The results of the “Spinning Greenwash” study

The Changing Markets Foundation, a nonprofit organization working on environmental sustainability, commissioned research from the Microplastic Research Group at Çukurova University (Turkey) to compare the release of microplastics between recycled and virgin polyester fabrics. The results reveal a surprising and worrying situation:
The recycled polyester garments tested released an average of approximately 55% more microfibers than those made from virgin polyester during wash cycles.

In terms of average quantity, the study recorded approximately 12,430 microfibers per gram in recycled fabrics, compared to 8,028 microfibers per gram in virgin polyester.

The microfibers released from recycled fabrics are smaller—with an average length of approximately 0.42 mm versus 0.52 mm—making them more easily dispersed and potentially more harmful to ecosystems and human health.

The 51 items analyzed came from five major fashion brands — Adidas, H&M, Nike, Shein, and Zara — and included items such as t-shirts, tops, dresses, and shorts.

What does this mean for the environment?

Microplastics are a globally recognized environmental problem: they are found in soil, waterways, and oceans, but also in living organisms, including human tissue, and are associated with potentially adverse effects on biological systems.

A single wash cycle can release hundreds of thousands of microfibers into wastewater, which treatment systems struggle to fully filter, allowing these particles to enter the environmental and food chains.

Where do all those tiny microfibers end up?

The answer is everywhere. Not just in the seas and rivers, but also in the air we breathe, in the soil of our fields, in the most remote sediments, even in the organic tissues of living beings. According to an Italian report on micro and nanoplastics in the human body (Vera Studio 2024), synthetic textiles are among the most significant sources of microplastics linked to home laundry processes, and certain technical steps like pre-washing can release far greater quantities of microfibers than simple washing and rinsing.

This is the reality: what we wear, wash, and use every day comes into contact with environments we can no longer separate from our daily lives. Yet, amid this scientific reality, some marketing narratives remain reassuring. The Changing Markets Foundation uses a powerful symbolic image to describe many companies’ communications: it calls it a “sustainability fig leaf,” a fig leaf that covers a deep dependence on synthetic materials without properly addressing the problem of microplastics (The Ecologist). And the message comes from an authoritative voice: Urska Trunk, senior campaign manager at Changing Markets, told The Ecologist very clearly that “fashion has sold recycled polyester as a green solution, yet our findings show it exacerbates the problem of microplastic pollution.”

Why is this phrase so important? Because it directly challenges the core of the global textile industry’s green narrative. It’s not about demonizing recycling—but about highlighting the fact that sustainability cannot be a superficial promise, based on catchy claims, if products continue to release significant amounts of microplastics.

And this awareness isn’t just for scientists or environmentalists. It’s about us, our consumption, our washing habits, and, ultimately, the future of our communities and the planet we inhabit.

Why does recycled material release more microplastics?

According to the authors of the Changing Markets study, the difference can be traced back to the structural characteristics of recycled fibers. During recycling processes—both mechanical and chemical—the polyester polymer chains shorten and weaken, making the fibers more fragile and prone to breakage. This leads to a greater release of microfibers during use and washing.

Labeling and transparency: another critical issue

The Changing Markets study also found discrepancies in brand claims: some garments advertised as being made from recycled polyester exhibited shedding behavior similar to that of virgin fabrics. In some cases, online labels and descriptions did not match the fiber information physically displayed on the garments, raising concerns about potentially misleading marketing practices.

What Other Research Says

In addition to the Changing Markets Foundation study, other scientific research is helping to clarify the situation, showing that recycled polyester is not automatically a better solution in terms of microfiber release. A study published in Environmental Pollution in 2024 found that, during home washing, recycled polyester garments can release more microfibers than virgin polyester ones, likely due to the lower mechanical strength of fibers subjected to recycling and heat treatments. Analyses conducted by The Microfibre Consortium confirm this trend in several cases, indicating, in some samples, a release of up to twice as many microfibers, often finer in size and therefore potentially more impactful on ecosystems and the food chain. However, the data also show strong variability: fabric structure, yarn type, production processes, and washing conditions significantly influence the results, with some tests showing less marked differences between virgin and recycled materials.

Overall, the scientific literature converges on one key point: polyester recycling reduces upstream plastic waste, but it does not solve—and can sometimes exacerbate—the problem of microplastic dispersion, confirming the need for a broader approach that includes material innovation, responsible textile design, and strategies to overall reduce the amount of synthetic fibers in circulation.

Microfibers and the Fabric Life Cycle: Beyond Home Washing

When discussing microplastics and microfibers, the common debate often focuses on release during home washing. However, recent research highlights that several stages of textile production are also significant sources of microfiber emissions. A study published in Scientific Reports monitored microfiber emissions in a large textile manufacturing plant and found that wet processing—such as dyeing and finishing—can release up to 25 times more microfibers than home washing cycles, with dyeing accounting for over 95% of emissions under some conditions. These findings suggest that the environmental impact of textiles is not reduced simply by changing the type of fiber (virgin or recycled), but requires optimization and mitigation from the earliest stages of production, for example, through lower dyeing temperatures, shorter process times, and the use of yarns and textile structures that minimize fiber shedding.

