The European Union has officially adopted legislation that places full financial responsibility on textile producers for the end-of-life of their products, marking a significant step towards reducing textile waste and promoting a circular economy. Under the new Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) regime, producers of all types of textiles—including clothing, footwear, bedding, accessories, curtains, and optionally mattresses—will be required to cover the costs of collection, sorting, and recycling of their products. This regulation applies to companies inside and outside the EU selling into EU markets, with micro-enterprises granted an extra year to comply. Industry associations have expressed varied reactions to the new legislation. EuRIC, the European Recycling Industries’ Confederation, welcomed the introduction of mandatory EPR schemes for textiles, emphasizing the need for harmonized implementation across member states. In a joint statement with FEAD, the European Federation of Waste Management and Environmental Services, EuRIC highlighted that "the introduction of EPR schemes across the EU is essential to safeguard competition in the single market and to incentivize much-needed investments in collection, sorting, and recycling infrastructure for post-consumer textiles" EuRIC . However, concerns have been raised about the potential challenges of implementing these schemes effectively. The European Environment Bureau (EEB) and other NGOs have pointed out that the proposed EPR scheme for textiles omits setting targets for waste prevention, collection, reuse, and recycling. They advocate for the inclusion of specific targets to ensure that the legislation leads to tangible environmental benefits EEB - The European Environmental Bureau . Social enterprises, which play a vital role in the collection, sorting, reuse, and resale of textiles, must be fully recognized within the waste legislation and EPR frameworks. The Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR) emphasizes that these actors should have fair access to funding and partnership opportunities, as their unique contributions can enhance the circular economy while delivering strong social outcomes CEMR CCRE . As the EU member states work towards establishing their EPR schemes within the next 30 months, the success of this legislation will depend on its implementation. Stakeholders across the textile value chain are calling for clear guidelines, adequate support for reuse and recycling infrastructure, and inclusive governance to ensure that the EPR schemes effectively contribute to a circular textile economy.

At the EU Environment Council, Commissioner Jessika Roswall warned that without urgent EU and national action, Europe’s recycling industry faces serious threats. She urged Member States to use current waste regulation flexibilities and advance extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes for textiles. A strong recycling sector is essential for circularity and competitiveness but is strained by high energy costs, volatile material prices, and unfair competition from uncertified imports—especially in plastics and textiles.  With 2025 waste separation rules looming, Roswall said the crisis could worsen without support. While the 2026 Circular Economy Act will strengthen the framework, she called for immediate steps like tighter import controls and better use of EU funds. Italian Deputy Minister Vannia Gava backed early action but stressed the need for coordinated EU efforts.

Sweden said Thursday that some used clothes can now be thrown away with regular trash, after an EU ban on textile disposal overwhelmed municipalities and flooded recycling centres. The decision, effective October 1, follows the European Union's decision this year requiring member countries to implement separate textile recycling, alongside existing processes for glass, paper and food waste. Textiles are then sorted to either be reused or recycled as padding, isolation or composite materials. But recycling centres in Sweden and other EU countries have struggled to keep up with the influx that ensued. "Since the start of the year, the amount of textile waste collected has increased significantly, and with it the costs of sorting," the Swedish government said in a statement. The new regulation defines which textiles are to be sorted and which can be directly thrown in the trash, such as torn socks, stained textiles and overly worn clothes, environment minister Romina Pourmokhtari told reporters. Humana Sverige, which collects and sells used clothing, says that "the influx of textiles we receive has dramatically increased". Humana said it was closing 600 of its 1,300 collection points in order to limit the flow. "It's impossible for us to handle everything," the organisation explained. The issue is not limited to Sweden.Damaged clothes are sent to sorting centres in Europe, but the entire sector is overwhelmed due to this regulation.

