LAPSE:2023.32486v1
Published Article

LAPSE:2023.32486v1
Looking for Sustainability Scoring in Apparel: A Review on Environmental Footprint, Social Impacts and Transparency
April 20, 2023
Abstract
Sustainability has been recognized as a major concern globally since the Brudtland Report, in 1987, and further reinforced in 2015 by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDG) 2030. This paper reviews the methodologies and criteria of sustainability applied to fashion products, regarding products’ environmental footprint (environmental life cycle assessment/analysis; e-LCA), the social issues (including the social life cycle assessment/analysis; s-LCA) and the transparency in reporting sustainability. In our review we seek KPIs (key performance indicators) that allow classification of a pair of shoes or a piece of cloth on a scale from A to E, i.e., products can be compared with a benchmark and classified accordingly with a simple labelling scheme, which is easily understandable by the consumers. This approach is similar to those used to classify electrical appliances, housing energy consumption for thermal comfort, food Nutri-Scores, CO2 levels of road vehicles, and tire performance. In this review we aim to identify the initiatives and measures being put into practice by the top global fashion brands. We found that, despite the existence of GRI (global sustainability reporting initiative) standard reporting, most companies follow their own methods or others created within the industry rather than those created in the scientific community. Examples include the Higg index, the Transparency Index, and the Social Codes of Conduct (CoC). In this study, we conducted an extensive review of certification schemes and labels already applied to fashion products, and identified a multitude of labels and lack of harmonization in communicating sustainability. As result, we compiled a summary table of all criteria, methodologies, and possible KPIs that can be considered the basis for a benchmark and score of a fashion product. This topic is crucial to avoid “green washing” and a lack of transparency for the buyer’s community, i.e., business to consumer (B2C), and for the business community, i.e., business to business (B2B) relationships, which comprise a complex multi-layer supply chain of suppliers and sub-suppliers. The UNSDG 2030 “Responsible Consumption and Production” frames these efforts to facilitate standardization of KPIs in terms of structure, criteria, and their measurement. The most common KPI is environmental global warming impact (expressed as CO2eq) based on life cycle assessment/analysis (LCA) principles (established in 2000), which provide an appropriate base to monitor and benchmark products. However, in our innovative review of t-shirt e-LCA, we identified a wide range of e-LCA assumptions, relating to different boundaries, allocations, functional units, and impact categories, which represent a major challenge in benchmarking.
Sustainability has been recognized as a major concern globally since the Brudtland Report, in 1987, and further reinforced in 2015 by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDG) 2030. This paper reviews the methodologies and criteria of sustainability applied to fashion products, regarding products’ environmental footprint (environmental life cycle assessment/analysis; e-LCA), the social issues (including the social life cycle assessment/analysis; s-LCA) and the transparency in reporting sustainability. In our review we seek KPIs (key performance indicators) that allow classification of a pair of shoes or a piece of cloth on a scale from A to E, i.e., products can be compared with a benchmark and classified accordingly with a simple labelling scheme, which is easily understandable by the consumers. This approach is similar to those used to classify electrical appliances, housing energy consumption for thermal comfort, food Nutri-Scores, CO2 levels of road vehicles, and tire performance. In this review we aim to identify the initiatives and measures being put into practice by the top global fashion brands. We found that, despite the existence of GRI (global sustainability reporting initiative) standard reporting, most companies follow their own methods or others created within the industry rather than those created in the scientific community. Examples include the Higg index, the Transparency Index, and the Social Codes of Conduct (CoC). In this study, we conducted an extensive review of certification schemes and labels already applied to fashion products, and identified a multitude of labels and lack of harmonization in communicating sustainability. As result, we compiled a summary table of all criteria, methodologies, and possible KPIs that can be considered the basis for a benchmark and score of a fashion product. This topic is crucial to avoid “green washing” and a lack of transparency for the buyer’s community, i.e., business to consumer (B2C), and for the business community, i.e., business to business (B2B) relationships, which comprise a complex multi-layer supply chain of suppliers and sub-suppliers. The UNSDG 2030 “Responsible Consumption and Production” frames these efforts to facilitate standardization of KPIs in terms of structure, criteria, and their measurement. The most common KPI is environmental global warming impact (expressed as CO2eq) based on life cycle assessment/analysis (LCA) principles (established in 2000), which provide an appropriate base to monitor and benchmark products. However, in our innovative review of t-shirt e-LCA, we identified a wide range of e-LCA assumptions, relating to different boundaries, allocations, functional units, and impact categories, which represent a major challenge in benchmarking.
Record ID
Keywords
eco-cost, ecolabels, key performance indicators (KPI), life cycle analysis/life cycle assessment (LCA), Sustainable Development Goals (SDG)
Subject
Suggested Citation
Gonçalves A, Silva C. Looking for Sustainability Scoring in Apparel: A Review on Environmental Footprint, Social Impacts and Transparency. (2023). LAPSE:2023.32486v1
Author Affiliations
Journal Name
Energies
Volume
14
Issue
11
First Page
3032
Year
2021
Publication Date
2021-05-24
ISSN
1996-1073
Version Comments
Original Submission
Other Meta
PII: en14113032, Publication Type: Review
Record Map
Published Article

LAPSE:2023.32486v1
This Record
External Link

https://doi.org/10.3390/en14113032
Publisher Version
Download
Meta
Record Statistics
Record Views
189
Version History
[v1] (Original Submission)
Apr 20, 2023
Verified by curator on
Apr 20, 2023
This Version Number
v1
Citations
Most Recent
This Version
URL Here
http://psecommunity.org/LAPSE:2023.32486v1
Record Owner
Auto Uploader for LAPSE
Links to Related Works
