Why are fashion’s sustainability promises so hard to spot during fashion month?

This article is part of our Vogue Business membership package. To enjoy unlimited access to our weekly Sustainability Edit, which contains Member-only reporting and analysis, sign up for membership here. Judging by the Spring/Summer 2024 collections, there’s little indication that fashion’s growing sustainability promises have changed how brands actually make their clothes. Over the last month, Vogue Business asked more than 200 brands to send information about materials used in their latest collections, and nearly two dozen of the biggest houses to send sourcing information for the materials they used. Very few of them shared details, and whether it’s press releases, brand statements or fashion reviews, the information is hard to come by elsewhere, too. The goal was to evaluate the materials being featured in fashion’s most prominent spotlight and the extent to which they offer any evidence of brands aligning with the sustainability commitments that so many have made to customers and investors. We wanted to understand: for all the initiatives that brands say they’re adopting to improve their raw material sourcing — an important aspect of sustainability work, considering raw materials account for a majority of a brand’s total footprint — has any of it translated yet to what we see on the market or on the runway? In short, the answer is that we don’t know. That’s the state of sustainability in fashion today: a lot of promises are made in boardrooms and marketing statements, but there’s little to show for it on the runway. “All of the ambitious targets being set — this means nothing until we start to see it trickle down into commercial product. One of the clearest determiners of that is what gets sent down the runway,” says Rachel Arthur, sustainable fashion consultant and co-founder of FashMash, a London-based global community running events and a mentoring programme. “Given we’re so many years now into a lot of [brands’] sustainability commitments, we should be seeing fashion weeks awash with such preferred fibres.” A lack of information about the materials used does not necessarily mean the materials are not improving — it’s possible the information is too complicated for brands to feel comfortable sharing quickly or concisely. Some may have announcements in the works they are not ready to disclose publicly. What the lack of information about materials does mean is that fashion is failing to offer evidence of the change it has been promising. Given its track record of setting lofty goals but facing no accountability when it comes to meeting them, combined with the increasing severity of the climate, water and biodiversity crises, that is an ominous sign for the speed and direction of progress in the industry, experts say. “At a certain point, design is just choices. And one of those choices is, what are you making things out of,” says independent consultant Geren Lockhart. “You choose a certain colour, where does the seam go and how long is it — they’re all choices, they’re not divine moments that come from above.” What we know about SS24’s materials We asked 231 brands — every label that showed on the official calendar in New York (plus Coach), London, Milan and Paris — to share the main materials used in the collections they showed this season, and the source or certification partner they worked with if any materials were sourced in a specific way — recycled, organic, regenerative, etc — as well as whether it was used for select garments or collection-wide. Nineteen responded, most of them independent designers using alternative materials or fabrics sourced through known or directly traceable supply chains. Patrick McDowell used a Tencel twill and Tencel linen mix certified by the Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS), deadstock from various sources and a material called Faeba made from agricultural waste (from banana trees), among others. Frederick Anderson used cotton from Argentina for crochet pieces, which were crafted by hand by artisans in Buenos Aires. Kozaburo used Sakiori, a traditional Japanese form of textile recycling, and Cycora, a fabric made from old garments developed by material science startup Ambercycle. Edward Crutchley used organic base silk and cotton. Masha Popova featured denim prominently in this collection, using only Isko and Candiani denim that was either 100 per cent cotton or mixed with “eco-circular stretch” Roica V550 in place of traditional elastane, and much of it featuring fabric made from discarded post-consumer clothes. Chloé, whose SS24 collection “explores the power of individual action as a form of environmental advocacy”, said that 69 per cent of the product offer is made with “lower-impact materials” — which is notable because it doesn’t claim the materials to be fully sustainable or responsible, phrases that many if not most brands use a bit too liberally — and specifies that external auditors had previously approved the criteria for determining what defines a lower-impact material. The collection, Gabriela Hearst’s