Natural fibres such as wool, cotton and mohair have historically been in competition for the same buyer. Now these industries are joining forces to take on new textile labelling laws in Europe over the very definition of sustainable.
Key points:
The wool industry has launched Make the Label Count campaign to change proposed EU labelling laws
According to a recent EU survey many fashion brands use "vague" or "misleading" sustainability claims.
There are concerns the current plan would see natural fibres rated poorly compared to synthetics based on water use, carbon footprint and recyclability.
The "Make The Label Count" campaign aims to influence proposed European Union labelling laws which would see swing tags include a sustainability rating on every fashion garment.
However, there were concerns the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) would leave natural fibres like wool and cotton worse off compared to synthetic textiles.
Claire Press, a sustainable fashion expert and the presenter of The Wardrobe Crisis podcast, explained the current methodology may not give consumers the full story.
"In sustainability, we've got a bit of a problem that there's no standard methodology or standard agreement on what we mean when we talk about a more 'sustainable' product," Ms Press said.
Right now there is some controversy that natural fibres will be worse off under the current EU PEF methodology.
However, wool and cotton industries were concerned the methodology did not factor in issues including the use of fossil fuels and growing concern about microplastics.
According to activist group, Fashion Revolution, 34 per cent of all microplastic pollution in the oceans comes from synthetic textiles.
In the same vein, wool brokers have told ABC Rural they were concerned plastic bottles recycled into clothing had become popular among those promoting sustainability, but that did not take into account those clothes ending up in landfill.
Greenwashing on the rise
The EU was the first jurisdiction to look to regulate labelling to give consumers transparent information on sustainability.
Earlier in the year the EU conducted its annual sweep of websites and for the first time targeted the rise of greenwashing amongst brands.
In more than half of the cases, the survey found the trader did not provide sufficient information for consumers to judge the claim's accuracy.
In 37 per cent of cases, the claim included vague and general statements such as "conscious", "eco-friendly" or "sustainable" which aimed to convey the unsubstantiated impression to consumers that a product had no negative impact on the environment.
Didier Reynders, Commissioner for Justice said in a statement: "The Commission is fully committed to empowering consumers in the green transition and fighting greenwashing."
Clare Press said the fashion industry needs regulation to overcome misleading marketing campaigns.
"As more customers demand or look for greener and more eco-friendly products.
"Of course, marketers rush to try to sell them those things.
"Right now, for example, the fast-fashion giant H&M is pushing a PETA-friendly vegan collection," she said.
The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has campaigned for animal-friendly fashion that uses recycled polyester and upcycled nylon "instead of animal or oil-derived products", according to H&M's website.
"And the intimation is that it is also friendly for the planet."
"But coming back to this idea of synthetics, microfibres and also the fact that they're derived from petroleum and fossil fuels, well that [planet-friendly principle] is not the case."
Wool worse off
Dalena White, secretary general of the International Wool textiles Organisation based in Brussels, said the current methodology would leave natural fibres like wool, cotton and mohair worse off.
"It will have a serious implication for our natural fibre industry right through to our farmers — which are the most vulnerable in this position," Ms White said.
The recently launched Make The Label Count campaign brought together Australian Wool Innovation, Cotton Australia, as well as anti-plastics campaigners to make the case there are gaps in the methodology.
"We know that the rest of the world is really trying to cut down on the use of fossil fuels, and somehow that point is not really being elaborated on in the process," Ms White said.
"So when we look at biodegradability, that is currently not accounted for, in the PEF process.
"Microplastic pollution, which we know is a huge issue on our planet, it's not accounted for.
"And then the fact that our natural fibres come from renewable sources, that fact is not being accounted for.
"This is such a fantastic opportunity, but we have to make sure the law is right and fair."
Sustainable fashion expert Claire Press said this was a complex field that required a nuanced approach when comparing sustainability claims.
"The EU is leading on this and it's brilliant … I'd love to see us do it in Australia," Ms Press said.
"Now personally, my view is that wool is a fantastic fibre.
"But I also do see the kind of argument for recyclability, which is what's underpinning some of this push towards synthetics.
"I think this is complex and there isn't a simple answer when it comes to sustainability."
Can consumers make a difference?
While it was not expected that the EU would implement textile labelling until at least 2023, it would be closely watched by other markets.
Until regulation was in place, some experts believed a shift in consumer behaviour was part of what was needed to turn around the fast-fashion model.
"Until we do have universal standardised labelling for sustainability, I think the onus is kind of on the consumer to do a bit more research and ask more difficult questions of brands about how they produce their stuff."