In order to set a final punctuation for two major research projects that have run parallel over the last five years, Consumption Research Norway Clothing division invited partners and interested parties to an closing hybrid seminar.
The title ‘More and more and more’ – when both projects have been about lessening the environmental burden and deplastification of textiles – must have intrigued many, as 76 people participated online and the physical attendance at OsloMet saw a healthy turn-out.
The seminar was divided into three parts: Context, New Knowledge and Offspring. Ingun Klepp set the scene in the first part, describing the context and unanticipated developments during the projects’ five-year period: the pandemic and the launch of EU’s Textile strategy. These two events impacted how the projects needed to reorient themselves relating to some of the work.
Kate Fletcher and Jens Maage led us through the middle part of the seminar.
The main part was the presentation of new knowledge from the partners, which was led with warm humor by Kate Fletcher (Manchester Metropolitan University) and Jens Maage (SIRK Norge). Short snapshots from both projects were disseminated with graphs, key take-aways and publications. Relating to key take-aways, Bjørn Sverre Hol Haugen from the Norwegian Folk Museum did a stellar job of presenting how the interaction between research and historic knowledge gave grounds for new knowledge, using museum artifacts and wardrobes to better understand how the use of apparel has changed relating to variety – and also to sustainable consumption patterns and discourse.
Bjørn Sverre Hol Haugen on some key take-aways from history.
Other highlighted learnings were results presented by Kirsi Laitala on how there is a lack of correlation between more repair and reuse and less buying of new stuff, an assumption often misused in EU’s policy work. And that we must look much more at the constant and aggressive marketing that is bombarding consumers, ie the bigger picture of what pressures we are being exposed to. This also surfaced in Vilde Haugrønning’s PhD work with couples’ wardrobes, where it is clear that women do have much larger wardrobes than men, and men find it easier to actually find what they are looking for in the market to serve their clothing needs. More research on what societal pressures and expectations are underlying these dynamics begs exploring. Anna Schytte Sigaard’s PhD work – which is on the disposal drivers – also brought forward the societal acceptable mechanisms that encourage the flow-through of ever-increasing apparel. That 10 percent of what is discarded is as good as new, and only 20 percent is deemed as ‘used up’, shows the uselessness of the EU Textile strategy’s focus on more durable and repairable goods. The triangle of consumption, capitalism and care will be interesting to read more about!
Gisle Mariani Mardal from NF&TA on industry and education dilemmas.
We also learned through SINTEF’s Meron Assefa Arega’s presentation that the size of an EPR fee will decide how effective it is, which is in line with Ingun’s Targeted Producer Responsibility idea that we have been trying to sell to the EU as a much better idea than the current EPR set-up. Gisle Mardal from NF&TA did his best to deflect any radical ideas on how the sector could be curbed or capped, while Irene Maldini showcased how the EU doesn’t want to hear anything relating to degrowing the massive overproduction – so much in line with the industry’s wishes to keep on doing what they are doing. Irene’s presentation also showcased the desk-top research that has unearthed how the assumption that durability is going to save us and limit overproduction, has no solid foundation in research.
SINTEF’s Meron Assefa Arega
Kerli Kant Hvass spoke about the upcoming EPR legislation, our engagement with TPR (as mentioned above) and the market experiences from ‘circular business models’ like reuse, repair and recycling – and how they struggle in a capitalist, growth-driven economy.
In the last part of the program, Ingun presented examples of budding projects, both some that are operational and others that will hopefully come to fruition. To wrap it all up, both Kate and Ingun spoke about the newest ‘win’, the project Green Blood which will start off in 2026. More to follow shortly!
Kerli Kant Hvass joined online.
Back to the title of the seminar ‘More and more and more’ which is borrowed from a book title, and was used since all the tools and measures so far suggested or implemented are drivers for more, not for less. And if we are to actually reduce the environmental burden on the planetary boundaries, we need less of everything – not more. In Jean-Baptiste Fressoz’ book, he describes how energy innovation has not led to energy transitions, but rather the use of more and more and more energy. Very much the same dynamic we see in the textile and fashion sector.
The Product Lifetimes and the Environment (PLATE) conference aims to be a conference that brings together leading researchers trying to address ways for us to align our consumption more realistically within our planetary means. But despite this, there was little will to discuss how product lifetime is related to environmental issues during the three hot summer days in Ålborg.