When the EU decided that all member states must start collecting textiles separately by 2025, the aim was clear: to reduce one of the most environmentally harmful waste streams and create conditions for reuse and recycling. But the first attempts in several countries have backfired massively and actually worsened the problem. At the same time there is a constant push for the false narrative about textile waste from second-hand export to African countries. This obscures the view of the real problems and opportunities to create circularity. The textile sector is one of the world’s most polluting industries. It consumes vast amounts of water, chemicals and energy, while driving global resource use. On average, EU citizens buy around 13 kilos of new textiles per person every year, while much of the old clothing ends up in waste bins and is incinerated. Bringing textiles into a circular system is therefore central to Europe’s climate and resource goals. Sweden – a sad example of the challenges Sweden moved early, introducing a ban on textiles in household waste in January 2025. But the collection system soon collapsed when people started to throw dirty and damaged garments into collecting bins. Charities raised the alarm, recycling centres filled up, and the government was forced to backtrack. From October, households will once again be allowed to throw damaged textiles into residual waste – while clean and wearable items must still be collected separately. Uneven progress across Europe The problems are not unique to Sweden. On the EU level, only about 15% of textiles are currently collected separately so Europe’s textile transition faces several hurdles at the moment: Insufficient infrastructure: - Too few collection points and weak logistics. - Limited sorting and recycling capacity: Technology not yet at the necessary scale. - Weak economic incentives: Recycled textiles are expensive and hard to sell, leaving systems dependent on subsidies. - Unclear responsibility: It is still unresolved whether consumers, municipalities, producers or charities should bear the main responsibility for collecting and/or sorting. Blaming African second-hand import At the same time there is a constant push in media for the narrative about textile waste in African countries. It is said that almost half of the second-hand import to countries like Ghana and Kenya is unusable clothes, discarded upon arrival.  But as we have documented in our earlier research , this is false.  In reality, local studies suggest that the demand for second-hand clothes actually exceeds supply and the "mountains of textile waste" has not been found anywhere. They are simply not there. Imported second-hand garments play a crucial economic role in many African communities, providing affordable clothing and supporting local livelihoods and the idea that half of it would be thrown away is totally illogical for anyone who has the least knowledge about it. No focus on the real issues So instead of focusing on the real problems; overproduction and overconsumption in combination with a "wear it one time and then throw-away"-attitude, the debate is focusing and attacking those who already are an important part of a circular textile economy.  European policymakers considering stricter limits on second-hand exports should note that such restrictions could inadvertently worsen Europe’s own textile problem. If reusable garments have no outlet abroad, they are more likely to remain in European waste streams, increasing pressure on collection systems, recycling capacity, and local charities that handle textile sorting. In short, Europe risks creating its own “textile mountains” while addressing a problem that largely does not exist in Africa. A crucial transition Getting textile collection right is essential for the EU’s climate and environmental agenda. Experiences so far show that much more is needed: investment in recycling industries, harmonised standards, and clearer producer responsibility – alongside robust support for textiles reuse via global second-hand clothes exports to regions with genuine demand. Until then, Europe’s textile mountains will continue to grow – and old clothes will remain waste rather than a resource and opportunities for other parts of the world.

A new alliance, the PRO Circularity Alliance, is set to join the European landscape and will be officially launched on 15 September in Frankfurt, Germany, bringing together PROs from various product streams, including textiles. The initiative was created to strengthen the role of PROs in Europe’s circular economy and to ensure that extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes remain effective, transparent, and fit for the future. The founding members of the Alliance are three German organisations: GRS Service GmbH, Stiftung GRS Batterien, and Reclay Holding GmbH.  Positioning itself as an open network, the PRO Circularity Alliance aims to engage in dialogue with European industry associations, policymakers, and stakeholders. Its mission is to develop common standards, drive efficiency gains, and reinforce the contribution of PROs to a sustainable circular economy. Selected PROs from across Europe will gather at the launch event to discuss the organisation’s objectives, governance model, and future programme of activities.

When the researchers followed the flow of second-hand clothing donations from Sweden to Kenya, they discovered a successful circular model and found no evidence for the claims that Europe is dumping it's textile waste in Kenya. The study was conducted and authored by IVL, the Swedish Environmental Research Institute, and commissioned by Humana Lithuania. The research explores the environmental, economic, and social benefits of exporting second-hand clothing (SHC) from Sweden to Kenya, at a pivotal time in Europe following the enforcement of mandatory textile collection under the EU Waste Framework Directive.   The study finds that a prevalent criticism – that exporting second-hand clothes to Africa constitutes dumping of low-quality garments – is not supported by evidence. Given Kenya’s high import taxes on mitumba, an East African term for second-hand clothes, importing textiles to discard them in landfills or incinerators would be economically unfeasible. Amanda Martvall , an expert from IVL and co-author of the report, said, "The mitumba market in Kenya is a practical demonstration of a successful circular economy model. It effectively extends textile life and clearly disproves the dumping narrative." IVL - Swedish Environmental Research Institute Read more: The elusive truth behind the second-hand export debate

