This is Maja Nellström - Project manager at IVL - Swedish Environmental Research Institute. Her team recently published a report examining and comparing climate impact from reuse (second-hand), recycling and incineration. A recent study by the IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute has provided a comprehensive assessment of the environmental, social, and economic sustainability of various methods for managing textiles collected in Sweden. The research focused on reuse and recycling practices both within Europe and internationally, as well as the option of incineration and it show that reuse is by far the best option for the climate. The findings indicate that reusing textiles offers the most significant climate benefits, regardless of whether the reuse occurs in Europe or elsewhere. This advantage is primarily because the highest environmental impact arises during the manufacturing phase of clothing. Extending the lifespan of garments through reuse reduces the need for new production, thereby diminishing the associated environmental footprint. The study also examined the environmental implications of recycling compared to incineration with energy recovery. While recycling textiles can lead to lower water consumption—benefiting processes like cotton cultivation—the difference in climate impact between recycling and incineration in Europe is relatively minimal. Beyond environmental considerations, the research highlighted the economic and social advantages of the second-hand clothing market. For households with limited budgets, this market provides both income opportunities and access to affordable apparel. The study underscores the importance of ensuring that exported textiles are genuinely reused and not merely disposed of in importing countries. A high rate of disposal among exported textiles can diminish the environmental benefits of reuse. Additionally, the longer a garment is used and the more it replaces the need for new clothing, the greater the environmental advantage. These insights are particularly pertinent in light of Sweden’s new legislation mandating the separate collection of textiles, which came into effect on January 1, 2025. The law aims to promote sustainable handling of collected textiles, and this study provides valuable guidance for stakeholders involved in textile management decisions. In conclusion, the report advocates for prioritizing textile reuse over recycling and incineration to achieve the most favorable environmental outcomes. It also calls for careful consideration of the quality and destination of exported textiles to maximize their sustainability benefits. Link: The IVL-Report

Hundreds 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.

"Few industries might be so misunderstood as our industry. This is particularly sad when these misconceptions start to influence politicians and other decision makers" These are the words from Örjan Österdal, CEO of Humana Second Hand Fundraising Projects, one of Europe's largest second-hand clothing enterprises. A non-profit enterprise that´s been a part of the second-hand trading since the nineties. "I would argue that the second-hand clothing industry is a very well functioning circular economy, but it is now under a threat from politicians whose ambition is just that - to create a circular economy system. It is a paradox, to put it mildly" The prevailing media narrative suggesting that 40% or more of second-hand clothes imported into Africa end up in landfills has faced strong criticism from experts and operators within the second-hand industry. These claims are not only unverified and misleading but also disregard the economic logic of the trade. “It would be both illogical and uneconomical to import clothes that end up being discarded,” says Örjan Österdal. “First of all, the cost of importing second-hand clothing is extremely high. In Kenya, for example, taxes, tariffs, and fees amount to over 70% of the purchase price.” Read more: Misconceptions about textile waste in Africa threatens the circular textile economy But, let´s start from the beginning. How does this industry really work? The truth about the second-hand industry is probably far from what you've been told What actually happens to the clothes we drop into collection bins outside shopping centers and recycling facilities? Many people assume that “someone” collects them and ships them off to Africa, where they are left for anyone to take. For many years, secondhand clothing has been part of a professionalised global industry—a commercial trade spanning multiple wholesale levels across continents and providing employment for millions of people. The container you place your clothes in is owned by an organisation or company. They