As fashion firms flaunt green claims of “recycled,” “sustainable,” and “responsibly sourced” materials on labels and scorecards, a new report reveals top brands have actually increased their use of synthetic textiles, a major driver of microplastic pollution.
The report from the Changing Markets Foundation shows that brands such as Zara, SHEIN, Boohoo, and Lululemon are “doubling down” on their dependency on fossil fuel-based textiles.
As usage ramps up, the report details how fashion brands are employing the same tactics as the fossil fuel industry, which they continue to prop up.
While knowingly polluting, these fashion brands downplay plastic pollution, shift the blame onto consumers, and distract both the public and regulators with false solutions.
Fashion Becomes an Environmental and Human Health Risk
Synthetic fibres dominate the fashion industry, currently accounting for 69 per cent of textile production—and this is only set to rise by 2030, by which time it is projected to reach 73 per cent.
These fibres are cheap and versatile, enabling companies to produce clothing at warp speed, driving the scourge of fast fashion.
However, this also means high levels of waste, plastic pollution, and emissions—with synthetic fibres derived from fossil fuels.
Indeed, the industry is responsible for around 10 per cent of global CO2 emissions—a figure that is only growing— and, in 2019, the apparel industry generated nearly 15 per cent of total plastic pollution from all sectors.
These synthetic fabrics release microfibres, a type of microplastic released from clothing throughout its life cycle, from production and use to end-of-life.
Once these microfibres have detached from clothing, they can be transported by air or carried into water during cleaning.
In fact, synthetic textiles are responsible for roughly 35 per cent of microplastics released into the oceans worldwide.
In contrast to natural fibres, which degrade over time, studies have shown that synthetic fibres don’t have the same biodegradability.
Microplastic contamination of soil and farmlands is also well recorded, the report said.
Further, as the Changing Markets Foundation outlines, microplastics lead to potentially significant and not yet fully understood health issues.
Indeed, microplastics are found in human breast milk and placenta, raising concerns about infant health, and have been linked to increased stroke and heart attack risk, chronic inflammation of the lungs, intestinal issues, and many other health problems.
“Synthetic fibres from textiles have become one of the most prevalent types of microplastic pollutants in the environment and are being identified in numerous human organs. So heavy is their use by manufacturers and so heavy is the pollution that it is fair to say that fashion itself is becoming an environmental and human health risk,” said marine pollution expert Dr Sedat Gündoğdu, responding to the report.
Doubling Down & Covering up
In April 2024, the Changing Markets Foundation and its partners wrote to 50 global clothing brands and retailers to better understand whether or not they are fulfilling their green pledges.
Its questionnaire requested disclosure on their use of synthetic fibres, their commitment to phase them out, policies on microfibre release, and positions on legislation proposed in the EU Textiles Strategy and the Global Plastic Pollution Treaty.
To measure impact, brands were divided into four categories: leading the shift, could do better, trailing behind and red zone.
The results?
Twenty-seven of the brands (more than half the companies) failed to respond in part or in full.
This compares to 44 per cent in 2022 and 17 per cent in 2021.
“The level of corporate secrecy has more than tripled since our surveys began in 2021,” the report reads.
Just two companies—Reformation and Hugo Boss—were found to be “leading the shift.” The former plans to phase out virgin synthetics by 2030 and reduce all synthetics (virgin and recycled) to less than 1 per cent of total sourcing by 2025.
Hugo Boss, meanwhile, plans to eliminate polyester and polyamide by 2030. However, its use of synthetics has grown by 143 per cent since 2020.
The vast majority—45 out of 50—were either “trailing behind”—marked by limited transparency and a heavy or increasing reliance on synthetics—or in the “red zone,” having minimal or no transparency.
Some of the companies in the red zone include Patagonia, Adidas, Boohoo, Burberry, LVMH, Shein and Walmart.
This poor performance and lack of action comes despite brands’ awareness of the risks associated with synthetics use.
Indeed, the report detailed that a new element of the enquiry asked companies to identify sustainability or other risks related to synthetic fibres. Seventeen companies responded, with microfibre shedding, microplastic pollution, impact on marine ecosystems and biodiversity emerging as common themes. This was alongside carbon emissions, the use of non-renewable resources, biodegradability, and chemicals in processing.
Eighty-eight per cent of respondents included microfibres or microplastics in their answers on the risks of synthetics.
