The pants don’t fit, the sweater is scratchy and the dress looked somehow different in the picture: If we don’t like it, we send it back – or don’t even buy it from the dealer. Designed, produced, transported and then burned unused?
In times of fast fashion and mass production, many items of clothing suffer this absurd fate. This will soon come to an end in the EU. About a year ago, negotiators from the European Parliament and the EU states agreed on a corresponding regulation in the Ecodesign Regulation.
Accordingly, large and medium-sized textile retailers will soon be prohibited from destroying unsold products, such as shoes, T-shirts or sweaters, without a good reason. According to estimates by the European Environment Agency (EEA), this currently happens to four to nine percent of all textile products every year. According to the EEA, this corresponds to between 260,000 and 590,000 tonnes of textiles.
Environmental damage, wasted resources and mountains of garbage
This has direct negative consequences for the environment and the climate: the energy required for production, transport and storage. There are also expenses because the unsold products are passed on. Burning would also release greenhouse gases and pollutants – but this is often not the case in the EU.
The Environment Agency writes: “A large proportion of unsold products are ultimately exported from Europe. The majority of it ends up in Africa and Asia.” In Africa, there is evidence that clothing is burned in open landfills or in the open air.
Federal government discusses penalties
According to the EU, anyone who wants to destroy textiles in the future will have to provide extensive information and give valid reasons. Large textile retailers still have until the summer of 2026 to adapt to the new rules and the associated reporting requirements. Medium-sized companies, on the other hand, have four years longer. Smaller and micro-enterprises are completely exempt from the ban.
In Germany, national regulations are also needed to control and sanction the EU regulation. A spokesman for the Federal Environment Ministry said that these would also be prepared after the traffic lights went out. “The exact sanction mechanisms have not yet been determined; fines will certainly be part of it,” said the spokesman.
Companies welcome new rules
When asked by the dpa, several large textile companies stated that they supported the EU regulation. Wearable fashion should never be destroyed, asserts H&M. Zalando also makes a similar statement.
Textile retailers hardly express any criticism of the ban and the associated bureaucracy. The Otto Group’s response simply states that significant additional bureaucratic and financial costs are to be expected. Kik emphasizes that patchwork standards should be avoided in all European countries.
The stricter regulations do not appear to be a problem for companies. C&A, Kik and Kaufland report that the proportion of unsold goods is less than one percent – sometimes in the per mille range. Otto and H&M are also confident that they already meet EU requirements. No company announces additional costs for customers who return ordered clothing.
Expert questions the effect of the ban
The fact that smaller companies are exempt from the ban on destruction has met with criticism from conservationists. For this reason, scientist Björn Asdecker also questions whether the ban directly leads to fewer unsold products being destroyed.
Asdecker works on the logistics of returns at the University of Bamberg. Smaller companies often end up with products that all previous retailers were no longer able to monetize, he says. At the end of this chain there would be companies that send the unsaleable part of the products for thermal recycling, i.e. incineration.
Hope for more transparency
In addition, there is trade across national borders, which requires the cooperation of various national authorities. “It will become difficult to control at some point,” says Asdecker.
“There is a great danger that everyone will continue as before if the implementation of the ban is not consistently monitored,” warns Greenpeace activist Moritz Jäger-Roschko. Returns researcher Asdecker still sees an opportunity in the regulation. The transparency demanded by companies could lead to increasing social pressure on companies.
Oblige companies to produce in Europe?
Maike Rabe from the Niederrhein University emphasizes that mass production with the aim of reducing unit prices is now completely detached from the needs of consumers.
She advocates for textiles to be manufactured locally, i.e. in Europe and not, as is suspected, in Asia. “I would demand from all companies that want to market products in Europe that ten percent of their production is also manufactured in Europe.” But that is probably a utopia, admits Rabe. (dpa)