Stakeholder Framework Helps Turkish Textile SMEs Meet EU Sustainability Demands

For many smaller textile producers, sustainability planning has often felt abstract—dominated by broad targets and lengthy checklists that are difficult to translate into daily operations. The research addressed this by applying a structured materiality framework that allowed each enterprise to identify its most relevant issues through a stakeholder-centred process.

The approach was rooted in the GRI Standards, which define material topics as those representing the organisation’s most significant environmental, social, and economic impacts. This was adapted for SMEs through a four-stage process: topic identification, prioritisation, mapping, and validation. Importantly, the model incorporated complementary international standards to strengthen credibility. The European Sustainability Reporting Standards contributed a “double materiality” perspective, the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards added investor-focused considerations, and the AA1000 Accountability Principles ensured stakeholder inclusivity.

The study began by selecting 18 sustainability topics relevant to the textile sector. These were grouped under four categories: product quality and technology, environment and world, social responsibility, and corporate development. Topics ranged from emissions reduction and energy management to diversity and talent development. The list was drawn from GRI standards, academic research, industry practice, and European regulations.

Each of the four SMEs—operating in Ankara, Gaziantep, and Kahramanmaraş—then undertook a four-week engagement programme. Employees, managers, and department heads joined customers, suppliers, and community representatives in a structured series of activities. These included introductory training on sustainability and the SDGs, self-assessments of sustainability maturity, detailed stakeholder surveys, and collaborative workshops. This design ensured that both internal and external perspectives shaped the outcomes, while remaining feasible for firms with limited staff and resources.

The surveys asked stakeholders to rate each sustainability topic on a scale of one to five. Results were plotted on dual-axis materiality matrices, with internal assessments on one axis and external perceptions on the other. This method produced a clear visual representation of high, medium, and low priorities, as well as gaps between internal and external views. Validation workshops were then used to confirm the findings and link them to organisational strategy.

The framework enables SMEs to focus limited resources on their most pressing issues. By focusing on stakeholder-identified priorities, SMEs avoid spreading resources too thin and can direct capacity where it matters most, while still maintaining alignment with recognised international standards.

Although the four companies examined in the study represented different segments of the textile sector—from medical textiles and carpet weaving to fibre recycling and knitwear—their materiality assessments revealed surprising common ground. When the priorities of each enterprise were compared, a pattern of convergence emerged that suggests sector-wide trends rather than isolated company preferences.

At the top of the list were issues directly tied to competitiveness and operational resilience. Product quality and customer satisfaction were universally rated as critical, reflecting the reality of competing in demanding export markets where failure to meet standards can mean the loss of key buyers. Occupational health and safety also featured prominently across all four enterprises. In a sector reliant on manual processes and machinery, concerns about workplace accidents and health risks are immediate and tangible for both managers and employees.

Emissions reduction and energy management emerged as priorities that transcended company type. The growing weight of European regulation, combined with rising domestic energy costs, has made carbon accounting and efficiency improvements unavoidable. Companies that once focused narrowly on production costs are now compelled to consider energy use as a determinant of market survival. Circular economy practices, including recycling and waste reduction, likewise attracted strong support, particularly among firms eager to reduce costs while demonstrating environmental responsibility.

Medium-priority issues revealed additional nuance. Research and development, participation in sustainability networks, and gender equality were valued but generally ranked below immediate operational concerns. Stakeholder engagement, public relations, and information security also appeared in this middle ground, suggesting that while firms recognise their importance, they are not perceived as urgent compared with emissions or safety.

The low-priority category contained some of the most striking results. Water use efficiency, biodiversity conservation, anti-corruption measures, and local community engagement consistently appeared at the bottom of rankings. In particular, water management was deprioritised by two companies that lacked wet processing or dyeing operations, challenging long-held assumptions about water as the textile sector’s universal concern. Similarly, biodiversity and corruption were seen as too distant or abstract for resource-constrained SMEs.

These patterns highlight the contextual nature of sustainability priorities. A recycling-focused firm will naturally emphasise waste minimisation, while a medical textiles manufacturer is more concerned with regulatory compliance and product safety. By comparing average values across the four firms, the researchers established a priority ranking specific to the textile sector, with emissions, occupational safety, product quality, and circularity emerging as prominent issues. For policymakers and industry bodies, this convergence provides a clear indication of where collective support and guidance could have the greatest impact.

After identifying priorities, companies faced the challenge of turning them into actionable measures. To bridge this gap, the research applied the SMART framework—setting goals that are Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound—and then mapped them against the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Linking targets to the SDGs provided SMEs with measurable goals anchored in an international framework.

In the category of Product Quality and Technology, companies committed to raising compliance with international safety and quality standards. Targets included increasing the proportion of products certified under recognised schemes and subjecting suppliers to sustainability-oriented audits. Firms also pledged to develop life cycle assessments and pursue eco-design initiatives, ensuring that product innovation aligns with emerging European expectations.

Environmental objectives focused on quantifiable reductions in impact. SMEs were encouraged to calculate their greenhouse gas inventories in line with ISO 14064 standards, providing compatibility with the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. Emission reduction plans were set against the Science-Based Targets initiative’s 1.5°C pathway, with deadlines as early as 2025. Energy management was addressed through commitments to renewable installations such as solar and wind power, coupled with efficiency improvements to cut operating costs. Circular economy principles were embedded through targets for zero waste practices, higher use of sustainable raw materials, and product development that incorporated recyclability.

On the social side, occupational health and safety featured strongly. Companies aimed to extend safety culture beyond compliance, adopting ISO 45001:2018 where possible and setting measurable goals for reducing workplace accidents. Diversity and gender equality were also addressed, with targets for performance evaluation systems, employee engagement metrics, and achieving more than 30 per cent female participation in decision-making roles.

Corporate development goals centred on governance and market resilience. These included implementing sustainability reporting in line with GRI Standards, joining international networks such as the UN Global Compact, and strengthening stakeholder partnerships. Companies also targeted improved export performance by leveraging sustainability credentials to maintain or expand their EU market presence.

The alignment exercise revealed connections with thirteen SDGs, ranging from Climate Action and Responsible Consumption to Decent Work and Reduced Inequalities. By linking company-level targets to global goals, the research showed how even resource-limited SMEs can position themselves within an international sustainability framework. For Turkish textile firms navigating regulatory pressure and competitive markets, SMART targets anchored in SDGs provide not just compliance tools but a strategic roadmap for long-term resilience.