The annual Materials Benchmark of nonprofit Textile Exchange showcases the progress of both brands and manufacturers towards more sustainable materials sourcing. This year's benchmark has just been released and comes in two parts.
Very broadly, the sentiment that emerges is this: there has been a lot of progress, but a lot also remains to be done. It's a sentiment that one would have gauged many times before, from many other reports from many other organisations.
You can call them sugar-coated pills. But one can very well understand why they are so. An organisation like Textile Exchange is not an activist outfit. Hence, the reports are what they ideally should be: straight-jacket and devoid of sensationalism. Second, it is a member-driven organisation. You cannot and should not expect such an entity to bad-mouth its members. Fair enough.
Nevertheless, the truth is there: you only need to look for it. And, the nuances that are designed to be amiss are there for you to construct.
But first, the official takeaways.
The key trends for brands and retailers are:
- Participants are scaling their sustainability strategies for raw materials.
- Brands are starting to address climate impacts through goal setting and risk assessment.
- Sustainability programmes and standards represent accessible solutions, but there is more to do.
- Further progress is needed in the transition to a more circular economy.
- Further visibility to the countries where fibres and raw materials are produced is a must.
The key trends for suppliers and manufacturers are:
- Suppliers are setting strategies for materials sustainability, with risk assessments needed next.
- Measuring impacts is a relatively new area for participants.
- Participants are using more preferred materials but need to focus on key fibre types.
- There is untapped potential for suppliers to become leaders in circular solutions.
The Devil, however, lies in the details. A careful gleaning of the data shows that both brands and manufacturers are high on words, low on action.