How Garment Care and Design Influence Microfiber Release

The amount of microfibers released from a garment depends not only on the material, but also on manufacturing techniques and care conditions. Different cutting and sewing methods, as well as washing conditions, can significantly influence the release of microplastics into the environment. Research published in Science of the Total Environment (2023, R Rathinamoorthy, S Raja Balasaraswathi) demonstrated that the use of more advanced cutting techniques such as laser or ultrasonic cutting can reduce microfiber release by up to 15–20 times compared to traditional scissors, while choosing specific stitch patterns and stitch densities can further reduce fraying. The use of multiple needles increases the release of microfibers across different variations of the same stitch pattern. For example, a 45.27% increase in microfiber release was reported with the 4-thread (2-needle) overlock stitch compared to the 3-thread (1-needle) stitch.

Furthermore, studies conducted on actual laundry loads (Science of the Total Environment, 2023, R Rathinamoorthy, S Raja Balasaraswathi) indicate that parameters such as temperature and cycle length influence the amount of microfibers released, with shorter, colder cycles, full loads, and high-efficiency washing machines reducing release. These findings highlight how changes in garment design and household care practices can help reduce microplastic shedding, complementing efforts to develop more sustainable materials.

An illusory solution or an intermediate step?

The findings of the Changing Markets study do not imply that all recycled materials are useless or that recycling has no value. Rather, they highlight a critical point: reducing environmental impact cannot be solely achieved by transitioning to “recycled” materials if they continue to release significant microplastics.

In other words, if the goal is a truly sustainable textile system, it is necessary to consider:

• design strategies that minimize the release of microfibers (e.g., low-release yarns, more compact textile structures, and less degrading finishes);
• technologies for capturing microfibers in domestic and industrial washing processes;
• an overall reduction in reliance on synthetic fibers—recycled or otherwise—in favor of alternative materials with a lower microplastic impact.

What we can do, concretely

For brands
• design garments with low-linting yarns and more compact structures;
• improve industrial processes, especially dyeing and finishing;
• adopt less fraying cutting and sewing techniques;
• communicate clearly and verifiably;
• invest in microfiber-capturing technologies in industrial laundries and supply chains.

For fashion buyers and consumers
• wash at low temperatures and shorter cycles;
• prefer full loads;
• use more efficient washing machines when possible;
• consider using certified filters or microfiber-capturing devices;
• above all: reduce dependence on fast fashion and synthetics, even recycled ones.
It’s not “buying nothing anymore.”
It’s buying better, less, more consciously.

Toward a broader vision of sustainability

This research is part of a broader debate on sustainability strategies in the fashion industry, which requires integrated and transparent approaches. It’s not just about replacing raw material A with B, but about rethinking production, consumption, and end-of-life models of garments with a truly circular perspective.
For consumers and industry professionals, the study is an invitation to look beyond “recycled” labels and evaluate concrete, independent data to make choices that truly make a difference.

The Dutch Study: 41% of Labels Are Wrong

A study conducted in the Netherlands* on more than 10,000 garments revealed alarming statistics: labels were inaccurate in 41% of cases. Most of the sample consisted of post-consumer, non-reusable clothing items discarded by consumers and delivered to a textile sorting center. Significant differences were found in the accuracy of composition claims between pure and blended materials. Discrepancies were especially evident in garments mixing fibers (e.g., cotton + polyester), where the accuracy rate dropped to just 23%. Analyses suggest that the intentional exaggeration of cotton content is indeed plausible. For pure fibers, the accuracy rate rose to 77%.

This is not just a matter of dishonest marketing: misleading labels erode consumer trust, complicate recycling processes, and fuel greenwashing.

Examples from the EU Market

EU regulations require all textile products sold within the Union to display clear and legible information about their composition. However, checks conducted by NGOs and independent bodies have shown that some brands fail to comply — particularly when labels include implicit environmental claims (green claims) without solid evidence.

In the fur market, for example, a study** analyzing 667 items containing animal fibers found that 68% did not comply with EU labeling rules. Real and synthetic fur are becoming increasingly similar in appearance, texture, and even price. Consumers — most of whom reject real fur for ethical reasons — must receive accurate information to make informed choices. It is often assumed that a low price indicates synthetic fur, and that if an item contains real fur, such information should be clearly displayed on the label. However, the current labeling system fails to provide an easy way to alert consumers to the presence of real animal fur.

Greenwashing and Misleading Environmental Claims

Why It’s a Problem (Beyond Fraud): The Real Consequences

This kind of misrepresentation goes far beyond deceiving the consumer.