An article in Kenyan Daily Nation examines how the Russia-Ukraine conflict is reshaping Kenya’s second-hand clothing trade, disrupting shipping routes and driving up costs, including the price of mitumba. Since imports from Europe and the US are considered higher quality, the disruption of Mediterranean routes has directly affected mitumba sales in Gikomba and Toi markets. MCAK Chair Teresiah Wairimu explained:  "Because of this war, a shipment from Europe has to change route. A consignment that once took one-and-a-half months to reach Kenya now takes three months. This delay not only affects availability, but also raises import costs, and that expense must be recovered."  She added that inflation, shifting fashion trends, and a weakening shilling further complicate the trade:  "As the shilling depreciates, importation costs rise, which are passed on to traders and eventually buyers. Outdated styles fetch lower prices, while new designs, produced with costlier materials, naturally sell at higher rates. Poor-quality, old fashion items remain cheaper than trendy, high-quality pieces."  According to interviews conducted by the Daily Nation, the mitumba trade remains profitable and vital, offering traders a reliable source of daily income despite these challenges.

Ultra-fast fashion is worsening the textile waste crisis. On Wednesday, 13 Swiss organisations, including Public Eye and Fashion Revolution Switzerland, dumped five tons of old clothes in Bern’s Bundesplatz to protest the issue. Their message: Switzerland is drowning in discarded fashion. They’re calling on Parliament and the Federal Council to support fair, sustainable fashion through political action. With the rise of brands like Shein and Temu, global clothing production has soared, leading to 100,000 tons of barely worn, low-quality clothes being incinerated or exported from Switzerland each year, often made under exploitative conditions. Source: Take to News

Newly enforced EU laws requiring mandatory separate collection of textile waste have triggered a system‑wide breakdown across Europe—most starkly demonstrated in Sweden—causing major disruptions to the second‑hand clothing ecosystem. Sweden, one of the first EU countries to adopt the January 1, 2025 deadline, has seen recycling centers reach breaking point. Municipal facilities reported a 60% surge in textile volumes  in early 2025, with collection centers “completely overwhelmed”  by the influx. Sweden's environment ministry announced new rules permitting exceptionally worn, stained, or tattered textiles to be discarded with regular waste beginning October 1, as systems buckle under pressure. Humana Sweden, handling over 1,300 collection points, has already shuttered nearly half— 600 sites closed —due to unmanageable intake and costs. Reuse att risk Experts warn that mixing low‑value, non‑reusable fabrics with higher quality donations is undermining existing reuse value chains. A joint study by IVL and Humana Lt reveals that poorly sorted collections harm transnational reuse systems that formerly shipped high‑quality garments from Sweden to second‑hand markets in Kenya and beyond. Reuse‑ready garments are being contaminated by unsellable waste, severely reducing their market value. Before the law change, Humana Lt sorted roughly 76% for reuse, but the emerging chaos is blurring lines between reusable and recycling‑bound textiles. A Broader EU Breakdown Although EU directives mandate all member states to implement separate textile collection by 2025 and progressive extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes covering costs of sorting and recycling, infrastructure remains inadequate across the continent. Local governments and civil society groups are lagging on compensation. Without EPR systems in full operation, the economic burden has fallen hard on municipal waste systems and charitable collectors, who face mounting costs with little support. For organizations like Artikel2 , Myrorna , and Human Bridge , the new law has converted thousands of collection sites into net liabilities—handling more garbage than reusable donations. Some are actively scaling back services or pulling out of municipal contracts altogether. Consequences for the Second‑Hand Industry The unfolding chaos presents a direct threat to the second‑hand clothing sector: Diminished quality  of donations, reducing resale potential. Higher sorting costs , limiting profitability. Reputational risk , as donations end up landfilled or incinerated contrary to donor intent. Reduced global reuse streams , as export quality drops and clean supply to markets like Kenya wanes. Europe’s fashion industry is particularly vulnerable to fast fashion’s influence. New EPR regulations aim to push producers to fund textile recycling—but the implementation gap leaves second‑hand chains at risk while systemic improvements lag. Sources: Humana Sweden Financial Times Vouge Business European Environmental Agency Texfash Apparel Views

