Clear Labelling of Leather and Alternative Materials Critical to Make Informed Choice

Management Board / Leather Naturally

We know from the research that we carried out in conjunction with Leather UK and the University of Northampton that consumers are confused about the provenance of many materials, not just leather. All too often we see the term ‘leather’ used as shorthand to imply that a material has the same benefits of leather or that it is in some way natural, when it is not. This is not helpful to consumers and Leather Naturally has long included information on its website on how to read labels for this very reason.

Leather Naturally is therefore grateful to Textile Exchange for bringing this clarity to the definition of leather as part of its product information requirement. We would hope that it is the start of clearer labelling of both leather and alternative materials so that consumers can make an informed choice about products they choose to buy. We believe that is especially important at a time when people are looking to reduce their use of plastics in any form.

Managing Director / Sustainable Leather Foundation

It is significant in so far that its primary intent was to distinguish leather from the alternative materials. However, it is not a “new” definition. Textile Exchange has adopted the existing definition of leather as outlined in the EU Directive 94/11/EC, ISO15115 and EN 15987:2015.

The significance lies within the direct quote in Textile Exchange’s announcement “Materials that do not meet the definition above will not be described by Textile Exchange as leather, regardless of any past designation or common usage of the term. There is currently a gap in the legal framing of the classification and naming of the diverse materials sold as alternative materials to leather. This leads to misleading labelling where a fossil-based synthetic material could be referred to in the same way as an innovative plant-based material, making it difficult for a consumer to differentiate the two.

We're encouraging policymakers to close this gap. For now, these diverse manmade materials, fully or partially plant-based will be grouped in the 'Manmade non-fibre materials' category of our reports and programmes, until further legal guidance on the naming and categorisation of these materials is available.”

Consumers have for a long time been misled by organisations trading off the association of 'leather' as a quality item by adding the term to their material, for example faux leather, PU leather, mushroom leather, pineapple leather, plant-based leather. Even worse, more recently misleading consumers into thinking that by adding the words ‘Vegan+Leather’ together – then this must be a great product. So, the leather industry applauds Textile Exchange for having a clear stance now that all these other materials will be labelled within Textile Exchange exactly as they are ‘Manmade non-fibre materials’.

Let’s not kid ourselves or the consumers that these other materials have less impact – maybe different impacts – but not necessarily better. And of course, they don’t have the same in-life durability properties of leather as a material choice, as evidenced by the FILK report last year. That’s not to say they won’t in the future, but right now, they don’t.

Director / Leather UK

Obviously, the leather industry is very grateful for the decision by Textile Exchange to incorporate the current, accepted definition of leather into its material labelling requirements. As TE operates across the textile sector, we would hope that this will have a wide impact on the understanding of the unique identity of leather and lead to clearer, honest labelling of alternative materials. It is known from surveys that labelling of alternatives, that incorporate the term leather, is misleading for consumers. For this reason, and others, several countries have introduced strict and clear legislation on the labelling of leather, that uses the same definition adopted by TE.

Executive Secretary / International Union of Leather Technologists and Chemists Societies

Textile Exchange (TE) has accepted the official ISO 15115 definition of leather. This shows clearly that TE wants to promote transparency for the consumers by properly labelling the leather products and separating leather from the other materials that for now are called ‘Manmade non-fiber materials’. Hopefully this great example will be extended to other organisations, brands and institutions. In many countries the leather products are labelled by law using the ISO definition.

President / Leather & Hide Council of America

This is a strong, positive step not only for Textile Exchange and the leather industry, but for consumer labelling transparency as a whole.

The term 'leather' has been abused in recent years by a large number of fashion brands and other companies seeking to confuse consumers about the true composition of materials used to make their goods. Many times, these brands are trying to hide the truly alarming amount of cheap plastics that are used in their products by using vague and ambiguous terms such as “vegan leather” that do not accurately describe the materials being used. By taking a public stand against this practice, Textile Exchange is promoting market transparency and empowering the consumer to make appropriate choices about the products they are purchasing. It is a wonderful development and something we should all be supporting, whether you prefer leather or not.

As for the impact of this decision, much will depend on how the fashion and footwear brands that make up the majority of Textile Exchange’s membership react to this development. If they wish to be truthful and transparent in their marketing claims, they will follow the example set by Textile Exchange and clearly and accurately label the materials used in their products.