1. Compromised Traceability and Textile Recycling
   In a world where recycling and sustainable practices are essential, recyclers need accurate information about the fabrics they work with. For those involved in recycling or circular economy processes, knowing the exact fiber (cotton, wool, polyester, etc.) is crucial for proper material handling. The effectiveness of recycling relies on understanding a garment’s material composition, since different fabrics require distinct recycling methods. False labeling hinders sorting and reduces the quality of regeneration processes. Misinformation can lead to contamination of recycling streams, lowering overall efficiency and causing further environmental harm. Simply put, if we don’t know what a fabric is made of, we can’t treat or dispose of it properly.
2. Erosion of Consumer Trust
   When we discover that a garment isn’t what it claimed to be — for instance, “100% cotton” turns out to be a blend, or “Made in Italy” is a false indication — the relationship with the brand is damaged. Today’s conscious consumers highly value label honesty, and each deception undermines brand reputation. As shoppers become more attentive to sustainable choices, they often rely on labels to guide their purchases. Some consumers also have specific needs regarding fabric composition — for example, due to allergies, religious beliefs, or personal values. For many, understanding a garment’s material is also essential for assessing its environmental impact. When labels are misleading, consumers believe they’re making responsible choices, only to realize they’ve unknowingly supported practices that contradict their values.
3. Fueling Greenwashing
   Generic environmental claims (“eco,” “sustainable,” “green”) without real transparency create the illusion of doing the right thing, while the actual impact may be identical — or even worse. Deceptive labels become a marketing tool, not an information tool.
4. Legal Risks and Penalties
   In the EU market, brands that provide misleading information may face inspections, administrative sanctions, or compensation claims. Some countries are already scrutinizing environmental claims more closely to enforce greater transparency.

Do you already know of some real cases of false or misleading labeling in clothing?
Listen to this episode to find out what happened — in our country and beyond

The Causes Behind the Errors

1. Complex and Fragmented Supply Chains
   Textile supply chains often span multiple continents, involving numerous suppliers, dyeing processes, treatments, and finishing stages. Sometimes brands receive fabrics that are already blended or reprocessed, making accurate traceability extremely difficult.

2. Insufficient Testing and Quality Control
   Some brands do not test every batch or rely solely on visual checks instead of chemical analyses. This increases the margin of error when suppliers provide incomplete or partial composition data.

3. Costs and the Desire for Differentiation
   Claiming a high percentage of natural or “eco” fibers can make a product more appealing. In some cases, there’s a temptation to round up figures or present the “best-case scenario”rather than the truth.

4. Unclear Regulations or Poor Enforcement
   Labeling laws exist, but their implementation varies widely between countries. Minor violations are often barely penalized. Although brands and retailers are legally required to provide accurate information about the composition of products they place on the market, they have (so far) faced no public legal consequences for inaccurate labeling. When a brand discovers that a label is incorrect, the entire shipment — both in storage and in transit — must be recalled and re-labeled.

What a Sustainability-Focused Brand Should Do

The Dutch study serves as a wake-up call for brands in the sustainable fashion sector. It highlights the need for clear standards and rigorous controls in labeling practices to ensure accuracy. As sustainable brands strive to differentiate themselves in a saturated market, a commitment to labeling honesty can enhance credibility and strengthen consumer trust.

Brands that prioritize accurate labeling not only embody their sustainability values but also empower consumers to make informed choices. By ensuring the accuracy of fabric composition and country-of-origin information, brands can contribute to a more transparent fashion system.

The positive ripple effects of precise labeling go far beyond immediate trust: they encourage a shift toward circular economy principles, where consumers feel confident about recycling or reusing their garments — ultimately helping to reduce waste.

The Importance of Accurate Textile Labeling

In 2020, the Global Fashion Agenda report emphasized the importance of transparency, calling for greater traceability across fashion supply chains. This ongoing dialogue among industry stakeholders aligns closely with the findings of the Dutch study, pointing to the systemic change needed for the future of sustainable fashion to truly thrive.

In conclusion, incorrect labeling represents a major barrier to achieving a transparent and sustainable fashion landscape. As fashion enthusiasts and brands advocate for change, it is vital to remember that sustainable fashion is not solely about using eco-friendly materials — it encompasses the entire lifecycle of a garment. Ensuring that labeling is accurate and trustworthy is essential if we are to move toward a truly ethical and sustainable industry.

Brands should take immediate action to improve the accuracy of their labeling practices. For consumers, recognizing the importance of carefully examining labels can help guide choices that genuinely reflect their values. Together, we can foster a fashion industry built on trust, transparency, and sustainability.

* Clothing labels: accurate or not?, Circle Economy for The Ministry of Infrastructure & Waterways, 2019.

** Mislabelled and Misleading – Fur labelling problems, Fur Free Alliance, 2017

Linen

Obtained from the flax plant, it is natural, biodegradable, breathable, and cool: perfect for summer.
Optimal care: delicate machine wash in cold or warm water (maximum 30°C), without harsh spin cycles; use a mild detergent; air dry preferably. Ironing while still slightly damp at a moderately high temperature reduces creases. It tends to crease; this is normal and has its own reason.

Hemp

Robust, hypoallergenic, breathable fibers that improve with every wash: from stiff to softer over time.

Eco-friendly care: Machine wash cold or delicate cycle (maximum 30-40°C), natural soap, avoid chlorinated bleaches; air dry or dry at low temperature; iron at medium temperature. It tends to shrink slightly initially and becomes more comfortable after a few washes.