Since 2021, much of the debate around the environmental impact of the global textile industry has been dominated by reports alleging that Europe is dumping its clothing waste in African countries. However, these reports do not hold up to factual review. The evidence instead points to a narrative that has misled journalists, politicians, environmental activists, and the public alike. But how could such a widespread misperception take root? The year 2021 plays a pivotal role in this story.That was the year when claims began to circulate stating that 40% or more of Europe’s second-hand clothing exports to African countries consisted of unsellable garments, considered waste upon arrival. We've all seen the widely circulated images of rivers, beaches, and dumpsites in Ghana—images that contributed to the country being labelled “the dumping ground for Europe’s unwanted clothes”. In the second-hand industry, however, these claims have been met with considerable scepticism and in Ghana they have even taken to the streets to protest against these “unsubstantiated claims”. Watch clip from protests in Ghana here Mountains of textile waste in Ghana is mostly plastic. We searched for the mountains of textile waste In our previous article we decided to go to Ghana and look for the “mountains of textile waste”. But we couldn’t find them. There is undoubtedly an overwhelming amount of waste, but it is mostly plastic. Textile waste is only a few percent of the total waste stream in Ghana, and it does not come from second-hand imports. You can read the full story here.   So the next question is of course: how could this happen? A piece of research gains traction It's hard to find substantial references to exported textile waste to Africa prior to 2021. Something clearly shifted that year. In fact, two significant developments occurred in the months between autumn 2021 and summer of 2022 that seem essential in the formation of this narrative. Late 2021 the OR Foundation emerged—a US- and Ghana based non-profit organisation, advocating for environmental justice, ecological prosperity, and a new model of fashion beyond consumerism. They published a research into textile waste in Ghana. They called it a  “multimedia presentation”, and it’s emotional appeal, photos and videos seemed to show a rather difficult situation with textile waste emerging from second-hand import. The presentation gained rapid traction—picked up by major media outlets, widely shared on social media, and even discussed within EU policy circles. Journalists and politicians forwarding unsupported claims As media coverage and the OR Foundation’s own public relations began reaching policymakers and analysts within the European Union, the waste narrative and the 40% figure started to emerge in reports and presentations from EU. This has probably accelerated the work with policies to restrict the export of second-hand clothing from the EU to non-EU countries. In several reports, EU officials directly cite the 40% figure as justification for proposing stricter regulations—some even advocating for second-hand clothing to be classified as waste at the point of export. This is one of these reports, from the European Environment Agency. Even if the OR Foundations research often is referred to in the media as a study or a report, it is important to note that none of their official publications detail their methodology. However, it has been mentioned that it is based on interviews with a number of second-hand clothing traders in Ghana.   Funding announced The second key development occurred a couple of months after OR Foundations presentation in 2021, and sheds further light on this evolving narrative: the disclosure of the foundation’s funding sources. In 2022, it was announced that Shein—a multinational Chinese ultra-fast-fashion giant— entered a "multi-year agreement between The Or Foundation and Shein to create an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Fund. In a global first, Shein will commit $50 Million to the fund over five years". This is a corporation that, to most, likely appears as one of the greatest threats to what the OR Foundation claims to be fighting against. Shein has frequently been singled out in environmental debates as one of the worst offenders in the global fashion industry. Ultra-fast-fashion refers to extremely low-cost garments, produced rapidly on-demand and designed for short-term use. These clothes are often worn only a few times before being discarded. Crucially, they are largely made from synthetic, plastic-based materials—contributing significantly to environmental degradation. Like other Asia-based ultra-fast-fashion companies, Shein has seen explosive global growth in recent years. Yet one market remains relatively underdeveloped for the brand: Africa. In many African countries that import second-hand clothing, these goods dominate the local fashion market. Studies show that up to 90% of the population purchase and wear second-hand garments to some extent. This might be perceived to represent a significant obstacle to the expansion of ultra-fast-fashion companies on a continent with 1.5 billion potential customers. Summary There is no scientific evidence or peer-reviewed study to support the claim that 40% of second-hand clothing imported into African countries consists of unsalable items that are immediately dumped in landfills. On the contrary, several academic studies suggest that a more realistic figure is below 5%. These studies have been conducted in major second-hand import markets such as Ghana, Kenya, and Uganda.Textile waste levels in African nations are not disproportionately high compared to other continents, and the waste is certainly not primarily coming from second-hand imports. Despite this, both media reporting and the documents underpinning EU policy decisions frequently reference the same “study” — the research presented by the OR Foundation in 2021. Academic research suggesting significantly lower figures is entirely absent from the EU’s official policy reports. You can read two of them below. The OR Foundation has never concealed its financial support from Shein, the Chinese ultra-fast-fashion giant. The foundation maintains that both it and Shein are sincere in their efforts to reduce the fashion industry’s environmental harm. OR Foundation representatives have also verbally stated that they remain critical of Shein’s environmental practices. However, the authors of this article have found no documented criticism of Shein from the organisation in any public material.  Written by Thomas Lundkvist Read more:   The elusive truth behind the second-hand export debat e - Part 1 Read more:   GUCDA Report refute claims of textile waste in Ghana About Reuse News Reuse News is a news platform covering developments in reuse, recycling and environmental issues  related to the textile industry. Our work adheres to professional journalistic and editorial standards. Our goal is to support better-informed journalists, influencers, researchers and policymakers in the textile sector. We are funded by organisations active in clothing collection, second-hand trade and international development work, and the initiative was born out of a growing need to counter misinformation in this field.