are responsible for purchasing and placing the container, regularly emptying it, performing an initial sorting, and then selling the clothes to a sorting company. This process helps fund the collection operation, which requires labor and transportation. Many nonprofit organisations use the revenue from selling unsorted second-hand clothing to finance aid projects, while some for-profit companies also participate in this trade. Export and import The sorting company that purchases the clothes conducts a more detailed sorting process—sometimes into more than 400 different categories. Items are separated by type, such as shoes, jackets, pants, and sweaters, and further sorted by size, gender, fashion style, or material. Once sorted and packaged, the clothing is sold either to domestic market retailers or exported to importers in other countries. Importers then pay duties and taxes before reselling the clothing to shops or smaller wholesalers within their country. These smaller wholesalers, in turn, supply market vendors and secondhand shops. In many African countries, thousands of stores specialize in selling second-hand clothing. Second-hand industry offers affordable clothing for millions For many African nations, where a significant portion of the population lives below the poverty line, second-hand clothing offers a vital opportunity to purchase affordable apparel. Unlike in Europe, where second-hand shopping is often viewed as a niche or trendy choice, in Africa, it forms a fundamental part of the clothing market. Studies show that approximately 90% of Africans buy second-hand clothing (source: Institute of Economic Affairs Kenya ) Employment and economic impact In Kenya alone, government estimates suggest that the second-hand clothing industry employs over 2 million people. The customs and tax revenues generated are substantial, and if second-hand imports were to stop, it would deliver a devastating blow to the national economy, the job market, and the general population. Redistribution of surplus Clothing overconsumption in Europe is staggering. In Sweden, for example, the average person is estimated to purchase between 50 and 60 garments per year. Clothes that are no longer wanted are either discarded or, if deemed useful to others, placed in collection bins. In contrast, the average African citizen buys only 2–4 garments per year and can only afford to spend a fraction of what a European would pay for a single item. This redistribution process extends the lifespan of clothing that would otherwise be incinerated or sent to landfills, while also providing access to quality garments for poorer communities. In essence, it represents a global redistribution of surplus. Climate impact A recent study from the IVL Institute in Sweden examines the textile industry's climate impact and compares various methods for managing clothing surplus in European countries. The findings reveal that reusing textiles provides the most significant climate benefits, regardless of whether the reuse takes place in Europe or elsewhere. This advantage stems from the fact that the highest environmental impact occurs during the manufacturing phase of clothing. By extending the lifespan of garments through reuse, the demand for new production decreases, thereby reducing the overall environmental footprint. The study also compared the environmental effects of recycling versus incineration with energy recovery. While recycling can reduce water consumption—particularly beneficial for processes like cotton cultivation—the difference in climate impact between recycling and incineration within Europe is relatively minor. Read More: The IVL report Conclusions So what you have been told about the second-hand industry is probably quite far from truth. Within the industry, there is a strong concern—and perhaps even fear—that exports from Europe to regions such as Africa may be restricted or even banned. The reasons for this include the belief that a significant portion of the clothing ends up directly in landfills in Africa. The troubling aspect of this prediction is that, firstly, the proportion of waste among imported clothing is not as large as often claimed, and secondly, restricting exports would have a highly negative impact on millions of people. The obvious risk would be that ultra-fast fashion companies, such as Shein, would expand in the African market, which would significantly contribute to growing landfills since their clothes usually are not durable enough for reuse. At the same time, the amount of clothing we are forced to burn in Europe would increase significantly, as we would no longer be able to export them for reuse to parts of the world where they are in demand. Written by Thomas Lundkvist