Nettle

An exceptional material, highly sustainable thanks to pesticide-free cultivation and low water consumption.
Recommended care: Hand wash or delicate machine wash with water up to 30°C; air dry, away from direct sunlight; iron at low temperature; avoid intense rubbing and harsh bleaches.

TENCEL / Lyocell (from eucalyptus cellulose)

Regenerated fiber derived from cellulose, biodegradable and uses less water than traditional cotton.
Optimal care: Hand wash preferred, or machine wash on a delicate cycle with cold or warm water (maximum 30°C) and a protective bag; Avoid high temperatures to prevent shrinkage (often 3 to 5%). Dry flat or hang in the shade, without using the dryer; iron at low heat, without steam, and with a cloth between the iron and the fabric. Avoid fabric softeners.

Recycled cotton

Derived from pre- or post-consumer waste, it drastically reduces the use of water, pesticides, and soil compared to conventional cotton. It is an ethical choice, but with shorter and more delicate fibers.
Recommended care: Machine wash cold (max 30°C) on a gentle cycle with a small load; dry naturally, avoiding the dryer to avoid stressing the fibers; iron at low heat. To increase its lifespan, wash only when necessary and with gentle, eco-friendly detergents.

Organic cotton

Sustainably grown, without pesticides or GMOs, GOTS or Oeko-Tex certified, it is machine washable and versatile.
Gentle care: Wash at up to 30°C for colors (40°C for light-colored items), gentle cycle; air dry is preferable; iron at low or medium heat; wash colors separately to avoid fading. Tends to shrink slightly.

Tips:

Follow the washing instructions on your garment’s care label. Air drying is always the most eco-friendly choice: it reduces energy consumption, preserves fibers, and extends the life of your garments. In summer, ironing is often unnecessary: many natural fabrics like linen and hemp soften with use, and their worn texture is part of their sustainable appeal.

This article is from the June edition of our free monthly e-magazine. You can also receive:

• insights on new sustainable fabrics
• practical guides for green washing
• tips for extending the life of your garments
• interviews with ethical brands

Sign up now and join the community of those who make fashion a responsible gesture

Cover photo: freepik

Cosetex has revolutionized the industry by transforming what was once considered waste into new opportunities: natural padding, high-quality yarns and collaborations with the denim world. Silvio tells us about the environmental benefits of silk, such as its ability to capture CO2 and the fact that it does not produce plastic microfibers.

But what does “silk waste” really mean? How did silk end up at the Premier Vision denim fair? And how can you give new life to a fine material without waste?

Let’s discover together the path of Cosetex, the materials that you can also use in your collections between tradition and innovation, and its contribution to a more conscious fashion.

Introduction

(0:00) Introduction

• Presentation by Silvio Mandelli and Cosetex
• Silk between luxury and innovation

The world of silk and the role of Cosetex

(1:22) What is silk waste?

• Difference between continuous and discontinuous thread
• How silk waste becomes reusable materials

(4:10) Origin of silk and the role of Cosetex

• The history of the company and the Italian roots in silk production
• The evolution of the silk market: from Italy to China and India

(6:09) The choice of suppliers

• The importance of quality and tradition in the selection of raw materials
• Relations with Chinese and Indian producers

Sustainability and innovation in silk

(7:35) Sustainability in the processing of silk waste

• Recovery of waste and its reuse
• The environmental impact compared to other fibers

The silk market and the challenges of the sector

(16:44) The evolution of the silk market

• Experimentation with silk in different fields
• The relationship between tradition and innovation

(18:57) Innovative applications of silk

• New destinations of use: from padding to technical fabrics
• Collaborations with brands in the fashion sector and home
• Silk at Denim Premiere Vision
• T.Silk

(35:45) The difficulties with companies

• Positioning a niche product
• Educating the market on materials

(38:35) Regulations in the textile sector

• How laws affect smaller companies in the sector

The future

(45:11) The future of sustainable fashion and Cosetex

• Evolution of silk
• The push from below
• G.Silk

Listen to the episode to enter the fascinating world of silk!

Here’s where you can find Cosetex:

Cosetex – 360-degree silk fiber business

https://www.cosetex.it/ – Insights

T.Silk

https://t.silk.bio/ – presentation and e-commerce

https://t.silk.bio/pages/brevetto-imbottitura-in-seta – 100% Silk padding patent

https://t.silk.bio/blogs/magazine – Blog and information

Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/T.SilkOfficial/

https://www.facebook.com/Cosetex

Instagram

@Cosetex | @tsilkcollection

https://www.instagram.com/tsilkcollection/

https://www.instagram.com/cosetex.official/

Linkedin

@Cosetex

https://www.linkedin.com/company/cosetex-seta

photo: courtesy of Cosetex

“I want to dress all in hemp,” said Totò. Those were the times when advertising urged people not to let a precious fiber, Italy’s “green gold,” disappear. This is how Glenda Giampaoli, Director of the Hemp Museum in the municipality of Sant’Anatolia di Narco (Perugia), in Valnerina, takes us to explore the fascinating world of hemp.

