Industry News

All News Company Updates Industry News

Apparel industry insights for B2B buyers, covering sourcing trends, sustainability and compliance standards, supply chain developments, trade regulations, Incoterms® 2020, and market changes affecting apparel production and international sourcing.

Asian textile recycling and apparel development teams inspecting sorted garments recycled fiber yarn and new fabrics

Textile Recycling in H1 2026: Scaling Capacity Still Depends on Better Feedstock

09/14/2026

Fashion for Good published The State of Textile Recycling H1/2026 on September 10, presenting an industry view of major developments during the first half of the year. The update arrives as textile-to-textile recyclers move from technical demonstrations toward commercial operation, while feedstock, quality and economics remain central constraints. For apparel buyers and manufacturers, recycling capacity alone does not create a circular product. Used garments must be collected, sorted and prepared to a specification the recycler can process, and the recovered material must then meet spinning, fabric and finished-garment requirements. Feedstock quality controls recycling yield Post-consumer clothing varies by fiber blend, color, finish, contamination and construction. Elastane, coatings, prints, labels and hard trims can reduce recovery or require additional preparation. Buyers should confirm a recycler's accepted composition and contamination limits before describing a product as recyclable. Sorting technology can improve identification, but accurate product labels and traceability make the task easier. Digital product data may support future sorting, while physical testing remains necessary when labels are missing or unreliable. Design decisions determine the available route A circular design review should take place before bulk approval. Teams need to assess whether mixed fibers are necessary, whether trims can be removed, and whether color and finish choices fit the intended recycling process. Composition: keep blends within the recycler's operating window. Elastane: use only the amount needed for product performance and document it accurately. Trims: select fasteners and decorations that can be separated efficiently where feasible. Finishes: disclose coatings and chemistry that may affect recycling or recovered-fiber safety. Durability: protect the first life of the garment; premature failure does not improve circularity. Evidence: validate recycled content, quality and chain of custody before making claims. Factories can make pre-consumer waste more useful Cutting scraps and rejected fabric are more predictable than mixed post-consumer waste. Garment factories can segregate waste by fiber, color and contamination level, record weights and avoid mixing it with packaging or general waste. This creates a cleaner input and provides operational experience for later closed-loop programs. A buyer should agree who owns the waste, which recycler receives it and how reported quantities are verified. Claims should distinguish waste diverted from disposal from fiber actually converted into new textile material. Commercial demand must match technical supply Recyclers need stable offtake to invest and operate efficiently. Brands can support scale with realistic multi-season volume forecasts, agreed quality ranges and product platforms that use recovered fiber consistently. At the same time, sourcing teams should test strength, pilling, color, hand feel and process stability before committing large volumes. OEM and ODM partners can run controlled yarn, fabric and garment trials, document production losses and compare recycled inputs against the correct performance benchmark. A pilot should end with a decision on specification, acceptable variability, capacity and cost rather than only a demonstration sample. The 2026 market is moving, but the operational lesson remains clear: collection, sorting, design, recycling and demand must be connected. Apparel companies that define feedstock and product requirements together will be better positioned to use new capacity credibly. Source: Fashion for Good — The State of Textile Recycling H1/2026.

Asian textile laboratory team testing waterproof outerwear fabrics and safer finish options in China

