The Higg Index is designed to help fashion companies measure their environmental impact, but has come under a lot of criticism in recent weeks. It also hit the fashion group H&M. A brief synopsis of the events that show how clothing retailers are at risk from greenwashing allegations.
Scorecards were introduced last May as part of the Higg Sustainability Profiles and Higg Index Materials. Put simply, a scorecard provides a standardized way to compare the performance of different products and brands. Consumers should be able to identify products with a lower environmental impact at a glance.
H&M is a member of the Sustainable Apparel Coalition (SAC) lobby organization that developed the Higg Index. The fashion giant has used the index and scorecards across its online product offerings since their inception, giving each item a score based on the environmental impact of the materials used to make it.
Greenwashing allegations
The Swedish clothing chain H&M received a warning from the Norwegian consumer protection authority NCA in mid-June for these labels. The authority did not want itthat H&M uses data from the Higg Index for marketing purposes, as the use of the data is “misleading” and could be seen as “violating” national marketing laws.
H&M has since removed the markings from the website. But an investigation by Quartz, a global news website, helps get a sense of what the company has been criticized for.
On H&M’s website, the Higg metrics are given as values from ‘baseline’ to ‘3’. The base grade is given to products made from conventional materials, and grades 1, 2 and 3 are given to products made from materials that have a lower environmental impact. Detailed data on impacts on water use, global warming, fossil fuel consumption and water pollution can also be found on each product.
Over 50 percent of high-scoring H&M products that claimed the clothing had a low negative environmental impact were no more sustainable than comparable competitor clothing, Quartz says.
H&M has wrongly rated its products
“H&M displayed data that gave a completely false picture of a garment’s impact on the environment. These errors came about because the company’s website ignored negative characters in the Higg Index values. For example, a dress with a minus 20 percent water usage score – meaning it uses 20 percent more water than average – was listed on H&M’s website as having 20 percent less water usage,” Quartz said.
Last week, H&M removed all scorecards from its website after Quartz released these findings.
H&M’s quick response is perhaps an indication that no matter how hard fast fashion companies strive for sustainable practices, they are simply unable to reduce the impact due to the sheer volume of goods they produce. This is exactly what many refer to as greenwashing. H&M stated that the scorecards should show transparency, but the Higg Index is itself controversial, after H&M was reprimanded by the Norwegian Consumer Protection Agency in June for misleading customers and using the index as a marketing tool.
Anna Palmquist, Sustainability Specialist at H&M Group Expansion, is responsible for the company’s sustainability performance. According to its website, H&M scored 70.8 percent on the Higg’s brand-level index. According to Quartz, more than 100 women’s clothing scorecards contained errors. So the product team at H&M must have either miscalculated or misled the product reviews they posted on their website.
Higg scorecards do not provide a complete picture
The Index does not assess whether garments are biodegradable or whether they release microplastics. Eco-Age’s Philippa Grogan told Sourcing Journal that the Higg Index only looks at a select part of garment sustainability and would need to be measured from design through execution to the end of a garment’s lifespan to fully understand the lifecycle and impact to rate.
The Sustainable Apparel Coalition announced last Monday that it has updated its data and methodology will check immediately. The last review took place eight years ago, in 2016. The SAC has come under increasing criticism for championing synthetic materials made from fossil fuels over natural fibers such as wool, cotton and even leather. For example, she also champions recycled polyester, a cheap synthetic fabric that many of its members, like H&M, use in their collections. While H&M does not have a material filter for polyester on their website, a search revealed over 10,000 items that either contain polyester or are made entirely of polyester.
Greenwashing, intentional or unintentional, is unfortunately not uncommon in the industry. If you really want to promote sustainability in fashion, it is best to buy less and buy longer-lasting products.
This article was previously published on FashionUnited.uk. Translation and editing: Barbara Russ