To become a Vogue Business Member and receive the Sustainability Edit newsletter, click here.
Brands have goals for sustainability, but are far from meeting them. With the bulk of the fashion industry’s footprint generated in the supply chain, from farmers to manufacturers, a supplier-led conference this week could offer a roadmap for closing that gap.
Fashion labels rarely own or directly oversee their supply chain, from raw material sourcing to fabric production. That means the work of meeting climate goals, which brands are increasingly ambitious and public about, needs to happen at a level they don’t directly control. And, most of that work requires significant investment. One of the reasons why climate progress remains slow is because suppliers, who tend to operate on razor-thin margins, need more support from brands to enable shifts to renewable energy, for example — as well as laws and regulations to incentivise access to climate-friendly technologies.
There’s a funding gap in fashion’s sustainability commitments, made clear in a new report estimating a $1 trillion deficit in reaching decarbonisation goals. We unpack where, why and how to fix it.
On Tuesday, the Sustainable Apparel Forum in Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh, brought brands and suppliers together with union organisers, policymakers, garment worker advocates, academics and green technology companies — collectively representing over 20 countries — to open up discussions on both sides of the table about climate action, safe working conditions and other topics pervasive in fashion’s supply chain.
What makes this week’s event stand out is that suppliers not only had a heavy presence — they created and organised it, bringing together people who know what needs to happen with people who can help make it happen. It’s rare for suppliers, brands, unions and government officials to be in the same room discussing solutions together. That was precisely why Mostafiz Uddin, founder and CEO of Bangladesh Apparel Exchange, and denim factory owner, says he organised the forum in Dhaka: to put the various needs and opportunities on a single agenda — and so that Bangladesh can set an example for other manufacturing countries and for brands.
“We can be the most responsible manufacturing country in terms of the environment, in terms of social issues, in terms of circularity, in terms of human rights, in terms of purchasing practices,” says Uddin. He prioritises sustainability in his factory and says many suppliers want to do the same; but brands often set targets that suppliers can’t meet on their own.
“I’m a manufacturer. I know the pain and gain of this industry. I deal with these problems every single day,” he says. “So many retailers come and tell us, you have to achieve 30 per cent renewable energy. But how — I don't know from whom to buy this renewable energy, I don't know from whom to do the water recycling, and also I don't know where I will get the money.”
Accelerating progress
Discussions focused heavily on green manufacturing, global legislation, purchasing practices and access to funding, are perhaps the greatest hurdle for suppliers. Researchers and advocates say in general, brands need to put more on the line. That doesn’t mean paying outright for solar panels on a factory it shares with dozens of other brands, but rather could mean agreeing to long-term contracts or paying premiums to factories that are making the investment in solar themselves or other steps that amount to better buying practices. In a more subtle but potentially game-changing role, brands can also help suppliers unlock funding from other sources entirely.
Policy is another gap — and while lawmakers are starting to tackle some of the issues in fashion such as emissions and supply chain due diligence, these tend not to address the specific needs of suppliers in major manufacturing countries, says Uddin. “We need to collaborate. People sitting in Europe, sitting in Belgium, the OECD — they make a rule that will be applied in Bangladesh, but Bangladesh should know about it. We should have our own opinion about it. Is it possible, is it not possible. Those kinds of things are needed.”
That’s where Kurt Kipka, vice president of the Apparel Impact Institute will be following most closely. “I’ll be watching for outcomes particularly related to policy, and how policy within Bangladesh can support the overarching needs for baseline assessments, supportive action planning and financing that would come with a path to decarbonisation for the industry. In most cases, it really comes down to infrastructure capacity and regulation,” he says.
“This is their story”
Engaging with and listening more to suppliers could also have direct implications for emissions in the industry. If more manufacturers set their own climate targets — rather than be asked to meet the individual targets of different brands — it could be a much more effective way to reduce emissions, says Kipka.
“The last thing we want to see is each brand in this industry setting separate targets for their respective manufacturing partners — one brand setting a 10 per cent goal, another setting a 40 per cent goal, for the same manufacturer. That's not engaging the manufacturer,” he says. “I think right now is a moment for manufacturers, for producers to own the narrative, to begin to set a course that's their own and be able to demonstrate to regulators, policymakers and the brands they're producing for that this is their story.”
While the format may be different, it doesn’t guarantee a different outcome. Everyone being in a room together does not mean they will agree on anything. “It's one thing to show up at this early-stage level of work within the region, but the reality is there's still a lot of work to be done,” says Kipka.
Comments, questions or feedback? Email us at feedback@voguebusiness.com.
More from this author:
Costly, time-consuming and a sales barrier: Why fashion hates repairs