With her, in this episode of the podcast we learn many curiosities about a plant that has historically been fundamental to the textile industry and discover why Italy, once a world leader in the production of this autarchic fiber, saw a decline at a certain point.

You will be surprised by Glenda’s stories about the traditions of Valnerina and curiosities about hemp: did you know that fabrics can last up to a hundred years?

In addition, we will explore traditional cultivation methods, which involved sowing and harvesting at specific times of the year and techniques such as maceration in water.

Today, interest in hemp is returning, thanks to the growing awareness of its potential applications in the food and green building sectors. We discuss the possibility of resuming hemp cultivation in Italy, in light of innovative projects that aim to relaunch it.

The Hemp Museum not only preserves traditions, but is actively dedicated to engaging new generations, offering workshops and educational activities. Don’t miss the opportunity to hear how projects are developing to resume hemp cultivation in Italy and learn more about the innovations that are emerging!

From historical magazines that tell the story of the importance of hemp in fashion, to curiosities about modern and sustainable uses, this episode is an invitation to rediscover an extraordinary fiber and its potential in the present and future.

Table of Contents

• Introduction to the Hemp Museum (min: 1:00)
• History of Hemp in Italy (min: 3:00)
• Traditional Cultivation and Processing Methods (min: 5:00)
• Decline and Rediscovery of Hemp (min: 8:00)
• Historical Magazines and the Decline of Hemp (min: 12:00)
• Why is Hemp Disappearing in Italy? (min: 14:13)
• New Materials and Social Changes (min: 16:01)
• Resumption of Hemp Cultivation (min: 23:59)
• Contemporary Projects and Innovations (min: 37:34)
• 1941 Magazine on Hemp (min: 45:50)

Visit the Hemp Museum and find out its website

Dario tells us about the need for a “gentle revolution” to counter the fast fashion model, in a context in which the economy shifts wealth from many to few without actually creating well-being for humanity. Slow Fiber wants to positively change the paradigm of production, consumption and, therefore, the perception of textiles. Today, in fact, we find ourselves immersed in a consumerist and fast-fashion lifestyle, as Dario states.

Slow Fiber uses a series of KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) to evaluate the companies that join its network. Each aspect of the project is accompanied by measurable criteria, divided into mandatory and optional. These KPIs focus on five pillars: “good”, “healthy”, “clean”, “fair” and “durable”. For example, the “good” criterion requires that companies maintain their original headquarters and do not relocate, while “healthy” refers to the rigorous control of the chemistry used in production. The idea is that no company can be considered in the network if it does not meet all the criteria of these five pillars.

Listen to the episode to find out how current legislation turns into a “rubber wall” for virtuous companies. Furthermore, the concept of Made in Italy is put under the lens in the episode, where it is stated that “it is worth little or nothing” if not accompanied by effective controls. The concern is that products can be labeled as Italian even without respecting quality standards since there are no adequate controls on imports. Fast fashion lobbies heavily influence regulations, making it difficult to protect Italian sustainable practices.

Explore the common ground between food and fashion, discussing localisms and fast consumption/production, and new economic approaches such as “post growth“, more necessary than ever for a sustainable future.

We also reveal how certifications, which certainly help, can be misleading and how powerful fast fashion lobbies resist necessary changes. The European Green Deal could risk turning into a certification label that does not really address environmental issues – and not only that (find out which other important aspect it does not address). The episode highlights how many legislative initiatives tend to preserve the current business model, rather than tearing down an industrial system deemed dangerous. In short, the Green Deal may seem like a positive step, but it could mask an unchanged reality rather than bring about substantial changes.

In this dialogue that invites reflection and action, Dario paints a frank picture of the sector, helps us better understand some dynamics and introduces us to a reality that intends to sow a new way of producing and consuming by involving producers and consumers.

Table of Contents

1. 1. Definition of Slow Fiber (0:36)
   2. The comparison between textiles and agricultural supply chains (1:02)
   3. Problems of the textile supply chain (1:50)
   4. Sustainability in fashion (2:28)
   5. Career change towards textiles (3:34)
   6. Selection of member companies (9:00)
   7. Sustainability criteria and KPIs (11:39)
   8. The paradox and weight of certifications (17:23)
   9. The Slow Fiber audit system (19:06)
   10. The extra something compared to the current legislative model that wants to save both goats and cabbages (21:54)
   11. The need for a slowdown in consumption and a new economic model (24.56)
   12. Awareness-raising activities and demonstrations (34:11)
   13. Greenwashing and regulations (40:25)
   14. Future prospects and innovation (48:11)
   15. AI, blockchain and traceability (50:37)
   16. Made in Italy (53.14)
   17. Values ​​and economic model (53:17)

If you want to learn more, we recommend the Slow Fiber website and Dario’s book:

(The episode is in Italian. In case you would like to have the transcription in English write to us)

Amid a growing movement in sustainable practices, Europe’s textile industry is revisiting its roots in hemp and flax (linen) production. These natural fibres offer a blend of environmental and economic benefits, from reducing carbon footprints to reviving local economies. In this article we will explore the resurgence of these fibres across Europe.