undreds of dealers and traders in the second-hand clothing industry in Accra, Ghana entered the streets Thursday to protest against what they call unbalanced and false narratives about the industry. In the crosshairs of the protesters' anger is the OR Foundation, an organization that has for several years claimed that the second-hand industry is exacerbating the waste problems in Ghana. The Ghana Used Clothing Dealers Association issued a statement in connection with the event, where they explained their reasons for the protest: The OR Foundation has consistently portrayed the used clothing trade in a negative light - spreading false, unbalanced, and damaging narratives that seek to discredit our work and tarnish the image of Ghana internationally. These reports have painted an inaccurate picture of our operations, ignoring the significant role our industry plays in job creation, poverty reduction, and sustainable livelihoods for thousands of Ghanaians.  We find these actions not only disrespectful to our trade, but also harmful to the dignity and reputation of the Ghanaian people. The OR Foundation’s continuous misrepresentation of the Kantamanto market, in particular, is unacceptable and must stop.  During the protest, the participants held up images published by the OR Foundation, they believe are fake and not reflecting reality. Several other news platforms have notised the protest and reported about it: Texfash: "Misinformation campaign condemned" Ecotextile: "Protest against campaign claims" Joyonline: "Textile waste claims anger dealers" Here you can read more about the story that form the basis of today´s demonstration.

In two recent articles in the Financial Times they highlight the critical issue of fashion and textile waste. And, as a society, we must tackle the environmental damage caused by the fashion industry’s relentless overproduction. Extended producer responsibility (EPR) is an important tool to hold brands accountable for the full lifecycle of their products. As a representative of the second-hand clothes trade in Ghana, I support the idea that EPR funds should “follow the flow of garments”. But EPR schemes in the EU and beyond must reflect the realities of global textile reuse and support what already works. The second-hand clothing trade is the most established and scalable solution to textile overproduction and waste, and this is as true in Ghana as anywhere else. Global reuse keeps garments in circulation longer, reduces demand for new production and stops clothing from being sent to landfill or incineration too soon. Europe generates far more used clothing than it can reuse domestically and, in countries like ours, demand is very strong for these goods. In Ghana, this trade not only meets essential clothing needs but also directly supports the livelihoods of approximately 2.5mn people, especially benefiting women and youth through job creation and entrepreneurship. Policies that treat exports as waste by default, or restrict the flow of reusable clothing, risk undermining both environmental and social benefits. Policymakers, brands and consumers must embrace the global value of reuse and ensure garments continue to flow where they are both needed and valued. This isn’t just about cutting waste — it’s about making circularity work in the real world, from Brussels to Accra. Edward Atobrah Binkley General Secretary of the Ghana Used Clothing Dealers Association, Accra, Ghana  “Solving fashion’s waste problem”, Report , FT Weekend, May 31 “Fast fashion stuck in production-consumption rut”, Special Reports , May 22