HOW FASHION HIJACKED THE EU'S ECO LABEL FOR CLOTHING: Almost 900 signatories representing hundreds of thousands of farmers in natural fibres supply chains have signed a letter to the EU Council voicing concerns that its apparel ‘scoring’ method for the Green Claims Directive has been hijacked by #fastfashion. The letter points out that only major brands such as H&M, Nike, Inditex and VF Corp can now afford to participate and vote in the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) tool within the Green Claims Directive process. San Francisco-based Cascale (formerly the Sustainable Apparel Coalition) is technical secretariat for the PEF Category Rules for Apparel and Footwear. Apparel Insider understands the secretariat recently hiked the cost of participation and voting for the PEFCR – and it now runs into six figures. The technical secretariat has 26 members but only 14 of these have voting rights. More than half of the 14 are fashion brands, with the only representation from natural fibres being from Cotton Incorporated and the Alliance for European Flax Linen and Hemp. The letter argues that none of the 14 voting members are farmers, highlighting that farmers’ voices aren’t heard up, “against the well-funded and powerful fast fashion industry.” The letter points out that PEF continues to penalise and misrepresent natural fibres vis-à-vis their synthetic and man-made counterparts – to the detriment of farmers and the environment Our OPEN ACCESS story here: https://lnkd.in/evSdQnsU
Tanja Gotthardsen
9 个月
Hi Brett, As promised, hereby our additional letter on how the inclusion of PEF into GCD also fails to account for how apparel is worn and used, and thus risks contributing to the greenwashing the directive was supposed to regulate: https://www.dhirubhai.net/posts/tanjagotthardsen_letter-to-the-council-pef-in-gcd-activity-7208398659321839616-jFEJ?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios
Stewart Sheppard
9 个月
Brett Mathews, 2 things come to mind reading your post: 1/ it is factually incorrect: the EU PEF is NOT the EU Ecolabel. The EU PEF is a methodology to measure environmental impact. The EU Ecolabel is an environmental label?and has been identifying environmentally-friendly products and services since 1982. Clearly way before the EU PEF was ever dreamed up... Whether you agree on the methodology used for PEF is a legitimate discussion but EU PEF ≠ EU Ecolabel 2/ Isn't it time to start to reduce the controversy & Increase the collaboration? To use Tone Sk?rdal Tobiasson words: ""All materials have significant environmental impacts; especially given the vast quantities we are currently producing and consuming (currently 100 megatons per year and growing). What the fashion industry needs to do is reduce its material throughput, and that will require nothing less than a complete rethinking of its business models." as quoted in Ecotextile news in October 22. So why are we still discussing whether we're driving into the wall at 79.3mph or 82.3mph instead of putting all our energy into turning around and changing direction?
Scott Newton
9 个月
This is so frustrating- why is the EU allowing this to happen?
Jo V.
9 个月
In my former job i was a non-voting member (under EURATEX) in the PEF CR WG. From the beginning we as small federations realised we were just being used to show we were "involved" in the process. In fact every relevant proposition we made was systematically wiped of the table by the mayority voters. One could ask why a non EU organisation (who coincidently just changed name) is being allowed to set up a European eco labelling system while it has vested interest and commercial intrest to push it's own system forward. The Higg index was deemed not suitable by EU MSA's as can be read in former news articles. Since then i have systematically questioned this process as being non concensus based. Something as important as this belongs to be handled under CEN and be concencus based with all relevant EU stakeholders. The other elephant in the room is using a PEF method (LCA based) that is inherently flaud (imprecise) to ever be used as reliable ECO product labelling. We can reliably and scientifically measure how long a textile product can last (care cycles) before it starts to shows signs of wear, if the care instructions are followed. Thus giving a consumer and indication of quality and longevity, this is sustainability.
Lars Hellberg
9 个月
This is ignorant ??
Donna Marshall
9 个月
Thanks as always, Brett Mathews, for shining the light on the most important issues in the fashion industry. Time and again we see top-down governance by wealthy fashion brands where their voices are privileged above all others. This has to stop. Research has shown that for transition initiatives to work suppliers, workers and farmer's voices must be included in both decision making, development and management of initiatives. This elitist, exclusive capturing of government and legislation must end now.
Else Skjold
9 个月
This i so bad news. I and others signed a letter of concern authored by Tone Sk?rdal Tobiasson ingun klepp and Tanja Gotthardsen. Will they listen??? Who knows.
Head of CSR and Sustainability at European Outdoor Group (EOG)
9 个月I’m really struggling to understand and actually quite disappointed at how this (and everything else to be fair) has become a ‘natural vs synthetic fibre war’. Shouldn’t we be concentrating energies and efforts on the business models we want to eradicate/change? Due to available land, we know that there is a limit to how much natural fibre can be produced so why aren’t we focusing on using that limited resource in better ways. Imagine how much we could achieve if we put all the energy, effort and financial resource that is currently spent vilifying and slagging off the other camp towards something more useful.