The Higg MSI should be integrated with the Higg PM, the review of the Higg Index suite of tools of the Sustainable Apparel Coalition (SAC) has suggested.
- It has also recommended the implementation of warnings for users navigating the Higg Materials Sustainability Index (MSI) and Higg Product Module (PM) tools on the platform against inappropriate comparisons, and improved documentation for goal and scope definition of the LCA study.
- The review also found many aspects where the Higg MSI and Higg PM were not compliant with the ISO 14040 and 14044 standards.
- Some of the experts on the review panel also felt that the Higg MSI could lead to wrong decisions due to the lack of a good functional unit definition.
- The review, conducted by management consultancy KPMG, was announced in January this year after a spate of accusations last year had dented the credibility and integrity of the Higg Index, particularly the Higg MSI. The third-party, expert review was expected in June, but was delayed by three months.
Some Highlights: Most of the interesting points are buried deep in the report:
- A majority of experts highlighted that the goal description (per ISO LCA phase) can be further improved.
- A minority of experts do not agree with the statement and suggested that data quality and granularity should first be improved.
- A minority of experts did not agree with the statement (on inventory analysis) and suggested that data quality and granularity should first be improved
REVIEWS: While the Higg Product Tools have already been reviewed, the remaining Higg Index Review reports will be shared by SAC once they have been finalised by the review panels.
- SAC is working with supply chain stakeholders to determine the type of data that is available, outline data gaps, identify intrinsic differences due to geography, and build consistent LCA models that can show improvements over time.
- SAC is also actively working to improve data quality within its background datasets (secondary data), specifically in cotton fibre and textile wet processing data.
- It is working with supply chain stakeholders to determine the type of data that is available, outline data gaps, identify intrinsic differences due to geography, and build consistent LCA models that can show improvements over time.
- This is a process that it will continue to replicate with other materials and processing stages in the future.
EXPERT PANEL: To conduct the reviews, SAC engaged KPMG, which coordinated the creation of a panel of experts that represent a cross-section of the industry.
- KPMG led the process of generating the report, ensuring that it remained unbiased and independent.
- Those who participated brought insightful perspectives that triggered powerful conversations about how SAC and the apparel and textile industry can evolve the tools to drive greater impact.
- The review process surfaced clear feedback and recommendations to improve these tools which are now being evaluated on how best to address each recommendation.
- SAC hopes to implement changes in the next phase of regular tool updates. For example, it will develop the recommended signals and warnings, as well as offer more education and training, to help users correctly and more effectively use the tools.