PFAS Compliance for Textiles: Four Issues Apparel Buyers Need to Resolve

09/14/2026

EURATEX has published a new position paper on making PFAS compliance workable for the European textile industry. The organization supports reducing PFAS emissions and replacing the substances where technically feasible, while arguing that a restriction must also be measurable, enforceable and consistently interpreted. The position identifies four conditions: analytical readiness, legal certainty, compatibility with circularity and regulatory coherence. These points are directly relevant to buyers of waterproof outerwear, workwear, swimwear and other performance products because finish selection, testing and supplier evidence must work together. Testing needs a defined decision process EURATEX recommends a tiered approach that starts with total fluorine screening and moves to targeted PFAS analysis where scientifically justified. It also calls for thresholds that reflect validated laboratory capability and measurement uncertainty. For buyers, the key is to define the screening method, reporting limit, sample location and action triggered by a result. Different laboratories or methods can produce results that are difficult to compare. A test request should therefore cite the applicable legal or customer requirement rather than asking only for a generic “PFAS test.” Intentional use and background contamination differ The paper asks regulators to distinguish intentional PFAS use from unavoidable background or cross-contamination. Factories still need prevention controls: an inventory of finishes and processing aids, supplier declarations, controlled storage, equipment-cleaning procedures and traceability for outsourced coating or lamination. A positive screening signal should lead to investigation. Teams can review chemical formulations, historical machine use, water, packaging and recycled inputs before deciding whether targeted analysis or corrective action is required. Recycled textiles create a legacy-material question Legacy PFAS may remain in recycled feedstock made from products manufactured before current restrictions. EURATEX argues for an approach that protects textile-to-textile recycling while preventing new intentional inputs. Brands using recycled materials should define feedstock acceptance rules, request information on source categories and use risk-based testing. Recycled content alone does not prove chemical compliance, and an absolute purity expectation may be unrealistic without validated analytical limits. A practical buyer and factory checklist Map water, oil and stain-repellent functions by product and component. Identify finishes, membranes, coatings, seam tapes and processing aids that may introduce fluorinated substances. Approve PFAS-free alternatives only after durability, wash and performance validation. Specify screening and confirmatory methods with qualified laboratories. Record chemical supplier declarations, formulation changes and production lots. Define escalation steps for detected fluorine, including root-cause review and retesting. Check overlapping REACH, POPs and national requirements for the target market. Substitution should be managed as product development, not a paperwork exercise. An alternative finish must meet the necessary use case without creating an unsupported performance claim. Early mill trials and controlled wash testing reduce risk before bulk production. Source: EURATEX — Making PFAS compliance possible for the European textile industry.

Asian apparel compliance team mapping material and factory traceability for an outerwear supply chain in China

EU Forced Labour Ban Raises the Bar for Apparel Supply Chain Traceability

09/13/2026

The European Union's Forced Labour Regulation will apply from December 14, 2027. It prohibits products made with forced labour from being placed or made available on the EU market or exported from it, regardless of where the forced labour occurred in the supply chain. The European Commission's Forced Labour Single Portal now brings together implementation information and support. In September 2026, the Commission also highlighted a tender for supply-chain traceability services and forced-labour risk-detection pilots, with a submission deadline of September 28. The activity shows that traceability and risk analysis are central to enforcement preparation. Why apparel supply chains need detailed mapping A garment can pass through farms or feedstock collectors, ginners, spinners, mills, dye houses, printers, trim suppliers, sewing factories and logistics providers. A list of direct factories gives limited visibility if high-risk materials or processes sit further upstream. Buyers should map the chain by product and material, starting with the largest volumes and risk-sensitive inputs. The goal is to understand which legal entities perform each stage, where the work occurs, what subcontracting is allowed and which records connect the finished item to those sources. Evidence should show a working due-diligence process A certificate or social audit can contribute evidence, but it should sit within a broader system. Procurement teams need a method to identify and assess risk, prevent or mitigate harm, monitor results, provide channels for concerns and take corrective action when credible issues arise. Supplier identity: verified legal name, address, ownership information and production scope. Tier mapping: material and process suppliers connected to styles, purchase orders and shipments. Worker evidence: recruitment, age, hours, wages, freedom of movement and grievance records handled lawfully and with privacy controls. Subcontracting: written approval, capacity checks and monitoring for every outsourced operation. Risk assessment: country, sector, material and business-model indicators updated when conditions change. Corrective action: documented owners, deadlines, worker-centered remediation and verification of closure. What OEM and ODM factories can do now Factories should maintain an approved supplier list that includes mills and processors used for each order, rather than keeping only purchasing contacts. Material receipts, lot numbers and production records should connect upstream evidence to the finished shipment. Unauthorized substitutions must be escalated before use. Capacity planning is also a labour-risk control. Unrealistic deadlines, late design changes and sharp order fluctuations can increase overtime or unapproved subcontracting. Buyers and suppliers should agree on achievable production calendars and make commercial decisions that support lawful working conditions. Prepare for questions without predicting enforcement outcomes Companies should establish an escalation team across legal, sourcing, compliance and logistics, define who can retrieve evidence and test the response with a sample product. A traceability exercise should reveal how quickly the company can identify facilities, provide supporting records and explain its due-diligence decisions. The Commission will continue developing implementation tools before the regulation applies. Apparel businesses should follow official guidance and avoid treating any private checklist as a guarantee of compliance. The strongest preparation is a documented system that reflects the real supply chain and improves conditions rather than assembling files only when an inquiry arrives. Source: European Commission — Forced Labour Single Portal.