Historical Significance and Current Landscape  

Hemp and linen have been present in human civilization for thousands of years, with evidence suggesting linen use dating back as early as 30.000 years ago in Georgia, making it the oldest known textile in human history. In ancient Egypt, linen was so highly valued it even served as a currency and was a symbol of light and purity, prized for its coolness and breathability in hot climates. During the Middle Ages, Europe, particularly Belgium, the Netherlands, and France, became centres of linen production, benefiting from their favourable climates.

In Europe, hemp was a common crop until the late 19th century when it began losing ground to cheaper imported fibres, such as cotton and, later, synthetic alternatives. The decline in hemp cultivation was accelerated by political and economic shifts, particularly in the USA where the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 heavily restricted hemp production. This legislation, coupled with similar policies in other countries, significantly reduced global hemp cultivation.

Despite this decline, regions like Flanders continue to uphold their reputation for producing high-quality linen. Today, approximately 1,500 farmers in Belgium cultivate flax, predominantly in Flanders, demonstrating a robust commitment to this enduring crop.

Today, North-Western Europe is the largest producer worldwide of linen. France, Belgium and the Netherlands together account for approximately 85% of the worlds flax cultivation for linen fibre production. The vast majority of this is located in France, which alone is responsible for about three-quarters of the world’s production of long flax fibres.

Sustainability and Environmental Impact 

Flax and hemp are considered highly sustainable crops, offering numerous environmental benefits which make them attractive options for eco-conscious farming and production methods. Both flax and hemp are drought-resistant crops that typically require less water than other major crops like cotton. Hemp, for instance, requires about half the amount of water than cotton does. Hemp typically needs around 2,401 liters of water per kilogram of fibre, while cotton needs approximately 9,758 litres needed for the same amount of cotton*.

Hemp and flax generally require fewer chemical pesticides and fertilizers compared to other crops. This leads to less chemicals leaking into local waterways, which can be harmful to aquatic life and ecosystems. Hemp also has a high resistance to pests and diseases, which minimizes the need for chemical interventions.

Linen, and hemp in particular, are both known for its ability to improve soil health. They have a deep root system that helps to prevent soil erosion and can return significant nutrients to the soil. This makes them beneficial for crop rotation, helping to maintain soil fertility and reduce the need for artificial fertilizers.

Both crops are effective at capturing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, contributing to the mitigation of climate change and CO2 levels. The rapid growth rate of hemp makes it particularly efficient at carbon capture, which it stores in its biomass.

Furthermore, products made from flax and hemp are naturally biodegradable, meaning they break down into harmless substances that can be absorbed back into the ecosystem. This contrasts sharply with synthetic fibres, which can contribute to microplastic pollution.

Beyond textile production, both flax and hemp are very versatile in the way they can be processed for different types of products that can contribute to sustainable practices. Hemp, for example, can be used to produce bioplastics, and both hemp and linen can also be applied in construction materials (like hempcrete), paper, and even biofuels, which can lead to reduced dependence on fossil fuels.

Economic and Innovative Advantages 

The resurgence of flax and hemp is set to revive and strengthen local economies through job creation in agriculture and textile production, such as spinning and weaving mills. European initiatives, like the Alliance for European Flax and Linen, play an important role in fostering market unity and ensuring high standards across the continent. These efforts are complemented by local government and European Union support for sustainable agriculture and innovative textile technologies.

Case Studies and Examples

• France: The Alliance for European Flax and Linen is a driving force in the regional development of linen cultivation, promoting sustainable practices and enhancing market competitiveness. French linen is celebrated for its quality and eco-friendliness, with the country leading Europe and globally in both cultivation and innovative textile solutions.
• Belgium: Belgian linen remains a benchmark for quality worldwide. The concentration of flax cultivation in Flanders not only supports local agriculture but also preserves a vital cultural heritage. Efforts to reintegrate processing and production in Belgium aim to capitalize on the “grown and made in Europe” appeal.
• The Netherlands: Initiatives like the Linen Project, partnered with 1m2 Vlas project, and the Crafts Council Nederland, as well as collaborations with designers such as Joline Jolink highlight the country’s innovative approach to linen production. The 1m2 Vlas project, in particular, engages the community by engaging individuals to cultivate flax on small plots of land, promoting awareness and appreciation for the crop and nurturing a deeper relationship and respect to where our clothes come from and the amount of work that goes into creating a single garment.
• Italy: Italian initiatives, supported by the Alliance for European Flax-Linen & Hemp, promote hemp and linen as sustainable textiles. Regions like Biella, known for textile craftsmanship, are central, blending traditional skills with modern practices.
• USA: The USA Linen Project supports American farmers in cultivating high-quality flax, aiming to establish a fully integrated supply chain that mirrors the European model for sustainable textile production.

Challenges and Future Outlook 

While hemp and flax offer substantial environmental and economic advantages, they face several hurdles. Regulatory restrictions linked to hemp’s association with cannabis complicate its cultivation and distribution, stalling industry growth. Additionally, a decline in traditional farming practices means there is now a crucial need to re-educate farmers and develop new agricultural methods.

