Why Average Data is Bad for Fashion Decarbonization

If you work in the fashion industry, you'll notice how stretched the sustainability teams are. With limited resources, they are juggling tasks from corporate sustainability reporting, product sustainability initiatives, social compliance, and data collection/cleaning, to driving actionable insights for leadership. These insights are crucial for justifying investment in sustainability initiatives, yet many teams find themselves ill-equipped to report accurate emissions, pinpoint supply chain hotspots, or define decarbonization initiatives that will genuinely drive progress towards their goals.

One of the core challenges lies in the quality of the data available. In particular, many fashion brands in the US and Canada rely heavily on average data, including metrics such as:

• Emission factors for yarn or fabric (Using MSI)
• Weight of each product style/SKU
• Fabric composition and material mix
• Fabric and yarn specifications
• Fabric manufacturing technologies
• Transport modes and distances
• Packaging and accessories

This reliance on average data poses significant risks to the accuracy and effectiveness of sustainability efforts. For more context, you may also read our article on ‘Why Scope 3 Accounting is Broken in the Fashion Industry’?

What's wrong with using Average Data

Average data may suffice for reporting corporate Scope 3 emissions and meeting immediate reporting requirements, but it falls short in the long-term quest for fashion decarbonization. By relying on average data, brands are setting their emission baselines, establishing Science-Based Targets (SBTs), and making commitments to reduce emissions by 2030 or 2035—often without a clear understanding of their true supply chain emissions.

Here are the key reasons why average data is detrimental to the industry:

1. Inaccurate Emission Baseline

Average data leads to generalized emission calculations, which are often inaccurate. Brands that use such data to establish their emission baselines risk underestimating or overestimating their actual emissions. This foundational error can undermine all subsequent sustainability efforts, rendering progress reports misleading at best.

2. Lack of Industry Benchmarking

With many brands still relying on average data, the industry lacks accurate benchmarks for comparing sustainability performance. True industry benchmarking will only become possible when brands begin reporting emission intensities per product type based on primary supply chain data.

3. False Sense of Progress

Fashion brands may take pride in publishing sustainability reports, but without accurate data, this sense of achievement may be illusory. Year-over-year emission reductions can occur for reasons unrelated to genuine progress, such as seasonal variations, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, or overstocking inventory.

4. No Incentives for Supplier Decarbonization

As long as brands continue to rely on average data, there is little motivation for textile manufacturers to demonstrate year-over-year decarbonization progress. This is particularly discouraging for suppliers who have invested in renewable energy, factory modernization, and energy efficiency. Without recognition for their efforts, these suppliers may see little reason to continue making improvements.

Our friend Dr. Vidhura Ralapanawe has often written about this topic and the urgent need for brands to collaborate with suppliers and align incentives for decarbonization.

Transparency is Key, But Meaningful Action is Essential for Decarbonization

"Disclosing factory lists doesn’t mean your supply chains are sustainable, and disclosing your decarbonization targets doesn’t mean you’re making sufficient progress. But transparency is key for accountability. Transparency allows us to scrutinise progress and drive for improvements." - Ciara Barry, Policy and Campaigns Manager, Fashion Revolution

Transparency is undeniably crucial. It enables accountability and encourages progress. However, transparency alone is not enough. Meaningful, data-driven action is required to achieve real decarbonization in the fashion industry.

Investing in Supply Chain Decarbonization and Measuring Progress

A staggering "94% of brands failed to share how much they are investing in supply chain decarbonization.”?- Fashion Transparency Index, 2023 Report

Real decarbonization demands concerted effort and strategic investment. Brands must:

• Identify Emission Hotspots: Focus on product categories, supply chain tiers, and geographic regions with the highest emissions.
• Prioritize Emission Reduction Initiatives: Target initiatives that offer the greatest impact and are feasible to implement.
• Collaborate with Manufacturers: Work with suppliers to secure funding and investment for long-term sustainability improvements.
• Gather Primary Data: Collect, validate and integrate factory and process-specific data from all supply chain tiers.
• Measure Process-Specific Emissions: Assess emissions at the factory level for yarns, fabrics, and garments.
• Leverage Primary Emission Factors for Reporting: Use this data to report Scope 3 emissions accurately and provide transparency to consumers.

At Carbon Trail , we work with 100+ textile, apparel and footwear manufacturers to measure the real-time impact of fabrics/garments powered with primary data, allowing fashion brands and retailers to measure and track true progress on decarbonization. We also measure the % share of primary data in product or supplier data and help brands visualize the gaps and build an action plan to improve primary data in their emission reporting year over year.

If you are curious about what this could mean for your brand, do give us a shout at [email protected].

#SustainableFashion #SBTi #NetZero #FashionDecarbonization #PrimaryData

Apparel Impact Institute PEF for Apparel and Footwear Fashion for Good Global Fashion Agenda

?

?