Asian apparel sourcing team reviewing garment orders and global logistics at a Chinese factory

WTO Goods Trade Barometer Rises to 102.0: What Apparel Buyers Should Watch

09/13/2026

Global merchandise trade continued to strengthen in mid-2026, according to the World Trade Organization's Goods Trade Barometer released on September 9. The headline reading rose to 102.0 from 101.7 in June, placing it above the baseline value of 100 and indicating above-trend trade momentum. For apparel buyers and manufacturers, the result supports cautious confidence rather than a simple forecast of stronger clothing demand. The barometer covers global goods trade, and its strongest components are not all directly connected to apparel. Procurement teams should use it as one external signal alongside retail sales, inventory, booking and category data. Export orders point to continued trade growth The export orders index reached 103.5, while international air freight stood at 102.8 and agricultural raw materials trade at 102.6. The WTO said these readings suggest resilience despite trade-policy uncertainty and geopolitical tensions. Electronic components produced the strongest component reading at 104.9, reflecting demand associated with artificial-intelligence investment. Container shipping was the exception, dipping slightly below trend at 99.6. Apparel normally moves by sea, so buyers should avoid assuming that a positive headline index guarantees smooth garment logistics. Route disruption, equipment availability, port congestion and local capacity can still affect a specific shipment. What the signal means for apparel purchasing When trade momentum improves, competition for factory slots, fabric capacity and transport can tighten unevenly. A buyer that waits for retail demand to become obvious may face longer lead times later, while an aggressive order placed too early can increase inventory exposure. The appropriate response is to improve decision speed and visibility. Refresh demand scenarios: maintain base, upside and downside plans by category and market. Reserve critical capacity: identify fabrics, trims and processes with limited qualified supply. Separate production and transport risk: track factory readiness, vessel bookings and route exposure independently. Use order gates: link greige commitments, color approval, cutting and final shipment to updated demand evidence. Protect repeat programs: standardize proven fabrics and trims where speed matters more than novelty. Monitor total landed time: include testing, customs, transshipment and warehouse receiving, not only sailing days. Factories can support more flexible ordering OEM and ODM suppliers can help buyers respond to mixed signals by providing realistic capacity calendars, material lead times and milestone reporting. Pre-approved fabric platforms, modular designs and shared trims can shorten development without lowering quality controls. Factories should also distinguish confirmed purchase orders from forecasts and capacity holds. Clear rules for material liability, cancellation dates and minimum runs reduce disputes when market conditions change. Weekly exception reporting is more useful than optimistic status updates that hide a late fabric or approval. Keep the barometer in context The WTO's March 2026 outlook projected merchandise trade volume growth of 1.9% for the year under its baseline scenario and 1.4% under a high-energy-price scenario. An updated outlook is expected in October. Apparel teams should review that update alongside freight rates, consumer demand and their own sell-through data. A rising global indicator is useful because it reveals direction, but it does not replace style-level planning. Buyers that connect market signals to measurable order gates, supplier capacity and logistics options will be better prepared whether apparel demand accelerates or remains uneven. Source: World Trade Organization — Goods barometer points to resilient trade growth despite headwinds.

Asian apparel engineers preparing digital product passport data for an outerwear garment in a Chinese factory

EU Digital Product Passport Registry Is Live: What Apparel Suppliers Should Prepare