Competing with cheaper synthetic fibres and cotton remains a challenge. Consumer education and marketing are essential to overcome these barriers. Furthermore, revitalizing the flax and hemp industries requires considerable investments in processing technology, as the high costs of state-of-the-art equipment can deter potential investors.

Despite these challenges, the future of the hemp and flax looks promising. Increasing consumer demand for sustainable and ethically produced goods, coupled with advancements in processing technologies, could enhance the competitiveness of these fibres. With increasing global focus on sustainability, supportive governmental policies are more likely to emerge, facilitating the growth of eco-friendly crops. Enhanced collaboration between industries, governments, and academic institutions is also expected to drive innovation and market expansion

Conclusions

The revitalization of hemp and flax in Europe symbolizes more than a return to traditional materials; it represents a strategic move towards a sustainable and economically robust textile industry. By investing in these crops, Europe is not only reclaiming its heritage but also setting a global standard for environmental stewardship and innovative industrial practices. As this trend gains momentum, it presents an opportunity for Europe to lead the textile industry into a greener, more sustainable future.

Inge Duiker

*Source: EIHA, European Industrial Hemp Association

Photo: cover, Tsuyoshi Kozu; Sergey Semin; Micheile Henderson; Isabela Kronemberger

Renewcell

Renewcell is a Swedish company known for its technology that recycles cotton T-shirts and jeans destined for landfill into a new material, Circulose, which can be used by spinners and weavers to create lyocell or viscose which is normally obtained from the deforestation of millions of trees. Circulose has been used by H&M, Levi’s, Tommy Hilfiger, Calvin Klein and Zara to produce new clothing.

At the end of February, Michael Berg, chairman of the board of directors of Renewcell, announced the bankruptcy in a press release: “This is a sad day for the environment, our employees, our shareholders, and our other stakeholders, and it is a testament to the lack of leadership and necessary pace of change in the fashion industry”. Nicole Rycroft, founder of Canopy, described the news as a “sobering moment” for the global fashion industry (Just Style).

The bankruptcy came just over a year after Renewcell’s flagship factory opened. What exactly happened?

• Insufficient support along the value chain: Despite the commitment of more than 15 leading brands, including H&M, Levi Strauss & Co, Ganni and Inditex (Zara), demand for the product has been lower than expected, leading to a lack of sufficient long-term financing for the continuation of the business. For example, H&M had agreed to purchase 18,000 tonnes by 2025. Renewcell revealed that it had not received any orders in November 2023. While brands have made promises, they have often failed to deliver on them effectively. Using more sustainable materials just for a capsule collection does not make  the large-scale production of these alternatives viable.

• Obstacles in the supply chain: Renewcell’s business model has faced challenges due to the lack of vertical integration and connections along the supply chain. This may have made it difficult to control the entire process and scale the business efficiently (Nikolay Anguelov, public policy expert at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, to Drapers). Furthermore, the lack of national infrastructure for circular fashion processes has further hindered progress.

• Management: According to Scandinavian Mind, the company has shown signs of unstable leadership, highlighted by the resignations of spokespeople Harald Cavalli and Nora Eslander, who were replaced by a high-profile marketing executive based in New York. The sudden dismissal of CEO Patrik Lundström, followed by a share sale ahead of a negative earnings call, further undermined confidence in management.

• Pioneers’ challenges: As is often the case in emerging industries, early players like Renewcell face significant obstacles. Progress in these industries is frequently uneven, dependent on massive and critical adoption (Rycroft to Fast Companies) and support across the entire value chain. Furthermore, some established players may resist by seeing pioneers as a threat to their dominance in the industry.

• Weak collaboration and stakeholder engagement: Companies in the industry recognize the importance of collaborating and involving key players. No single company can transform the entire supply chain alone or bring an entirely new supply chain to market. Even if the conditions are there for a revolution in the sector, the fashion value chain is not quite ready to support the pioneers (Just Style). Collaboration between companies is necessary.

• Competitiveness: The challenge with the competitors lies in comparing the cost of cheaper virgin fibers to more sustainable options like Circulose, which tend to have a higher market price. According to Rycroft, Circulose’s relatively high cost reflects its status as a leading innovation on the market. Renewcell expected to be able to lower the cost in a few years (Green Biz). This comparison highlights the fashion industry’s short-term approach and its focus on profits. For many businesses, particularly those listed on the stock exchange, achieving optimal profit margins remains a priority, despite growing attention to the environment and ethics (The Interline). Renewcell’s business model, which requires brands to order Circulose recycled dissolved pulp, places an additional burden on them. This deviates significantly from usual fiber sourcing practices, as most brands are unfamiliar with the origin of the fibers used in their fabrics. A brand may be pressured to choose between a more expensive but sustainable material, investing in a future supply chain, or continue to use less expensive and less eco-friendly materials to maintain short-term profitability. The situation reflects a broader trend in the fashion industry, which shows a reluctance to support and adopt innovations necessary to ensure long-term sustainability. Growing demand coupled with limited supply has no history of reducing prices, making it clear that the industry must take significant steps to meet future challenges (Forbes).