From SIFO Irene, Ingun, Kirsi and Lisbeth took part in the conference, and our experience was very much influenced by the fact that the two papers on the limitations of durability newly had been published.
As Irene wrote on LinkedIn:
‘After the results of our recent publications, we decided it was time to put the discussion about production volumes or quantities at the center of the table in an academic community mainly dedicated to extending the lifetime of products. Production volumes mediate the relationship between product lifetimes AND the environment (the full name of the PLATE conference). This is because the main environmental advantages of extending the lifetime of products would be the reduction of new stuff made, and this applies to all consumer goods. However, believe it or not, this is seldomly mentioned in this community. There is a lot about “product lifetimes”, but very little on “the environment”. ‘
Ingun, Kirsi, and Irene together with other scholars that have been active in this space Harald Wieser and Eléonore Maitre-Ekern organized a session that we hoped would bring in more critical views and also linking environment to lifetime. The organizers renamed the session and put it together with “Rebound effects” – making it a rather imbalanced mix. With all respect, rebound is both important and the presentations on this topic were very good. BUT…. Rebound is an unwanted side effect. We, however, wanted to discuss the missing evidence for the effects. How, when, if and in what way more durable products reduces environmental impact. Citing from the overview of sessions on PLATE’s website: “it is taken for granted that product lifetime extension (PLE) and durability lead to environmental and social benefits in line with circular economy objectives.
These advantages are expected to materialize in lower demand for new products by consumers and reduced volumes of production by industry“. The critical sessions hosted by Irene and Ingun were well attended, though some of the papers missed the mark, e.g. ‘designing for reduced material usage in a value chain’ echoes the old eco-efficiency measures, rather than approaches sufficiency. This shows both some openness and interest in the topic and that there’s a long way to go for the PLATE community to take the issue of volumes seriously. In our experiences, the younger scholars were open for our views, but we did not manage to have the discussion we aimed for. Have we missed something? Is there a (researched) link between “more durable” and “less” that we have missed?
Besides this, the conference was pleasant and filled with interesting people and topics and a lot the presentations were about wardrobes. Some examples: Aniko Gal’s talk “Connecting transition design and everyday fashion practices: a case of body change and the wardrobe” showed a good example of how life-events impact clothing longevity: documenting the changing relationship with clothing of women in Hungary and Italy throughout pregnancy, The study showed a changing perception of self, and highlighted cultural norms, e.g. the Italian women often changed their clothing style post-partum to conform to clothing norms dictated by motherhood: “I don’t want to look like a little girl anymore”.
In the talk “Hyper-Local Recirculation of Second-hand Clothing Through Donation-Thrift Networks” by Anika Kozlowski, Rachel McQueen, Liam Roy, and Charlotte Little, we learned about the informal secondhand clothing systems in Canada that have formed due to geographical obstacles and how these are focused on serving their communities, as opposed to the centralized facilities, that are focused on meeting daily quotas of product rotation in stores.
In their presentation “Gendered threads: Policy barriers to sustainable textile lifecycles”, Tiziana Ferrero-Regis and Chamari N. N. Pushpamali asked “Is textile policy gendered?”, highlighting how policies that are not scrutinised through a gender lens could perpetuate existing inequalities and create further gender disparities.
A particularly enjoyable part of conferences is meeting people who have read our work, or who we have worked with online. We all particularly appreciated meeting Hester Vanacker, who Kirsi mentors for a PhD on the intersection of clothing sustainability and just transition at l’ENSAM Paris, exploring how local upcycling centers can provide solutions to the global textile waste crisis. Through the research process, she critically examines colonial legacies within the scientific field, prioritizing action research methods appropriate to the local conditions in which the work is carried out.
Another person it was very nice to meet was Veerle Vermeyen, who also attending the Degrowth conference. She has published on an impressive wardrobe study with 156 Belgian individuals (and a lot of clothes, but presented two papers at the conference, one about unused garments showing that in wardrobe audit of 30 individuals in Flanders (Belgium) it was revealed that participants owned, on average, 169 garments, of which 138 were used in the past year (81%), and 90 were considered essential (53%). Participants’ perceived essential clothing needs varied strongly, ranging from 36 to 275 garments, or alternatively, 28% to 98% of their current wardrobe. She also presented a paper on clothing swap events. A lot to learn!