09/12/2026

The European Commission states that the Digital Product Passport Registry became operational on July 20, 2026. The registry is a central EU database that stores unique product identifiers and required registration data, while complete product information remains with the economic operator or a Digital Product Passport service provider. Textile apparel is one of the priority product groups under the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation. The current indicative timeline places adoption of textile-specific delegated requirements in the third or fourth quarter of 2027. The Commission also notes that economic operators will receive a transition period of at least 18 months after relevant delegated acts are adopted. How the DPP process is designed to work An economic operator gathers the information required by the applicable legislation, creates the passport and registers the necessary metadata. A data carrier such as a QR code links the physical product to its digital record. The registry then generates a unique registration identifier, which customs can check for imported goods. Access to information will vary by user role. Consumers, repairers, recyclers and public authorities may see different parts of the record. Depending on the final product rules, a passport may include information about safety, origin, materials, repairability, environmental performance, reuse and recycling. Why apparel factories should prepare before final rules The brand or importer placing a garment on the EU market will normally control the formal passport, but much of the underlying evidence originates upstream. If supplier names, material compositions and production references use inconsistent formats, creating records for thousands of styles will become slow and error-prone. Preparation does not require guessing the final legal fields. Factories can improve the quality of information they already manage and preserve the links between product, material, facility and order. A practical factory data checklist Product identity: stable style, color, size and order identifiers shared across development, production and shipment records. Bill of materials: composition and supplier details for shell, lining, insulation, rib, elastic, coatings, membranes and significant trims. Facility mapping: legal names and locations for garment assembly and relevant upstream processing sites. Material evidence: certificates, transaction documents, test reports and lot references linked to the correct input. Performance data: approved methods and results for durability, care, safety and restricted substances where applicable. Repair and recycling information: construction details, replaceable parts, disassembly constraints and known material incompatibilities. Change history: approved substitutions and revisions recorded without breaking the link to the finished shipment. Design the data flow around real production A pilot should follow one product from development through shipment. The team can identify who creates each data point, when it becomes final, where supporting evidence is stored and how revisions are approved. Outerwear is a useful test because it can contain multiple layers, membranes, coatings, zippers and insulation; simpler hoodies or activewear styles can then validate whether the model scales efficiently. Buyers should agree on controlled names, units and identifiers instead of asking suppliers to re-enter the same information into separate spreadsheets. Application programming interfaces or structured exports may later automate transfer, but data ownership and validation rules must come first. The Commission's timetable remains indicative, so companies should monitor the textile delegated act and technical standards. Building clean source data now gives brands and manufacturers flexibility without claiming that uncertain future requirements are already final. Source: European Commission — Digital Product Passport.

Asian apparel sourcing and factory team reviewing material portfolio data and fabric samples in China

Textile Exchange Action Cohort Sets 2027 Material Reporting and Target Requirements

09/12/2026

Textile Exchange published new guidance on September 9, 2026 for brands and retailers participating in its Action Cohort. Starting in 2027, participating companies will be required to report material sourcing volumes through the Materials Benchmark and set measurable targets for materials sourced through standards, certification or other programs that verify preferred production practices. The targets should cover relevant key materials representing at least 80% of a member company's portfolio. Textile Exchange says they should be clearly defined, time-bound, measurable, achievable and challenging. For apparel buyers, that turns a high-level materials strategy into a data and supplier-management task. Portfolio coverage changes the sourcing conversation An 80% portfolio threshold means companies cannot focus only on a small capsule collection. Teams need a reliable view of total fiber and material volumes, then identify which inputs account for most of the business. Cotton, polyester, nylon, manmade cellulosics, wool, down and leather may require different production programs and evidence. Brands should define the reporting unit, period and treatment of blends before collecting data. Finished-garment quantities alone are insufficient when a style contains a shell, lining, insulation, rib, elastic and trims. A consistent bill of materials and product weight method helps translate purchase orders into material volumes. Five intervention areas guide the targets Textile Exchange lists shared intervention areas that include reducing or eliminating pesticide and fertilizer use, addressing deforestation and conversion, upholding animal welfare, using recycled feedstocks with an emphasis on textile feedstocks, and ensuring human-rights due diligence. Each company can set targets suited to its own context, but the targets should contribute meaningfully to collective progress. Aggregate results will be made public, while participants receive more detailed information that allows comparison with shared targets and peer performance. What factories and suppliers may need to provide Material identity: fiber composition, supplier, program or standard, and applicable chain-of-custody model. Volume evidence: purchase, inventory, production and shipment records that reconcile with reported quantities. Transaction records: certificates or platform references linked to the correct orders and facilities. Subcontractor visibility: nominated mills, printers, laundries, filling suppliers and other relevant processors. Exception control: documented substitutions, shortages, quality failures and approved corrective actions. Claim discipline: product and marketing claims aligned with the evidence and rules of the relevant program. A practical preparation plan for buyers First, establish a material baseline using the same scope and units that future reporting will use. Second, rank materials by volume and sourcing risk. Third, map existing verified programs and identify gaps between current sourcing and proposed targets. Fourth, test whether suppliers can deliver the required evidence on time. Procurement teams should also assess commercial constraints. Preferred material programs can affect minimum order quantities, lead times, color availability, testing and cost. A target becomes more credible when it is connected to category plans, supplier capacity and an approved budget rather than managed as a separate sustainability exercise. OEM and ODM manufacturers can prepare by standardizing bills of materials, separating verified inputs in inventory, training purchasing teams and reconciling material receipts with production output. Early checks reduce the risk that an order qualifies technically but lacks the documentation needed for reporting. Source: Textile Exchange — Action Cohort reporting and target-setting guidance.

