From the Sector

Reset
3 results
29.05.2024

Traceability New Front Line for Sustainable Retail

Multiple global regulations set to take effect in the coming years have made traceability an imperative for retailers and brands. These include the Digital Product Passport, the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, and the New York Fashion Sustainability and Social Accountability Act, to name a few.

While companies are aware of the importance of traceability, research indicates that they are not prepared to comply with upcoming legislation. A recent KPMG survey highlighted that 43% of executives at major enterprises had no visibility or were “largely unclear” about the performance of their Tier 1 suppliers. At the same time, only 28% of companies had clear visibility into Tier 2 suppliers.

TradeBeyond’s recently published Supply Chain Traceability Guide, the latest installment of its Retail Sourcing Report series, highlights the myriad challenges that companies face in implementing effective traceability programs. This report is relevant for all industries, and is especially topical for the apparel and footwear sectors, which are under increasing scrutiny to enhance traceability to ensure sustainability.

Multiple global regulations set to take effect in the coming years have made traceability an imperative for retailers and brands. These include the Digital Product Passport, the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, and the New York Fashion Sustainability and Social Accountability Act, to name a few.

While companies are aware of the importance of traceability, research indicates that they are not prepared to comply with upcoming legislation. A recent KPMG survey highlighted that 43% of executives at major enterprises had no visibility or were “largely unclear” about the performance of their Tier 1 suppliers. At the same time, only 28% of companies had clear visibility into Tier 2 suppliers.

TradeBeyond’s recently published Supply Chain Traceability Guide, the latest installment of its Retail Sourcing Report series, highlights the myriad challenges that companies face in implementing effective traceability programs. This report is relevant for all industries, and is especially topical for the apparel and footwear sectors, which are under increasing scrutiny to enhance traceability to ensure sustainability.

The report highlights retail’s slow progress in achieving transparency, as evidenced by the Fashion Transparency Index, which found that the average transparency score across 250 of the world’s largest brands and retailers was just 23%. That suggests that progress on transparent disclosure of social and environmental data is still lagging.
 
The report shows that brands fall short on most key measures of sustainability and traceability, including publishing a responsible code of conduct and providing visibility into their Scope 3 carbon footprint. The United Nations Economics Commission found that only a third of the top one hundred global clothing companies track their own supply chains. One of the obstacles is complexity. More than two-thirds (69%) of fashion companies report that complexity of their global business networks is an obstacle to visibility.

In addition to a lack of visibility, false sustainability claims are also rampant. Greenpeace found that in the apparel and footwear sector, 39% of sustainability claims are false or deceptive. Lack of third-party verification of ESG measures is also rampant.

The highest scoring brands in the 2023 Fashion Transparency Index included luxury brands such as Gucci and retailers such Target Australia, Kmart Australia, OVS, and Benetton. These companies back up their commitment with solid action on multiple measures of traceability.

Along with legislative requirements, consumers are a key driving force pushing companies to improve their traceability initiatives. McKinsey research found that 66% of consumers consider transparency to be a key factor when making a purchase decision and 73% of consumers would pay more for products with transparency into production and sourcing.

The report also highlights key challenges to overcome in the journey to traceability, including effective communication between stakeholders, compliance with new regulations, technology barriers, and data complexity.

On the positive side, the industry is responding with sophisticated technology, including software systems that incorporate artificial intelligence and blockchain-enabled traceability, which provide the required visibility and compliance.

Traceable fiber technology, which allows for traceability from the material origin of a product until its end-life, provides the option of a “fiber-forward” rather than a “product backward” approach to achieving traceability.

Aside from the regulatory and consumer drivers, there is a strong business case for implementing traceability, which includes cost savings, operational efficiency, brand protection and reducing supply chain risk. As such, TradeBeyond expects a rapid evolution in traceability programs across industries, especially in those that lag in best-practices.

While there has been considerable progress in recent years toward accurately tracing the complete origins of products, much more needs to be done. Brands and retailers must intensify their efforts to stay compliant with escalating regulations and align with evolving consumer preferences.

Source:

TradeBeyond

(c) ChemSec, report Not Quite 100%
28.04.2022

ChemSec' Study: Consumer brands demand clarity on recycled plastics

A new interview study from NGO ChemSec shows that there is a gap between supply and demand when it comes to recycled materials, causing confusion and bottlenecks. Among other things, suppliers go out of their way using elaborate trade schemes to reach the coveted ”100% recycled” tag, which – it turns out – is not that important to consumer product brands. Far more crucial aspects, according to several major B2C companies, are:

  • Honest communication towards customers
  • Comprehensive information from suppliers
  • Clear standards for recycled material

These are some of the conclusions from NGO ChemSec’s survey and interview study with 26 highly well-known consumer product brands. All brands responded to a survey concerning their current plastic use, as well as their needs, expectations and challenges regarding using more recycled material, to enable the shift to a circular economy for plastics.

Ten of the brands then participated in in-depth interviews on the same topics:, Essity, H&M, IKEA, Inditex , Lego, Mars,  SC Johnson, Tarkett, Unilever and Walgreens Boots Alliance.