Lisbeth hosted the workshop “Exploring product lifetimes from a product ecosystem perspective”, where the participants were guided through a mapping of a furniture or clothing product’s ecosystem, taking into account other products the item may interact with, as well as the user and their life events through gradually adding prompts and prompt questions. Although limited by the 45-minute timeslot, the exercise effectively demonstrated the complexities of product lifetimes, encouraging a deep dive into a single product that participants expressed an interest in pursuing in other contexts. There is potential for developing this work further, in particular, to better capture the influence of product(ion) volumes on product lifetimes.
We went with a mission, but did not succeed. Good then that our thoughts have been picked up by others, such as Apparel Insider.
Sharing experiences of trying and failing to transform EU legislation in setting an upper production/import limit in rich countries – drawing on the case of clothing and textiles.
Chair of session Kate Fletcher
Organised as an interactive session of mutual learning and exchange about attempts to transform policy around setting upper limits to production/import of goods in rich countries, this session will invite dialogue between activists, community organisations, academics and more. The session will begin with a presentation about the experiences of clothing and textiles researchers and their dialogues with policy makers in the EU to limit production/import volumes. The session will then open to the floor, with discussion not limited to the case of clothing and textiles, to share the experiences of others’ policy dialogues in different contexts. Discussion may include: the type of language and terminology used, different ways of framing discussions, the channels that have proved effective, preferred approaches, among others.
This session links to the conference theme by sharing practices and actively linking degrowth theory and priorities to action for transformed futures.
Format of the session: Presentation: 25 minutes – Professor Ingun Grimstad Klepp, SIFO, OsloMet and Tone Tobiasson, reflecting on the work with policy as part of the research project CHANGE
Facilitated discussion open to all attendees: 45 minutes
The CISUTAC Sustainability Forum’s new webinar series is designed to inspire dialogue and share practical knowledge for a more sustainable textile sector. Sessions will bring together experts, innovators, and changemakers to explore actionable strategies for closing the loop and promoting circularity across the textile value chain. Professor Ingun Grimstad Klepp will participate in the first edition, taking place on 13 May and hosted by ACR+ (Association of Cities and Regions for Sustainable Resource Management). This session will focus on key findings related to textile waste collection. Also explored will be real-world case studies from across Europe and examining how citizen behaviour can directly impact waste prevention.
A new research article in Journal of Sustainable Marketing address EU’s Textile Strategy’s blatant avoidance of the volumes issue, and raises the question of why.
In the Journal of Sustainable Marketing, a new article penned by Irene Maldini and Ingun Grimstad Klepp, The EU Textile Strategy: How to Avoid Overproduction andOverconsumption Measures in Environmental Policy, takes the bull by the horn.
The analysis, which was just published, shows how the focus on product durability avoided addressing production volume reductions measures, leading to the exclusion of marketing-oriented regulation (applied to price, frequency of new products put on the market, product placement with influencers, advertising including social media strategy, etc.), which could have actually significant effect in tackling overproduction and overconsumption.
No volume-related questions
Instead, in the open hearings, no questions were asked that were volume-related, only related to durability (with the exception of overconsumption being mentioned once). In the answers, however, volume-related wordings are common – however, in the summary of the feedback, everything about volumes again disappears.
The article is based on the analysis of public documents and interviews with participants of the policy making process, the study unpacks the factors that enabled such a decision, and how it was integrated in the final document.
In sum, the analysis suggests that measures aimed at reducing production and/or consumption volumes were out of the scope of the Textile Strategy already from early stages. The public consultation process was designed, conducted, and analyzed in a way that ensured this exclusion, despite the efforts of some stakeholders and many survey respondents in bringing this issue to the table. The final document does not propose any mechanisms to check and ensure that these have an effect in volume reduction or on the environmental impact for that matter.
Only three peer-reviewed scientific articles
The analysis rather shows that by focusing on product durability, an explicit aim to reduce the volume of clothing was avoided, leaving potentially impactful marketing-related measures out of the scope. The study also uncovers that of the 56 different publications cited to provide the data base for the Textile Strategy, only 3 are peer reviewed scientific articles.
And this is not because there is no knowledge available on textiles and the environment impact from researchers. However, in a marketing journal, we think our perspective from consumption research ploughs new ground.
Thematically, there is a lot of overlap between consumer research and marketing research on consumption. Yet there is little cross-citation and little collaboration. This is probably related to a certain mutual skepticism. Consumer research is about taking the consumer’s position, while marketing is the opposite – at least initially, with the desire to sell something and later change consumers in one way or another. Therefore, it is extra gratifying that we have managed to overcome this barrier by publishing in a marketing journal. With great help from Diego Rinallo, Doctorate in Business Administration & Management, Bocconi University, Milan, Marketing Department. His input has been invaluable.