Asian apparel team reviewing garment durability and textile recycling processes for the French market

France Moves to Link Textile EPR Fees with Sustainability Practices

09/11/2026

France notified the European Commission on August 27, 2026 of an order amending the specifications for its extended producer responsibility scheme for clothing textiles, footwear and household linen. According to the notification, the financial contribution paid by producers would be adjusted through a penalty linked to the sustainability of industrial and commercial practices. The measure follows France's Law No. 2026-602 of July 8, 2026, which aims to reduce the environmental impact of the textile industry. For apparel brands selling into France, it signals that EPR cost may increasingly depend on product and business decisions made well before goods reach the market. Why sourcing teams should follow the measure EPR programs make producers responsible for financing the management of products after use. When fees are modulated, product characteristics or commercial practices can influence the amount paid. The notified French order focuses on a sustainability-related penalty, so brands should watch the final criteria, calculation method, effective dates and reporting evidence before changing forecasts. Manufacturers do not normally pay the market-facing EPR fee on behalf of a brand, but factory data can determine whether the brand can substantiate its declaration. Fiber composition, garment weight, durability tests, repairability, finishing, accessories and production traceability may all become relevant depending on the final rules. Prepare a reliable product data pack Apparel buyers can reduce future reporting work by requiring a consistent technical file for each style. It should connect the commercial SKU with the approved bill of materials, test reports, supplier details and production records. Composition: verified fiber percentages for shell, lining, insulation, rib, elastic and other significant components. Mass: product and packaging weights recorded with a repeatable method. Durability: relevant wash, colorfastness, pilling, abrasion, seam and dimensional-stability results. Construction: information on replaceable components, repair access and avoidable mixed-material complexity. Chemistry: finish descriptions and evidence supporting restricted-substance controls. Traceability: purchase, lot, production and shipment references that connect evidence to the finished style. Commercial planning matters as much as product design The notification refers to industrial and commercial practices, so brands should evaluate the full merchandising cycle. Forecast accuracy, order timing, replenishment, cancellation controls, outlet channels, repair and resale programs can affect how much inventory remains unsold and what happens to it. Factories can support better decisions with realistic capacity commitments, early warnings on material constraints, smaller validated pilots and clear rules for handling overproduction and rejected goods. Buyers should also specify ownership and approved disposal routes for branded surplus, samples and production waste. What to do before the final French rules are clear Procurement teams should first confirm which legal entity places each product on the French market and therefore carries EPR obligations. They can then map current product data against likely reporting needs, identify missing evidence and estimate how fee changes could affect category margins. A cross-functional review involving legal, sustainability, finance, design, sourcing and suppliers will prevent conflicting assumptions. Teams should label any calculation as provisional until the final order and implementation guidance are published. This distinction protects budgets and avoids making unsupported environmental claims. The direction is clear even while details develop: design choices, inventory practices and verifiable factory data are becoming financially connected. Brands that prepare structured evidence now will be better positioned to respond when the final French fee rules take effect. Source: European Commission TRIS — Notification 2026/0457/FR.

