New Better Cotton Report Seeks to Align LCA Practice with Real-World Farm-Level Realities

BEHIND THE METRICS: The paper distinguishes between attributional and consequential LCAs to show how differing methodologies can lead to contradictory results. Attributional LCAs provide snapshots of existing systems, while consequential LCAs model broader market impacts and policy shifts. The study notes that most cotton-related assessments still rely on attributional data, which limits accuracy when brands attempt to measure system-wide effects of sourcing or policy interventions.

• Attributional LCAs allocate environmental burdens to specific products but overlook dynamic effects such as displaced production or alternative material demand.
• Consequential LCAs capture ripple effects, modelling how market responses influence emissions, land use, and resource distribution across cotton-growing regions.
• The authors warn that comparative studies require methodological equivalence — identical system boundaries, data sources, and impact categories — to prevent misleading or unsubstantiated claims.
• Brands are encouraged to use both methods judiciously, combining attributional data for baseline insight with consequential models for long-term strategic decisions.

THE SUBTEXT: Beneath its technical framing, the report calls for collaborative responsibility across the cotton value chain. By emphasising LCA literacy, ethical data governance, and equitable participation, it urges shared accountability between farmers, brands, and policymakers. The paper highlights that primary data collection and farmer engagement are vital for improving how sustainability information is interpreted and applied across programmes.

• By calling for literacy and transparency, the guidance stresses ethical data governance and shared responsibility for how sustainability information is interpreted.
• It underscores that credible sustainability outcomes depend on equitable participation and fair investment in those producing the data.
• The narrative recasts farmers as knowledge partners, not passive data sources, demanding inclusion in design and benefit-sharing mechanisms.
• Policy actors are quietly tasked with ensuring that transparency does not penalise producers for revealing accurate but higher-impact results.

INSIDE PERSPECTIVES: Stakeholders contributing to the paper expressed differing emphases but shared concern over how sustainability data translates into practice. Better Cotton’s Lars van Doremalen called for methodological clarity to strengthen trust in environmental claims, while Cotton Australia’s Brooke Summers stressed that farmers must shape solutions. Allan Williams, Executive Director of Australia’s Cotton Research and Development Corporation, warned that LCAs alone will not deliver farm-level change without stronger scientific understanding and support.

• Van Doremalen said clearer communication and scientific rigour would help ensure sustainability claims remain credible, data-backed, and farmer-informed.
• Summers emphasised that farmers deserve a central role in designing traceability systems and benefit-sharing frameworks across cotton-producing regions.
• Williams said LCAs by themselves do little to guide growers on emission reduction until agronomic research on nitrogen use is advanced.
• The shared message is that collaborative, context-aware data systems are vital to rebuilding trust and ensuring measurable, equitable outcomes in cotton sustainability.

BEYOND THE STUDY: The paper positions responsible LCA use within a wider evolution of cotton-sector sustainability frameworks. It calls for stronger investment in farmer-centred data systems, fair benefit-sharing, and harmonised reporting aligned with emerging global standards. Recognising that transparency sometimes reveals higher impacts, the report states that accurate data should be valued rather than penalised to maintain credibility and trust across the supply chain.

• The authors recommend linking LCAs with social and economic indicators to capture sustainability’s full complexity and long-term development effects.
• Programmes submitting high-quality, region-specific data should be recognised, even when results show higher impact values than generic datasets.
• The study references wider policy initiatives, including SBTi and the EU’s Green Claims Directive, as part of the broader discussion on credible measurement and claims substantiation.
• Sustainable transformation, it concludes, will depend on aligning credible data systems with equitable financing for farmers and local institutions.

ON THE HORIZON: The report calls for brands and cotton programmes to invest in literacy initiatives and periodic data updates to strengthen sustainability measurement across the sector. The report encourages brands and supply chain partners to invest in LCA literacy and capacity building, with further greenhouse gas reporting updates expected to begin in 2026.

• Newer and updated greenhouse gas reports will be available on a periodic basis beginning in 2026.
• The study recommends periodic methodological reviews to maintain alignment with recognised international standards and data-quality frameworks.
• The authors call for continued collaboration among stakeholders to evaluate progress and refine approaches for fair data compensation and traceability.