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 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.   What looks like textiles from a distance, is actually plastic, not dumped clothes. 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. This is how deceptive narratives about textile waste actually fuel ultra fast fashion. 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. 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.

A wave of policy changes is currently underway in the EU, aimed at tackling the environmental damage caused by the textile industry. Yet early signs suggest these reforms may be making the problem much worse. One of the reasons might be that some of the data it is based on, is flawed. It has been claimed, that the export of second-hand clothing to African countries is in fact a way for European countries to dump unwanted clothing waste. Nearly all reports on the subject come from Ghana. So we decided to go there. This is what we found—or perhaps more accurately, what we didn’t. There is no doubt that the textile industry is among the most climate-damaging sectors. The environmental impact of clothing production is immense, and garments are increasingly made from synthetic, plastic-based materials. Add to that the massive overconsumption of clothing in the Global North and the mountains of textile waste it produces. But in recent years—since 2021, to be precise—a relatively small part of the textile industry has come under the spotlight: the trade and handling of second-hand clothing. Despite the fact that the second-hand sector arguably extends the lifespan of textiles, redistributes surplus clothing from the Global North to the Global South, and contributes both to job creation and affordable clothing for comparatively poorer populations, it has become the target of growing criticism. Why? The truth about the second-hand export debate not quite as it usually is described in media Claims of 40% waste in exports Critics argue that the problem lies in the quality of second-hand clothing exported from Europe to countries in, for example, Africa. A significant portion of these garments are said to be unusable—torn, dirty, or otherwise unfit for resale—and are therefore discarded as waste upon arrival. The figure most commonly cited in debates is that around 40% of second-hand clothing imports to African countries are considered unwearable and thus treated as waste. This exacerbates an already difficult waste management problem in African countries. The prevailing narrative that has gained traction in mainstream media, social media, debates, and conferences is that "Europe is dumping its clothing waste in African nations". Where are the mountains of waste? There is only one way to find out whether the claims about imported textile waste are true: go to Accra and visit the places where the waste is said to be. So this is what we did. We meet up with "Kevin" on one of Accra’s beaches. He says he has guided many TV crews to the places where textile waste can be found. For a small fee, he can guide us too, we gather. So the next day, we follow him to the beaches of Jamestown—perhaps the most frequently featured location in reports about second-hand waste in Ghana. When we arrive, the beach is full of young people picking up litter and trash. The cleanup is organised by the OR Foundation, a non-profit based in Ghana and run by two Americans. The foundation is one of the main forces behind the portrayal of Ghana as a dumping ground for the Global North’s clothing surplus. But the litter being collected on the beach, with few exceptions, isn’t clothing. Unsurprisingly, it’s almost entirely plastic. Jamestown Beach in Accra, Ghana. One of the beaches said to be overflowed with textile waste. Volonteers cleaning up Jamestown beach in Accra. A place said to be overflowed by textile waste. But in fact, most of it is plastic. It's not textiles, it´s plastic bags Kevin tells us that all the clothing has already been cleared from the beach. There are other places, he says, where we’ll be able to see the piles of clothing. So we head to another beach. But again, there are no textiles. We continue upriver, passing Korle Lagoon—another location frequently mentioned in reports about textile waste. Here, we find large amounts of litter. But very little of it is textile. At first sight the trash on the beach look like old clothes and textiles, and there are som pieces, but almost all of it is plastic. And particularly plastic bags. Plastic bags looks a lot like textiles from a distance. There are many landfills and dumping sites along the river. It’s been said that when it rains, clothing waste is washed along the river and out into the ocean. But nowhere do we find any mountains of textile waste. In some places, from a distance, it may look like clothing waste—but as we get closer, it becomes clear that it’s plastic. Plastic bags, from afar, can very easily be mistaken for textiles. There are some garments here and there at the beach, but it is estimately only a few percent of the total amount of waste. We visited all the places in Accra that are said to be where unwanted, discarded second-hand clothing ends up. We went to the beaches, we visited the dumping sites, we climbed onto and around several landfills, and we followed the river that runs through the city. But nowhere did we find any evidence that Ghana is a dumping ground for Europe’s cast-off clothing. On the banks of the river that runs trough Accra there is a lot of waste. But most of it is plastic. Nowhere are the mountains of textile waste to be found. It might look like textiles from a distance, but as you get closer, you discover that textiles is a very small part of it As we travel around trying to locate the textile waste reported on by media outlets around the world—and which has, to a large extent, shaped EU policies and regulations on second-hand clothing—it’s hard to understand how things ended up this way. Even if the beach we visited had truly been cleared of clothing, all the other places we’ve seen should be overflowing with textile waste, if the media coverage is to be believed. We leave Ghana puzzled. How did this happen? Who stands to gain from it? We’ll be back with more soon. Written and produced by Thomas Lundkvist & Kristjan Sigurjonsson More to watch: More to read: What does the traders say? Edward Atobrah Brinkley We meet Edward Atobrah Brinkley. He is the Secretary General of the Ghana Used Clothing Dealers Association, an organisation representing importers and retailers of second-hand clothing in Ghana. "Claims that 40% of second-hand imports end up as waste have been circulating in the media for years. But those of us who live and work in this industry have never been able to understand where these so-called mountains of clothing waste are. We've really searched—but we haven't found them," he says. “Every country has textile waste—and so do we,” says Atobrah. “But the waste consists of clothes that have been worn many times and then discarded. It doesn’t come from second-hand imports.” “Our research shows that textile waste makes up just a few percent of total waste,” he says. We learned that one such study was carried out by the Metropolitan Research and Education Bureau, which concluded that no more than 5% of imported second-hand clothing could be considered waste. You can read that study here . Protests in Ghana Traders in Ghana protest agains misinformation campaigns about textile waste This is exactly what importers and second-hand clothing traders in Ghana have been trying to say for years, but nobody want's to listen, as it seems. They argue that the reported volumes of waste supposedly generated by second-hand imports are completely inaccurate—and that the mountains of textile waste said to exist in Accra simply do not. As recently as March 2025, hundreds of people working in Accra’s second-hand industry took to the streets to protest what they claim is a deeply misleading portrayal of the trade. Their frustration is understandable: such claims threaten not only their livelihoods, but their very ability to earn a living and live with dignity. 2,180 shipping containers of textile waste The images and reports in media appear convincing. The message is that nearly half of Ghana’s imports of second-hand clothing are unusable and end up directly in landfills and on beaches. But to anyone with even a basic understanding of how the second-hand clothing trade works, this claim sounds both unlikely and illogical. Ghana imports over 130,000 tonnes of second-hand clothing each year. If 40% of that were waste, it would amount to around 2,180 shipping containers annually—or roughly 182 containers every month. That’s a vast amount of textile waste. But it would also mean that importers are unable to sell half of what they bring in—a remarkably bad deal by any measure. Especially considering they pay both duties and taxes to bring the clothes into the country.