Asian apparel sourcing team reviewing preferred fibers and production data in a modern Chinese garment factory

Textile Exchange Maps Preferred Production Systems into Sourcing Actions

09/11/2026

Textile Exchange released its Preferred Production Systems: Pathways for Action guidance on September 9, 2026. The framework is designed to help fashion, textile and apparel organizations move from broad material ambitions to actions that support better outcomes for climate, nature, people and animals. For international apparel buyers, the practical message is that a preferred fiber name alone does not describe the production system behind it. Sourcing teams need to identify the outcome they want, the intervention that can deliver it, the evidence available and the role each supply-chain partner will play. What the pathways cover The guidance organizes action around production systems rather than treating every material as a single fixed category. Textile Exchange highlights intervention areas including reducing pesticide and fertilizer use, addressing deforestation and ecosystem conversion, upholding animal welfare, improving soil health and biodiversity, protecting human rights and livelihoods, and strengthening recycling systems. This approach matters because impacts differ by fiber, geography and production context. A cotton program may prioritize soil, water and farm inputs. A wool program may add grazing and animal-welfare controls. A recycled synthetic program needs reliable feedstock definitions, chain-of-custody records and quality management. Buyers should therefore avoid applying one checklist to every material. Translate material goals into product specifications A useful first step is to connect the brand's material target to the bill of materials and supplier nomination process. The specification should define the accepted fiber or program, required transaction evidence, applicable chain-of-custody model and any testing needed to confirm composition and performance. For outerwear, swimwear, activewear and hoodies, product teams should also assess how preferred inputs interact with stretch, insulation, colorfastness, pilling, abrasion, dimensional stability and chemical finishes. A production pathway succeeds only if the selected material can be manufactured consistently and meet the intended use. Questions buyers can add to supplier reviews Production context: Where is the raw material produced or recovered, and which environmental or social risks are most relevant there? Intervention: What specific practice is changing, who implements it and over what period? Evidence: Which farm, facility, transaction, test or audit records support the claim? Traceability: How is identity or volume maintained from raw material through spinning, knitting or weaving, dyeing and garment assembly? Performance: What indicators show progress, and how are limitations or missing data reported? Commercial fit: Are lead time, minimum order quantity, quality, capacity and price aligned with the product plan? Build a staged implementation plan Brands can begin with a small number of priority materials and products, map the relevant suppliers, and agree on baseline data before setting improvement milestones. Pilot orders should test both the material and the evidence flow. The factory can then record where documentation is lost, where specifications create production risk and which upstream partners need support. OEM and ODM manufacturers can contribute by maintaining material approval records, matching purchase and production documents, separating relevant inventory and waste streams, and reporting substitutions before production. These controls help buyers compare stated sourcing goals with what actually enters the cutting room. The pathways also provide a useful structure for supplier development. Instead of asking for a general sustainability commitment, a buyer can agree on a defined intervention, responsible owner, timeline and evidence package. That makes progress easier to verify and gives suppliers a clearer basis for investment. Source: Textile Exchange — Preferred Production Systems: Pathways for Action.

Chinese apparel development team evaluating circular outerwear materials and recycling options

Fashion’s Implementation Challenge Puts Circular Design and Recycling Decisions on the Factory Floor