• Sustainability and logistics: Despite sustainability efforts, Renewcell’s international shipping practices have raised questions about the true sustainability of the process. Sending Circulose textile fiber to China for further production raises questions about the overall sustainability of the production cycle. Furthermore, due to the characteristics of the chemical recycling process, the Renewcell solution is mainly applicable to textile production waste, rather than to post-consumer textile waste.

• Lack of financial support: Lack of adequate funding and pressure to achieve rapid returns on investments have been key factors hindering the growth of Renewcell’s (Drapers) sustainability initiatives. Despite advanced negotiations with major shareholders and financiers, including H&M, BNP Paribas and the European Investment Bank, along with other potential investors, they have failed to secure the liquidity and capital needed to support business operations. The lack of long-term financial support has put business continuity at risk. Renewcell attributed this situation to the current capital market climate, highlighting the difficulty in raising funds for future strategic developments and the orientation towards rapid returns on investments (ROI). These factors led to the difficult decision to file for bankruptcy, despite confidence in the company’s long-term potential. Global interest in sustainability is constantly growing. However, obtaining funding at this crucial time has proven to be a difficult task. The role that sustainable materials play in combating climate change is relevant, but many people still view their long-term feasibility and scalability with skepticism. As a result, many investors are directing their funds towards sectors considered more profitable or less risky, for example artificial intelligence.

Mylo

Mylo is an innovative material developed by the US company Bolt Threads. It is a biomaterial derived from mycelium, the fibrous part of mushrooms. Mylo is designed to be a sustainable alternative to animal leather, offering an eco-friendly option for the fashion and design industry. The production of Mylo involves the controlled cultivation of mycelium, which is then processed and treated to obtain a leather-like material, but without the use of animals. Mylo has attracted the interest of several companies in the fashion and design sector who are looking for more sustainable materials for their products. Bolt Threads has collaborated with brands such as Stella McCartney, Adidas, Kering, Hermes, demonstrating the potential of this biomaterial in helping reduce the environmental impact of the fashion industry.

At the end of June 2023, Bolt Threads paused production of Mylo. “We’re not immune to the macroeconomic pressures that everyone else is facing, so we’ve put Mylo on hold to rethink what works and what will work in the future,” Dan Widmaier, CEO of Bolt Threads, tells Vogue Business.

In addition to the impact of inflation, financial support was found to be substantially insufficient, preventing the product from reaching significant commercial scale. Widmaier stressed that interest and adoption of alternative materials by luxury brands has not been enough to ensure Mylo’s success. Despite collaborations with prestigious brands and the commitment of figures such as Stella McCartney, Mylo has struggled to achieve the scalability necessary for an effective market introduction.

The future of sustainable fashion

Renewcell’s decline has sparked a wave of global concern, including over its supply chain. Factories and waste handlers in Bangladesh, Turkey and Kenya, previously partnered with Renewcell for disposal and reuse, are having to look for alternatives (Forbes).

The stories of Renewcell and Bolt Threads are a sign of the need for greater commitment and collaboration from companies and governments to adopt and support circular practices. The Canopy founder urged all stakeholders in the fashion industry to align their actions with sustainability promises and fully embrace available market solutions for real change.

It is not a constructive choice to create “sustainable” capsule collections: a broader, long-term commitment is needed.

In response to the failure, members of the Circulose Supplier Network are launching a campaign to “save” Renewcell, highlighting the importance of coordinated action by various stakeholders to promote sustainability solutions. Burak Orhan Arifioglu, a board member of yarn seller Karacasu Tekstil in Turkey, is circulating a petition on LinkedIn urging other suppliers to continue developing Circulose fibres (Green Biz).

However, there is still optimism for the future of sustainability in the fashion industry. As new directives and regulations come into force globally, it is crucial that the entire industry invests more and prioritizes long-term gains over short-term ones. The European Union has announced a series of new regulations that will push clothing companies towards more sustainable practices, thus providing a potential boost to future demand.

Established investors and industrial giants must understand the importance of supporting start-ups like Bolt Threads and Renewcell to ensure that the industry’s green revolution does not get stuck in its infancy.

With investor support, corporate commitment and a long-term regulatory environment, the industry can make great progress in the fight against climate change. It is only through collective commitment and a long-term vision that we can hope to transform the fashion industry into an example of sustainability and environmental responsibility for future generations.

Source: Drapers; Just Style; Fast Companies; Green Biz, The Interline; Forbes.

Pinatex is an innovative fabric created as a sustainable alternative to both mass-produced leather and polluting synthetic materials. It is made from pineapple leaves by Ananas Anam, a UK-based B-corporation. For the SUMAS sustainable fashion management MBA, I prepared a detailed analysis to evaluate the biological and technical life cycle, to understand the advantages and disadvantages compared to the triple bottom line* model and the SDGs to which the material contributes. This article reports the theoretical contribution related to the analysis.

*While “bottom line” traditionally refers to an organization’s financial performance, the “triple bottom line” approach broadens this perspective to also include social and environmental impacts.