Textile Exchange released its annual Materials Market Report alongside its Materials Benchmark Insights and Trends 2025 and its Climate+ Dashboard. Together, the reports show global fiber production hit a record 132 million tons in 2024, more than double since 2000. Despite nearly a decade of climate pledges, raw material use across fashion, footwear, and home textiles keeps climbing, pushing the industry further from the 1.5°C climate goal of limiting global warming to safe levels.  The report highlights fashion’s central contradiction: brands are sourcing more “preferred” materials, but those gains are outpaced by the relentless growth in overall production. As long as the industry keeps making more materials, especially fossil-fuel synthetics, emissions will continue to rise.  The takeaway is that sourcing improvements matter, but on their own, they are not enough to offset the impact of increasing production.  Links: Materials Benchmark Insights Climate+ Dashboard

There are no plans for an emergency fund to support struggling clothing collectors in Europe, says Commissioner Jessika Roswall. She responded to the European Parliament question from MEP Saskia Bricmont (Verts/ALE) and MEP David Cormand (Verts/ALE) which highlighted that social enterprises handling second-hand clothes and textile waste are struggling financially due to rising volumes of low-quality textiles, insufficient recycling capacity, and the EU requirement to collect textiles from January 2025. Bricmont and Cormand asked the Commission:  1. What measures it will take to prevent social enterprises from bearing the costs of textile waste management.  2. Whether an EU-level emergency fund will be established before the extended producer responsibility (EPR) scheme starts in 2028, and how Member States could access it rapidly to cover related costs.  In her response, Roswall confirmed that the Commission recognises the challenges faced by the second-hand textile sector, mainly due to rising volumes of used textiles from fast fashion. The Commission does not plan an EU-level emergency fund but encourages Member States to complement EU measures with national initiatives and cohesion policy funds.  Under the revised Waste Framework Directive, Member States must introduce separate textile collection by 1 January 2025. The Commission also proposed extended producer responsibility (EPR), making producers finance collection and waste management. This should support reuse operators and social enterprises, which can keep collection points and may benefit from free textile waste collection under EPR systems.

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. "We are in a tragic situation", says Tony Clark, CEO of Svenskt Avfall, Swedish Waste Management. 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. Kwame Owino, CEO of Institute for Economic Affairs, Kenya, explain his research on the textile waste issue 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.

ReHubs announced its upcoming textile recycling strategy, designed as an industry-wide roadmap and portfolio of initiatives to scale textile-to-textile recycling and overcome the supply-demand deadlock.  ReHubs is a partnership-based collaboration hub focused on scaling up textile recycling in Europe. Its aim is to build industrial capacity for collecting, sorting, processing, and recycling textile waste. ReHubs’ strategy rests on two pillars: end-to-end supply chain management to deliver reliable, cost-competitive recycled fibres, and financing orchestration to mobilise and de-risk around €6 billion in investment. Targets include recycling 2.5 million tons of textile waste by 2032 (35–40% of EU total) and creating up to 10,000 jobs.  The new strategy will be unveiled on 22 September 2025, with wider industry engagement planned at the Dornbirn Global Fibre Congress and Circular Textile Days.

EuRIC, European Recycling Industries’ Confederation, has published a position paper welcoming the EU’s initiative to reduce administrative burdens in environmental legislation (Environmental Omnibus).  EuRIC stressed the need to balance efficiency with ambitious environmental goals. The organisation specifically highlighted that future tools like the Digital Product Passport should be transparent, practical, and fit for recyclers and manufacturers.  Moreover, harmonised definitions and implementation under the Waste Framework Directive were essential to avoid single market fragmentation, alongside EU-wide end-of-waste criteria. Lastly, EuRIC called for the simplification of waste shipment rules with mutual recognition of certificates and harmonised weight regulations. Additionally, reporting should follow the “only once principle” with digitalisation and simplified criteria.

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.

Starting in October, France will introduce a new system requiring clothing retailers to display the environmental cost of garments. This initiative, launched by several government ministers, aims to guide consumers toward more sustainable choices and encourage brands to adopt eco-friendly practices.  The environmental cost label will provide a clear, standardised score that reflects the full lifecycle of a garment. The label covers carbon emissions, water use, pesticide application, fossil fuel consumption, and microfiber pollution. The methodology is based on the EU’s Product Environmental Footprint (PEF), expanded with French-specific criteria like clothing durability and the export of second-hand textiles outside Europe.  Participation will be voluntary for brands, but those who join must declare their data through a dedicated government portal. Major fashion chains and smaller eco-conscious labels are already preparing for large-scale rollout.  Source: French Ministry of Economy