09/10/2026

Global Fashion Agenda published a review on August 20, 2026 of workshop discussions held at the Global Fashion Summit in Copenhagen. Across sessions on microplastic pollution, circular design, impact prioritization and textile-to-textile recycling, one theme connected the work: the industry must convert commitments into practical, scalable implementation. For apparel buyers and manufacturers, that shift places more responsibility at the design and development stage. Decisions about fiber blends, coatings, trims, construction, durability and production control determine whether a garment can be repaired, reused or recycled long before it becomes waste. Circular design needs a production test A circular concept should survive the same commercial checks as any other product. Designers and sourcing teams need to ask whether the selected material meets performance targets, whether trims can be removed, whether the construction can be repaired and whether a realistic recycling route exists in the intended market. For outerwear, a mono-material goal may conflict with waterproof membranes, seam tape, insulation, elastic, zippers and durable finishes. The best solution depends on the use case. Teams should document necessary exceptions and reduce avoidable complexity rather than making a broad recyclability claim that the final garment cannot support. Microfibre risk connects design with manufacturing Microplastic pollution cannot be managed only at end of life. Fiber choice, yarn structure, fabric construction, brushing, washing and finishing can influence fiber release. Product teams can build a test plan that compares candidate fabrics under consistent methods and records how processing changes affect results. Factories can support this work by controlling cutting waste, filtration and housekeeping, while mills can provide information on yarn and fabric construction. Buyers should define what evidence is needed before making a reduced-shedding claim and avoid comparing results obtained with incompatible test conditions. Textile-to-textile recycling depends on feedstock quality Recyclers need predictable inputs. Unknown blends, contaminated waste and hard-to-remove components can reduce yield or exclude a product from a chosen recycling process. A sourcing program should therefore connect product specifications with the needs of the intended recycler. Confirm accepted fiber compositions, colors, finishes and contamination limits. Separate pre-consumer waste by material and record its source. Design labels, fasteners and decorations for removal where feasible. Validate recycled output against strength, appearance and safety requirements. Track mass balance from collected feedstock through usable recycled material. A practical implementation gate for buyers Before bulk approval, cross-functional teams can review four questions: Is the circular goal technically defined? Is there evidence for the selected material and process? Can the factory reproduce it at scale? Is an actual collection, repair, reuse or recycling pathway available? If one answer is unclear, the team can run a controlled pilot and record the remaining uncertainty. This approach allows progress while protecting product quality and claim credibility. It also gives OEM and ODM manufacturers a constructive role in circularity: translating ambition into specifications, trials, quality controls and production evidence. Source: Global Fashion Agenda — Fashion's Implementation Challenge.

Chinese textile chemical-management team inspecting dyeing inputs and wastewater controls

ZDHC Supplier to Zero Version 2 Shifts Chemical Management Toward Measurable Performance

09/10/2026

ZDHC published Supplier to Zero Version 2 on July 31, 2026 and opened a six-month transition period from August 1, 2026 through January 31, 2027. The updated framework becomes mandatory on February 1, 2027, giving textile, apparel, leather and footwear suppliers a defined window to review requirements and prepare their next assessment. The change matters to garment buyers because chemical management is moving beyond the existence of policies. Version 2 is structured to recognize how well a facility implements controls and improves performance across chemical inputs, production processes and outputs. Three levels now describe supplier performance Under Version 2, the three levels represent the maturity of implementation. Level 1 covers foundational systems and practices. Level 2 reflects more advanced, systematic implementation supported by evidence and continual improvement. Level 3 represents leading practice and a strong commitment to environmental performance. Assessment confidence is handled separately through self-assessment, third-party desktop review or third-party on-site review. For procurement teams, this distinction is useful: a performance level explains what the facility has implemented, while the review method indicates how the result was evaluated. What apparel factories should review ZDHC says Supplier to Zero examines how chemicals and input materials are purchased, traced and controlled; how consistently processes are implemented; how output streams are managed; and how requirements extend upstream. A practical readiness review should cover: Chemical inventory: current product names, suppliers, quantities, locations, expiry controls and safety documentation. Input conformance: evidence that dyes, auxiliaries, solvents and other formulations meet applicable ZDHC MRSL expectations. Process controls: responsibilities for approval, storage, dispensing, worker protection, spill response and change management. Output evidence: current wastewater, sludge and air-emissions records where relevant to the facility scope. Upstream management: a method for assessing laundries, printers, mills and other subcontracted wet-processing partners. Corrective action: owners, deadlines, root-cause analysis and proof that identified gaps remain closed. How buyers can use the transition period Brands should first identify which nominated factories, mills, washing units and print facilities fall within scope, then compare each facility's next assessment date with the February 2027 implementation deadline. Existing scores should not be copied into a new scorecard without confirming which version and review method produced them. A useful buyer dashboard can record the supplier's Version 2 level, assurance method, assessment date, major gaps and agreed improvement actions. This keeps the framework connected to sourcing decisions instead of treating it as a stand-alone certificate. Suppliers can begin by completing their profile on the updated Supplier Platform, reviewing the Version 2 manual and checking the revised Knowledge Base. Early preparation is especially valuable for factories with wet processing, since evidence may sit across purchasing, production, environment, health and safety, and laboratory teams. Source: ZDHC — Introducing Supplier to Zero Version 2.

Trusted by Global Brands

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24