Producer-led projects: A gap in the sustainability debate?

The root of the sustainability crisis in fashion is a soured relationship between brand and supplier. This is a direct result of outsourcing production to low-wage countries. Over the last few decades, the supply chain has become so fragmented that visibility into who is producing what and how exactly has been lost. Now the industry wants to do it differently: with environmentally friendly factories, living wages and long-lasting designs. How can she find her way back? It starts with healing that relationship, according to the nonprofit Fashion Producer Collective (FPC).

Strengthen the voice of producers

The FPC advocates for the interests of clothing manufacturers, especially in the context of sustainability. The founding began in 2020 around the podcast ‘Manufactured’. In it, former factory manager Kim van der Weerd gives manufacturers a voice in the fashion world. This also includes sharing their frustrations about sustainability. In particular, it’s about policies imposed by brands without consultation or funding, and misconceptions about what sustainability requires in practice.

“Producers from all parts of the world have networked as a result,” says Gauri Sharma, director of strategy and engagement at the collective since 2025. “They met at conferences and in online meetings. In 2023, they wrote their first white papers on legislation, climate finance and the role of multi-stakeholder institutions such as the Sustainable Apparel Coalition and ACT (Action, Collaboration, Transformation) in engaging producers.” After a period of volunteer work funded by grants, the FPC became a formal collective in late 2025.

The collective has twelve formal members. These are manufacturers from countries such as Sri Lanka, Hong Kong, India and Pakistan. They represent both the beginning and the end of the chain – from packaging to fashion accessories. Five of the twelve members are co-founders and have a say in the direction of the collective. Members decide for themselves which projects they join, and non-members can also join for an additional fee.

The core team, or what Sharma calls a “fully remote headquarters,” consists of Van der Weerd (full-time) and four to five part-time employees. These cover everything from communications to finances. You maintain a Substack, organize projects and promote collaboration with external parties. One example is her recent work with her first fashion brand, a “large, international clothing company,” says Sharma. She can’t reveal the name yet. “We help your sustainability team incorporate their supplier base into shaping their strategy.”

Top down

Since the emergence of fast fashion, a hierarchy has been established in the supply chain. Manufacturers are told what they have to do: under what conditions they have to produce, what guidelines they have to follow and that they have to undergo inspections. The same top-down mentality also prevails in the organizations that develop frameworks, policies and programs for manufacturers. “Manufacturers are rarely included as equal partners,” says Sharma. She speaks from her experience as General Manager, ESG & Innovation at Shahi Exports, one of India’s largest apparel manufacturers. “At best, they are brought in for a short feedback session when it is almost too late to provide valuable input.”

This perspective also influences the industry’s sustainability efforts. The topic came into sharp focus after the pandemic. “Greening the supply chain became a key issue,” says Sharma, “but there was still no co-design of these plans. Sustainability teams are demanding that factories meet targets and test new materials. At the same time, purchasing teams continue to negotiate for low prices and are unwilling to absorb these additional costs. If manufacturers have done R&D on a new fiber and it works well, but the commercial team says, ‘We won’t pay a cent more for it,’ that’s where the innovation ends.”

As an example of such a recurring sustainability hurdle, Sharma cites brands’ desire to avoid coal. “The factories then have to invest in new boilers and alternative fuel sources. This costs money and increases operating costs. Some large manufacturers can do it, but it requires enormous effort and is not economically viable in the long term without support. When it comes to decarbonization, the industry tends to generalize: everyone has to move away from coal. But no one asks: What support do manufacturers need for this?”

As long as brands and suppliers do not communicate on equal terms, sustainability will not get off the ground, the FPC argues. “Sustainability strategies are imposed on those who have to implement them. However, these parties are not involved in the design and do not receive financial support to realize them. That is what we as FPC want to address.”

Producer-led projects

The first concrete result of the producer-led approach is ‘Bang for Buck’. This is a decision support tool designed to help factories identify and prioritize the most cost-effective decarbonization investments for their facilities. The project is commissioned and led by Elevate Textiles, Epic Group and Shahi Exports, with support from Giz Fabric and technical partner Grant Thornton Bharat. ‘Bang for Buck’ will be released to the public this April.

In addition, the FPC promotes ‘communities of practice’: conversations between suppliers about difficult topics. Recently, traceability has been the focus. Sharma: “Manufacturers are flooded with requests from brands to map their production processes. This is very complex because hardly any companies talk about it openly.” A series on heat stress begins in April. The temperatures in the production countries are reaching record highs and manufacturers have to arm their systems against this. “It is a serious issue that is currently being addressed by brands not from a risk sharing perspective but as an audit requirement.”

The FPC bases its priorities on what is happening on site. Sharma listens a lot, she says, through a WhatsApp group, meetings and social media channels. “Only when there is enough interest in a project does a group of designated members get to work. We didn’t set up this organization for show. We don’t want to become bureaucratic or traditional. We have to work actively, agilely and, above all, led by producers, because we’re trying to create something that doesn’t yet exist.”

Knowledge base

Brands can also benefit from this, says Sharma. Most of them haven’t produced anything themselves for decades. Production is expensive, risky and labor intensive, hence the outsourcing. This means that a large part of the specialist knowledge within the brands themselves has disappeared.

“Much of what you see in a store is co-designed by manufacturers. Large or specialized manufacturers have huge design teams, quality testing labs, fabric engineers and technical production engineers. This expertise now lies with the manufacturers. If you are a brand that wants to test recycled fibers or find out whether a factory can be electrified, you have to rely on your manufacturers. Unless you include them as equal partners, you are leaving a huge knowledge base untapped.”

Finally, she explains what the FPC wants to change: “We want manufacturers to become co-creators instead of just executors. They should act as equal thought partners in sustainability visions and strategies. Hopefully this will lead to a change in mentality and thereby to strategies that are practical and implementable.”

How to heal the relationship with your suppliers

Based on Sharma’s master’s thesis at the University of Cambridge and the practices of the Fashion Producer Collective, Sharma shares five tips for brands looking to improve their relationships with suppliers:

1. Involve suppliers earlier:

“Currently, they are often only brought in once the strategy has already been determined. Their absence from the design phase often leads to unworkable plans.”

2. Ensure internal coordination:

“Within brands, sustainability and purchasing teams often contradict each other. This sends conflicting signals and slows down sustainability plans.”

3. Focus on the what, not the how:

“As a brand, set the sustainability goal and the reason for it. Leave the execution to the manufacturers. They have the technical, context-specific expertise and know how to scale sustainability most efficiently.”

4. Provide security and share the benefits:

“Stop demanding change without providing anything in return. Suppliers will only invest in new technologies if there is a clear business case and long-term vision behind it.”

5. Build a structural dialogue:

“Replace one-off audits with constructive, ongoing collaboration – for example through workshops or learning platforms. This builds trust and unlocks the expertise needed for sustainability that is currently stuck in the chain.”