A survey of 50 companies by the Changing Markets Foundation has found that major fashion brands are increasing their use of polluting synthetic textiles, deepening their commitment to fast fashion despite growing environmental concerns.

The report, released at the close of London Fashion Week, highlights that fast-fashion brands increasingly rely on fossil fuel-based materials like polyester. These materials are cheap, versatile, and key to the quick turnover of clothing in fast fashion. However, these fabrics shed harmful microplastics and produce massive waste and pollution.

The report also warned that EU initiatives to reduce fashion’s footprint are backfiring, with anti-greenwashing plans set to label fast fashion fabrics as more environmentally friendly than organic cotton and a microplastic pollution initiative downgraded to a brochure.

Around half (11 of 23) of the international clothing brands and retailers that responded to the Changing Markets Foundation survey [1] confirmed that they have increased their use of fossil fuel-based fabrics, mainly polyester. Only 3 reported reduced use. Several broke pledges to reduce synthetics made in the last survey in 2022, and a growing number refused to respond.

Fossil fuel-based textiles are cheap and versatile, and they are seen as essential to the rapid cycle of production and disposal known as fast fashion. The low quality and near-zero recycling rates make fast fashion a significant source of microplastic pollution and waste. The first microplastic pollution found in human brain samples was reported yesterday.

Zara’s parent company, Inditex, revealed that it uses a higher volume of synthetics than any other brand surveyed by the Changing Markets Foundation, a non-profit. The fast fashion giant’s use of fossil fabrics grew by a fifth since the last survey. Fast fashion leader SHEIN declared the highest ratio of synthetic to natural fibres, with four fifths (81%) of its vast material output made from fossil sources. Boohoo reported a rise in synthetic fibres, now making up 68% of its materials, a 4% increase. The UK fast fashion brand was recently ordered to stop greenwashing by regulators. Lululemon, a “purpose-driven” brand identified with healthy lifestyles and also accused of greenwashing, ignored this year’s survey, but its 2022 annual report put the figure at 67%.

Despite mounting public and scientific concerns and a regulatory backlash, major brands are clinging on to synthetics and borrowing distraction and delay tactics from the fossil fuel industry [2], the Changing Markets Foundation said.

Over 30 pieces of draft legislation will come into force globally in the next few years, including a UN Plastic Pollution Treaty expected later this year. The EU has promised to raise clothing quality, cut waste and pollution, tackle greenwashing and overconsumption. The role of synthetics in driving fast fashion was clearly acknowledged by the EU and the bloc last month moved forward with product standards that could dramatically reshape the sector [3].

But the global treaty could be watered down, and some EU initiatives are attracting criticism. A pledge to reduce unintentional microplastics by 30% was scaled back, in part to a mere brochure. Worse, a draft EU anti-greenwashing law could use a criticised methodology that currently neglects microplastic pollution and other environmental concerns, leading to “completely misleading” results. This could see firms legally promote fast fashion items as more sustainable than high quality organic cotton or wool garments, a situation angering the natural fibre sector.

With the fashion industry resisting change, lawmakers must strengthen regulations to curb synthetic use, the Changing Markets Foundation warned.

Senior campaign manager Urska Trunk said: “Fashion is at a critical juncture, with major brands doubling down on the fast fashion model, flooding the market with disposable, polluting fabrics. These companies continue to bet big on plastic fibres, showing little intention to change and resorting to tactics borrowed from the fossil fuel industry to distract and delay real progress. While regulators are beginning to act, they must remain vigilant. We need strong, decisive action to steer fashion away from its dependency on fossil fuels and towards creating high-quality clothes that people want to keep for longer.”

The cycle of clothing production, sales and disposal has grown far faster in recent decades, McKinsey said in 2016. Recycling is rare, with less than 1% of all textile waste turned into new items, so vast quantities of used clothes are burned or buried. Textiles shed up to 500,000 tonnes of microplastics into the world’s oceans each year. Scientists are finding microplastics from polyester, nylon and other sources in a growing number of human organs, most recently in brain samples, raising health fears.