The Red Zone
While the likes of Shein and Boohoo have become synonymous with polluting synthetic clothing and fast fashion, others in the red zone, such as Patagonia, may come as a surprise.
In the report, the clothing brand—previously named UN Champion of the Earth—is called out for its lack of transparency and failure to ditch synthetics.
“Instead of closing the tap on synthetics, Patagonia is focusing on managing the end-of-life release of microfibres,” the report said.
It is outlined that while the brand lists “comprehensive” microfibre research projects online, it also lacks a “clear policy” with “specific targets” for reducing microplastic release.
Shein was highlighted as the worst synthetics offender, with 82 per cent of its fibre portfolio comprised of synthetic fibres. Public data also suggests that the company is the largest user of synthetic fibres by volume.
This is all the more concerning when taking into account that the brand is the leading fast fashion company in the US and has grown twenty-fold since its market entry in the country in 2018.
Boohoo came in second for its share of synthetic fibres within its total garment production portfolio at 69 per cent (compared to 64 per cent in 2022) of total fibres used, followed by Lululemon at 67 per cent (up from 62 per cent in 2022), Aldi at 60 per cent and New Look at 56 per cent (down from 60 per cent in 2021).
Meanwhile, Inditex disclosed the highest use of synthetics by volume at 212,886 tonnes in 2023. This is up from 178,030 tonnes in the 2022 survey.
Failure to Act
The report reveals that an uptick in the use of synthetics is now the industry trend.
In fact, since the Changing Markets Foundation published its first survey, around half of the companies that responded have increased their use of synthetics.
Five maintained their use of synthetics with “insubstantial fluctuations,” and only three companies decreased it, while four companies left this section blank.
“Coupled with the remaining 27 companies that didn’t respond to the survey, this shows a disturbing lack of transparency,” the report said.
What’s more, four brands that had promised to reduce their synthetics use in 2022 actually expanded their synthetic share or volume from 2022 to 2024.
“Fashion is at a critical juncture, with major brands doubling down on the fast fashion model, flooding the market with disposable, polluting fabrics. These companies continue to bet big on plastic fibres, showing little intention to change and resorting to tactics borrowed from the fossil fuel industry to distract and delay real progress,” said Changing Markets Foundation’s Senior Campaign Manager Urska Trunk.
Regulatory Changes Incoming
This resistance to change comes despite regulatory backlash and the development of a global plastics treaty, which is in ongoing negotiations.
Indeed, according to the report, over 30 regulatory measures are expected worldwide in the next two to four years. These measures will target everything from import restrictions and product design guidelines to textile waste and due diligence. Meanwhile, a legally binding UN treaty on plastic pollution is to be presented by negotiators by the end of this year.
That said, the report notes that EU legislation is full of loopholes, lacking in bite, and could result in unintended consequences, such as enabling fast fashion brands to “legally promote” their products as ‘green’.
Likewise, the treaty, despite its potential, could be watered down, it said. Indeed, according to Planet Tracker, it has been heavily lobbied by fossil fuel and chemical industry players.
Brands had a “tepid” response to both, it was shared.
“While regulators are beginning to act, they must remain vigilant,” commented Trunk. “We need strong, decisive action to steer fashion away from its dependency on fossil fuels and towards creating high-quality clothes that people want to keep for longer.”
Getting Fashion to Quit its Plastics Addiction
Indeed, the report makes a number of recommendations to brands, retailers, EU legislators, and citizens on how to steer the sector on the right path.
For brands and retailers, the report calls for concrete, measurable, and time-bound targets that reduce the use of materials, with a 50 per cent reduction in fossil fuel materials by 2030.
Strategies and measures to reduce pollution from the shedding of microfibres from synthetics are also underlined, alongside investment in “true” circularity, transparent supplier information, and climate targets, aligned with the UN High-Level Expert Group report on net-zero targets for non-state actors.
Meanwhile, for lawmakers, the report recommends that legislation on the unintentional release of microplastics from textiles be enacted, alongside a tax on virgin plastic materials, action to prevent false solutions, and the enforcement of regulations to prevent companies from making misleading and unsubstantiated green claims.
Finally, turning its attention to citizens, the non-profit urges individuals to exercise their purchasing power, buy only from brands with clear commitments, and do what they can to raise awareness of fossil fuel fast fashion.
By Madaline Dunn, Editor, ESG Mena.