last for the Richemont-owned house, featured leather from Leather Working Group-certified tanneries, organic silk and deadstock materials for 20 per cent of the hat collection, among others. Stella McCartney’s collection featured certified organic cotton, linen and silk, recycled cashmere, nylon and polyester, and lead-free crystals in embroidery in addition to material innovations including Mirum, Vegea, Uppeal, Bananatex and seaweed-based yarn Kelsun. Most of the biggest fashion houses, however, declined or did not respond at all — both to the initial questions about materials used in the collection, as well as to additional requests for interviews or to comment on the perception that a lack of sustainability on the runway may indicate a lack of commitment to it off the runway. Some responded with general statements referring to their company’s commitment to sustainable materials but saying little about what was used in the collection that buyers are now considering for next spring. The houses we reached out to include Louis Vuitton, Gucci, Chanel, Prada, Miu Miu, Hermès, Versace, Bottega Veneta, Alexander McQueen, Christian Dior, Ralph Lauren, Balenciaga, Fendi, Michael Kors, Saint Laurent and Gabriela Hearst, as well as Gucci and Dior parent companies Kering and LVMH. Without representation of sustainability on runways, there’s little reason for customers, buyers and media to believe the commitments are doing any good, or to shift their own thinking about what they can and should expect to see in the clothes they buy. “There’s no denying that sustainability has become a buzzword, and many promises have been made to improve practices across the industry. However, when we examine the actual progress, especially during events like fashion month and on retail floors, it’s evident that there’s still a considerable gap between rhetoric and meaningful action,” says Samata Pattinson, CEO of cultural sustainability organisation Black Pearl, and previously CEO at non-profit Red Carpet Green Dress. “If you dig for it you find some nice stories, but I don’t think it’s top of the agenda,” says London designer McDowell. “I think the investment in R&D is there, but the follow-through to pieces on the runway and then crucially in the stores isn’t as obvious.” How materials are chosen Material portfolios are complicated to evaluate. The impacts of any given material are embedded more in how it’s produced than in the type of material itself — cotton and wool, for instance, can both be very destructive to an ecosystem or can play a role in restoring it. However, there are certain material types, such as leather and synthetic fibres like nylon and polyester, that have outsized impacts no matter how they’re produced and are surrounded by unsettled debate even when they are optimised for sustainability. Countless brands claim to have strict environmental standards for sourcing materials, but few volunteer details about how they set those standards and whether they were reviewed or approved by independent experts. Some say they are investing in transitioning land to regenerative practices — and that takes time; converting land and improving soil is a years-long process — but the commitments are old enough now that the absence of visible results is a red flag. “Luxury has the ability to help mainstream sustainable materials in the market, and to help fund them at the source to make it a reality on a wider level. The fact fashion week feels so flat on that front is not a good sign,” says FashMash’s Arthur. “If we're going to hit any of the targets before us — bearing in mind we’re talking about 2030, which is very little time in the timeline of material sourcing — then we need to see speed and we need to see scale.” Leather, for example, has been front and centre for a lot of brands for several seasons now. It’s hard to see, especially until brands have a firmer lock on their entire leather supply chains and can guarantee that not only the tanning process is better but the farm level is free from deforestation and other problems as well, how relying heavily on a material that for many brands is the biggest contributor to their total carbon footprint is going to help them meet their ambitious climate goals. There’s also the influence factor: by using a lot of leather — or by not featuring their efforts to improve leather sourcing, and the reasons that work is important, in the show in some capacity — brands, wittingly or not, send a message that status-quo leather is acceptable and fashionable. Instead, what they could be doing is either steering the market away from the material altogether (but not towards plastic as a replacement) — at least until it is fully traceable and not helping to perpetuate problematic practices in an industry (industrial animal agriculture) that is a key contributor to climate change globally. Or, they could be talking about their sourcing efforts in such a front-and-centre way that they encourage customers to not only desire but actually demand — as in, require — sustainably sourced leather in the future. “Fashion weeks provide an enormous