Responding to today’s report, marine pollution expert Dr Sedat Gündoğdu said: “Synthetic fibres from textiles have become one of the most prevalent types of microplastic pollutants in the environment and are being identified in numerous human organs. So heavy is their use by manufacturers and so heavy is the pollution that it is fair to say that fashion itself is becoming an environmental and human health risk.”

Ends

The report, called Fashion’s Plastic Paralysis, is available here: https://changingmarkets.org/report/fashions-plastic-paralysis

Media contacts
For more information, images and interview requests, please contact:

Katie Roche, Director of Communications
Email: katie.roche@changingmarkets.org
Tel: +44 7751675733

Notes to Editors

[1] In April 2024, the Changing Markets Foundation and its partners, the Clean Clothes Campaign, Fashion Revolution, No Plastic in My Sea and the Plastic Soup Foundation, sent questions to 50 global fashion brands, representing $1 trillion in market value and spanning fast fashion, sports, luxury and supermarket own-brands. A spreadsheet of the companies and their responses is here, with no data overlap between brands and groups.

The results show that corporate secrecy of synthetics use has risen sharply, with 27 companies (54%) ignoring this year’s survey, compared to 44% in 2022 and just 17% in 2021. With synthetics expected to rise to 73% by 2030, it is likely that many of the brands that ignored the survey are expanding their use of synthetics. Just 6 of the 50 companies questioned by the group (C&A, Inditex, Lululemon, Mango, Nike and United Colors of Benetton) openly publish both the volume and share of synthetics they use.

Half of the 50 surveyed brands are part of initiatives claiming to address environmental problems but have no plans to reduce their use of synthetics. Primark was the only brand confirming it will increase both their volume and share of synthetics. Four brands (C&A, Esprit, Inditex and Reformation) broke pledges made in the last survey to reduce synthetics, growing their use by double digits. Hugo Boss and Reformation shared plans to quit some or all synthetics, though Hugo Boss has grown its synthetics use by 143% since 2020. Reformation’s also grew by 61% last year, though its synthetics share is very low at 2%. Patagonia refuses to share data on synthetics use, but it is the only brand that links clothing repair and resale to cuts in future production.

[2] Nearly all (88%) of the companies that responded to the survey acknowledged that microplastics are a problem. But nearly half of all brands (22 of 50) have no public plan to resolve the problem and another 22 rely on industry initiatives that have achieved little. A third of those that responded (8 of the 23, or 34%) claim that more research is needed to understand and measure microfibres before any legislation is put in place, despite the existence of thousands of scientific studies on the subject. In a sign of delay tactics, Inditex, Primark, Tesco, PVH, Zalando and Varner told the Changing Markets Foundation there should be a standard pollution test method, despite the fact such a method was announced in 2021 by an initiative backed by Primark, Tesco and PVH. Inditex stood out in survey results as the clearest opponent to regulation.

To distract customers and regulators, nearly all the brands surveyed (41 of 50, or 82%) are pledging to switch to synthetics from recycled material, mostly from plastic bottles. This is an unsustainable practice that does not address pollution and which a major industry initiative has said should end “as rapidly as possible”.

Nearly half (21 of 50, or 42%, including Adidas, C&A, H&M, Kering, Lululemon, Nike and Patagonia) back an initiative that carried out research concluding that natural and synthetic microfibres are equally problematic. This flawed claim is thought to have contributed to microplastics being excluded from an important EU policy instrument. Most of the 21 brands, including Adidas, Lululemon, Nike, are ranked among the worst by the Changing Markets Foundation.

About a third of all the brands (16 of 50, or 32%) do nothing to address microplastic pollution beyond being members of an industry initiative. Many major players promote circular economy initiatives, such as clothing repair, resale and rental services, but only Hugo Boss and Patagonia say they plan to cut overproduction.

Eight companies push the microplastic problem onto their customers, suggesting they fit washing machine filters or offering instructions on care. Some of the biggest, including SHEIN, promote efforts to reduce waste, a distraction from their vast and growing production of low-quality synthetic items destined to become waste.

[3] For years, EU standards have dramatically reduced the energy demand of everyday products. This approach will be expanded to more environmentally-friendly qualities for products from 2027, bringing standards for textile durability, repair and recycling. The recently adopted legal framework covers plastic waste and microplastic pollution, but much will depend on the detailed standards drafted by Brussels in the coming years.