A new study shows how future sustainability requirements for textiles in the European market could be specifically designed. The study was commissioned by the Federal Environment Agency and developed by the Öko-Institut together with the Niederrhein University of Applied Sciences and the Hof University of Applied Sciences. It provides suggestions on how the criteria of the EU Ecodesign Regulation 2024/1781 could be applied to textiles in the future.
The focus is on requirements for durability, repairability, recyclability, recycled content and the handling of problematic chemicals. The aim is to establish more sustainable products on the market and to gradually reduce short-lived clothing. As practical examples, the research team examined cotton T-shirts, functional T-shirts made from 100% polyester, cotton jeans with elastane content and functional jackets made from polyester or polyamide, as they have different material and usage requirements and are produced in large quantities.
Durability as a central lever
A key result: product lifespan is considered a decisive lever for the environmental balance of clothing. However, there is currently no uniform, legally binding definition of durability in the textile sector. In addition, current test standards do not adequately reflect real usage conditions, such as frequent washing. The study therefore suggests setting minimum values for physical durability (such as color fastness, abrasion resistance, dimensional stability) and further developing test methods. It also calls for dynamic adaptation of requirements based on new research results. The study does not address the issue of emotional durability, such as products no longer being worn because they are no longer liked.
Repairability: spare parts and instructions
In addition to durability, the analysis also addresses the repairability of clothing. Minimum requirements such as the provision of spare parts, repair instructions or cooperation with repair services are suggested. For technically more complex products such as outdoor jackets, additional design guidelines could be useful.
According to the study, typical damage that can be repaired are broken zippers, loose buttons, holes or torn seams. For more complex products such as jeans or functional jackets, product-specific repairability ratings or a repairability score could be introduced in the future. However, the authors emphasize: The ecological impact of repairability remains limited if purchase prices are low and repairs are relatively expensive. However, this is a realistic solution for higher-quality products.
Recyclability: less material mix, less elastane
In order to make recycling processes easier, the study also recommends restrictions on material mixtures, such as a maximum of two types of fiber per fabric and a limited elastane content of ideally less than five to ten percent. Minor components should have at least 10 percent material content so that sorting technologies can detect them.
In addition, binding minimum quotas for fibers from fiber-to-fiber recycling in new products are being discussed, for example for cotton or polyester. According to the study, binding recyclate quotas could play an important role in expanding the recycling infrastructure. The following minimum proportions are proposed for basic products such as T-shirts or jeans by 2030: cotton 10 percent, polyester 3 percent, polyamide and cellulose fibers 5 percent and wool 15 percent. The comparatively low values are intended to ensure technical feasibility and product quality, but could increase gradually.
More transparency for chemicals
Another component concerns transparency about the chemicals used, especially when dealing with substances of concern and effect chemicals, such as dyes or water-repellent finishes, within the supply chain. The authors see more comprehensive information requirements along the entire product life cycle as a prerequisite for specifically controlling material choice, quality and recyclability.
Environmental effects: PEF and microplastics are currently still too complex
However, the study does not currently recommend a mandatory Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) calculation for clothing. The reasons for this are, for example, that it causes high costs and places high demands on expertise, that there is often limited data availability in supply chains and that small and medium-sized companies in particular do not have the capacity to fulfill these obligations. “Introducing product-level reporting would impose a high administrative burden without providing any additional benefit over existing company-related obligations,” the study said. Instead, simpler product indicators or benchmarks could be developed in the long term, which also enable better comparability, at least in individual points.
The study also recommends against introducing a reporting requirement on microplastics/microfibers, as this would require companies to carry out extensive testing for the entire product portfolio. However, a gradual introduction is possible, which could initially apply to products with high sales figures. This means that fewer products would have to be tested, but the impact would still be great.
Conclusion: Greater demands on design
The study concludes that many future requirements must be specified in the design phase of a product. The authors also make it clear that standardized testing methods, certification systems and data infrastructures will be crucial for the practical implementation of the Ecodesign Regulation.