opportunity to shape and direct the market. Luxury brands very rarely take ownership for unsustainable practices relative to their fast fashion counterparts, but the influence they have on how others operate is enormous, with fashion weeks the pinnacle of that showcase,” says FashMash’s Arthur. “Every single brand showcasing has a responsibility. Ultimately, I think we need to have more regulated fashion week calendars as has been seen in the likes of Copenhagen where brands are only allowed to show if they’re evidencing change. This should become the norm in New York, London, Milan and Paris.” It’s disappointing to not see more progress, but it’s also a missed opportunity on the industry’s part, she says. “That’s the piece that I think feels particularly off here. It suggests that not only have the commitments not translated to the market yet, but that [brands are] still not seeing the commercial opportunity in all this.” The role of innovation When materials do get the spotlight, it’s usually for innovation, like last year’s Balenciaga coat made with bio-based material Ephea; Botter and Balmain turning to kelp- and banana-based fibres, respectively; and Peter Do’s use of a leather alternative from Tomtex. Next-gen materials have an important role to play in creating a more sustainable fashion future, but only if they’re done correctly (and do not trade one negative environmental impact for another) and are used to replace existing materials instead of in addition to them. Even then, however, next-gen materials do not clean up the problems rampant in fashion’s supply chain today from materials, such as cotton and wool, that can also feature heavily in a more sustainable future but only if the way they are produced is changed dramatically. “Sustainable fashion isn’t just about avant-garde materials like mushroom leather. It encompasses a spectrum of initiatives,” says Black Pearl’s Pattinson, pointing to initiatives such as regenerative agriculture and certifications through GOTS or Oeko-Tex. ”However, these less headline-grabbing but equally impactful achievements often go unnoticed in the fashion world’s glamour and glitz.” In fact, she adds, “some of the sustainable fibre manufacturers I have spoken to have said demand has gone down”. Some brands, most notably Ganni and Stella McCartney, offer a model for featuring next-gen materials in a way that indicates a quest for real change, rather than a fleeting moment in the spotlight. Stella McCartney, who has long worked with and promoted material innovations such as alternative leathers Mylo and Mirum and bio-based fur Koba, went a step further this year by pairing her Paris show with a “sustainable market”, featuring 22 stalls of vintage clothes and material innovation startups, with the goal to inspire and educate attendees. Ganni has said that its Fabrics of the Future initiative is specifically designed to not only showcase new materials, but to actively experiment with them — to find out what works, both for the brand and its suppliers as well as with customers and retailers — as part of its strategy to, ultimately, overhaul its entire materials portfolio, including phasing out virgin leather altogether by the end of this year. In these cases, experts say the focus on material innovation can lead to important change. “I believe that we are living in a materials race era, where we are seeing a handful of frontrunning brands already seeking and investing in preferred materials and I think these are the ones who are futureproofing their business models,” says sustainability consultant Sandra Gonza. Overall, experts say the progress is far too slow. Drastic change is what’s needed, and the industry is trying to fit the improvements it has to make into the way it already works — and it’s going to continue to fail, experts say, until it starts to address the deeper questions around the business models and incentivise everyone in the ecosystem, perhaps the designer most of all, to treat sustainability as a top priority and not try to wedge it in on the side. “Designers get credit for positive reviews, great sales, attention from celebrities and influencers. That’s the rewards system that’s set up. They’re not getting extra credit for deeply building in environmental impact, circularity or regenerative agriculture — or education about any of those things,” says Lockhart. Real change, it’s increasingly clear, is going to require bold moves and significant risk-taking — and people, both individuals and companies, willing to take them on. “It’s rare to see anyone really going for it and making the strong commitment to doing things in a different way,” says designer McDowell. “Ultimately it’s not the easiest path, but we do it because A, it’s the right thing to do, and B, we are building a brand for the future.” Comments, questions or feedback? Email us at feedback@voguebusiness.com. More from this author: Peta’s runway protests put spotlight on fashion's love for leather The problem with fashion’s sustainability awards Can fashion ever quit fossil fuels?

Make better business decisions

Make better business decisions