A new interview study from NGO ChemSec shows that there is a gap between supply and demand when it comes to recycled materials, causing confusion and bottlenecks. Among other things, suppliers go out of their way using elaborate trade schemes to reach the coveted ”100% recycled” tag, which – it turns out – is not that important to consumer product brands. Far more crucial aspects, according to several major B2C companies, are:

  • Honest communication towards customers
  • Comprehensive information from suppliers
  • Clear standards for recycled material

These are some of the conclusions from NGO ChemSec’s survey and interview study with 26 highly well-known consumer product brands. All brands responded to a survey concerning their current plastic use, as well as their needs, expectations and challenges regarding using more recycled material, to enable the shift to a circular economy for plastics.

Ten of the brands then participated in in-depth interviews on the same topics:, Essity, H&M, IKEA, Inditex , Lego, Mars,  SC Johnson, Tarkett, Unilever and Walgreens Boots Alliance.

Is non-mechanical recycling the answer?
Only about ten percent of all discarded plastics is recycled today, which is of course not nearly enough to achieve a circular plastics economy. Despite ambitions and initiatives to reduce plastics use – replacing the materials with other, more sustainable ones – the “plastic tap” is not expected to be turned off anytime soon. Quite the opposite, which makes raising the recycling rates more important than ever.

Although commercially viable, traditional (mechanical) recycling is afflicted with severe flaws, such as legacy chemicals, quality and functionality issues, as well as the lack of clean and sorted waste streams. The brands cited quality and functionality issues as the main obstacles for using more recycled material in their products.

This opens up for non-mechanical recycling, sometimes referred to as chemical recycling, where the plastic is either dissolved or broken down into smaller building blocks. Harmful additives and other hazardous chemicals can be removed in the process, and a material comparable to virgin plastic can be achieved – at least in theory.

So far, however, non-mechanical recycling technologies are costly, energy-intensive, and often require the addition of a great deal of virgin plastic to work – the very material that needs to be phased out.

The chain of custody models needs to be detangled
Apart from these production issues, there is a wide range of chain of custody models surrounding non-mechanical recycling, including mass balance and book & claim, which enable trade of credits or certificates for recycled material.

This cuts the physical connection between input and output, making it possible for a supplier to sell a material as “100% recycled”, when the actual recycled content could be zero.

This is a major issue for the brands ChemSec has spoken to, who value honest and correct communication towards customers. It turns out, perhaps somewhat surprisingly, that being able to slap a “made from 100% recycled plastic” label on a product is not all that important to brands.

To the brands, a physical connection between input (the discarded plastic waste headed for recycling) and output (the product at least partially made from recycled plastics) is far more important.

A physical connection, along with correct and adequate information from suppliers, as well as clearer standards and guidelines than what is available today, is what brands require to increase the use of recycled material and move us closer to a circular economy for plastics.

More information:
ChemSec plastics Recycling
Source:

ChemSec

18.01.2022

EURATEX: BREXIT has been a “lose-lose” deal for the textile industry

Latest trade data (January-September 2021) show a dramatic drop of imports and exports of textile goods between the EU and UK, with significant losses for companies on both sides. The situation is likely to get worse, as the full customs regime between UK and EU has entered into force on 1 January 2022. EURATEX calls on the European Union and the United Kingdom to effectively cooperate to remove the issues in the EU-UK Trade agreement that prevent smooth trade flows.  

Latest trade data (January-September 2021) show a dramatic drop of imports and exports of textile goods between the EU and UK, with significant losses for companies on both sides. The situation is likely to get worse, as the full customs regime between UK and EU has entered into force on 1 January 2022. EURATEX calls on the European Union and the United Kingdom to effectively cooperate to remove the issues in the EU-UK Trade agreement that prevent smooth trade flows.  

All the sectors have been already suffering a significant loss in the past year and textiles has been no exception. Compared to the same period in 2020, between January and September the EU recorded a dramatic fall in imports (-44%, corresponding to almost € 2 billion) and in exports (-22%, corresponding to € 1.6 billion). The data show that the most impacted EU countries on the export side are Italy, Netherlands, Belgium and Germany while on the import side the most impacted countries are Germany, Ireland and France. Among the T&C sectors, clothing articles are facing the most severe drop in both imports and exports, corresponding to a total trade loss of more than € 3.4 billion over the 9 months period. Despite these alarming figures, the UK continues to be the most important export market for EU textiles and clothing.

Concerning the impact on the UK textiles sector, in May 2021 the UK Fashion and Textile Association’s (UKFT) surveyed 138 businesses, including leading UK fashion brands, UK textile manufacturers, wholesalers, fashion agencies, garment manufacturers and retailers.

The results of the survey showed that:

  • 71% currently rely on imports from the EU
  • 92% are experiencing increased freight costs  
  • 83% are experiencing increased costs and bureaucracy for customs clearance
  • 53% are experiencing cancelled orders as a result of how the EU-UK agreement is being implemented
  • 41% had been hit by double duties  
  • The vast majority of the surveyed companies declared they are looking to pass the increased costs on to consumer in the next  6-12 months

The above situation is expected to get worse. Since 1 January, full customs controls are being implemented. It means that export and import rules have become stricter: products should already have a valid declaration in place and have received customs clearance. Export from Britain to the EU must now have supplier declarations and the commodities codes changed.  

EURATEX calls on the European Union and the United Kingdom to effectively cooperate to address, solve and remove the issues in the EU-UK Trade agreement that currently prevent smooth trade flows between the two sides of the Channel. It is causing considerable losses for textile companies both in the EU as well as in the UK. 

 

More information:
Euratex textile industry Brexit
Source:

EURATEX