement at the operational level, and even fewer (10 percent) at
  supply chain level. Additionally, no major fashion brand discloses hourly
  matched supply chain electricity use. As a result, big fashion’s
  zero-emissions claims may be disconnected from grid realities — creating a
  false sense of progress against climate targets.

• The fashion industry is evading accountability both for overproduction and
  the associated emissions released into the atmosphere. Most big fashion
  brands (89 percent) do not disclose how many clothes they make
  annually.
  Alarmingly, nearly half (45 percent) fail to disclose neither how much they
  make nor the raw material emissions footprint of what is produced —
  signaling the industry prioritizes resource
  exploitation
  whilst avoiding accountability for environmental harms linked to production.

• So-called ‘sustainable’ clothes may still be produced using fossil
  fuels. The fashion industry’s climate impact has largely been scrutinized
  through the lens of the materials used in our clothes, rather than the
  manufacturing processes behind them. While 58 percent of brands disclose
  sustainable material targets, only 11 percent reveal their supply chain’s
  energy sources — meaning ‘sustainable’ clothes might still be made in
  factories powered by fossil fuels.

• Suppliers need funding, not debt. Despite being the largest emitters
  with the greatest financial responsibility to decarbonize, nearly all (94
  percent) big fashion brands fail to disclose how much they are investing in
  supply chain
  decarbonization.
  Only 6 percent disclose contributions, often to collaborative initiatives
  such as the Fashion Climate
  Fund and Future Supplier
  Initiative — which offer supplier
  loans for infrastructure such as solar panels. However, burdening suppliers
  with loans to meet brand climate targets is unfair and perpetuates existing
  power imbalances between brands, their suppliers and the people who make our
  clothes.

• Long-term investment is key to decarbonizing fashion’s supply chains.
  The industry’s prioritization of short-term profit is at odds with supply
  chain decarbonization. A clean, fair and just energy
  transition
  must be driven by fashion embracing long-term supplier relationships and
  financial investments through fair purchasing practices. Vertically
  integrated brands and specialized segments such as sportswear outperform
  others in this research, due to greater leverage and commitment to long-term
  improvements. The renewable energy
  transition
  in fashion hinges on systemic changes that prioritize collective brand
  action, responsible purchasing and investment in a stable supply base.

• The overall average brand score is 18 percent. Puma (75 percent), Gucci (74 percent), H&M (61 percent), Champion (58 percent) and Hanes (58 percent) were top 5; 32 of the 250 companies assessed scored 0.

Dive deeper into What Fuels Fashion? here.