Irene and Ingun attending EcoAge’s round table on A fair phase-out of fossil fuels from the fashion industry.
The more we have seen the limitations of product perspectives (such as making products “repairable” and the ideas of “educating” consumers to act “sustainably”), the clearer it becomes that marketing must also be included in policy. We need knowledge about how it works and how it can be limited.
The EU, like Norway, is proud of its democracy. In the mapping of why policies develop as they do, and how and by whom decisions are made, it has been surprisingly difficult to gain insight. As the article shows, there was a lack of written documentation about the processes, a reluctance to be interviewed (although no personal questions or questions about opinions were included) and anonymity was ensured.
Sensitive stuff?
How are decisions made and are they really this sensitive to scrutiny? This begs a bigger question perhaps media should ask.
This raises questions not only about why transparency is not valued more highly in democratic countries/regions, but also about the relationship between the research community and policy.
The article sheds light on this relationship directly, and an analysis of what the EU strategy refers to, i.e. what kind of knowledge is used as a basis.
As first author, Irene Maldini reflects: “It has been an adventurous journey to develop my work into this area, and to experience the double role of trying to influence policy building on scientific knowledge (advocacy) and at the same time analyzing the processes of policymaking as an outsider (research). The former has also enabled the latter, because resistance to acknowledge the limits of the planet and economic interests in policy making processes become so clear when you are trying to bring the sufficiency agenda forward.”
The 2025 SCORAI Europe Conference took place at Lund University in Sweden on April 8-10. SCORAI (Sustainable Consumption Research and Action Initiative) is an international network of researchers and practitioners focused on sustainable consumption. This year’s theme, Mainstreaming Sustainable Consumption, brought together a community of thinkers and doers – including several researchers from SIFO.
By Anna Schytte Sigaard
Kirsi Laitala presented a paper from the CHANGE project, co-authored with Irene Maldini, titled “Access to Clothing in a Context of Material Abundance: The Role of Income.” The presentation was part of the session on “Consumption Corridors: Guaranteeing Human Wellbeing Through Upper and Lower Limits to Consumption.” Based on consumer surveys conducted in Norway, Germany, Japan, the UK, and the USA, the study highlighted the need to reduce clothing consumption in affluent societies to achieve social justice and environmental sustainability, noting that clothing consumption continues to grow despite its significant environmental impact
By examining the relationship between household income and clothing consumption, the research reveals that income does not significantly affect the total number of clothing acquisitions, likely due to decreases in the relative price of clothing and access to second-hand clothing. However, higher income does correlate with increased expenditure, purchases of new clothing, and product prices. The findings suggest that future policies aimed at reducing consumption volume in affluent nations should be combined with others that preserve equitable consumption levels in different income groups, involving stakeholders such as clothing companies, resellers, and municipalities.
PhD Research Contributions
SIFO researchers Vilde Haugrønning and Anna Schytte Sigaard also took stage in the “Practice Theory & Sociology” session. Vilde presented her work titled “The feminization of clothing consumption: Exploring drivers behind garment accumulation from a practice-oriented perspective”. Drawing on fieldwork with 15 Norwegian couples, her research allowed for a gendered comparison between couples that take part in many of the same practices and share the everyday life. Findings showed that acquisition is driven by everyday occasions, emphasizing the habitual nature of clothing consumption. In addition, women’s wardrobes were typically larger and growing faster, particularly among younger participants. While many participants, especially women, expressed a desire to reduce their clothing consumption, structural barriers made this difficult. The findings highlight that clothing acquisition is not simply a matter of personal choice or need, but rather a complex process influenced by gendered expectations around appearance, dress, and social practices.
Vilde talked about “The feminization of clothing consumption: Exploring drivers behind garment accumulation from a practice-oriented perspective”.
Anna’s presentation, “Cultural Conventions and the Contradictions of Sustainable Clothing Consumption”, shared early findings from in-depth interviews with 28 Norwegian households about textile disposal. Combining theories of social practice with convention theory, the analysis identified a variety of underlying justification people draw on, ranging from market to civic to environmental reasoning. Interestingly, while many participants referenced sustainability, these justifications often clashed with other cultural norms that still promote acquisition and disposal. The study highlights the tension consumers face when navigating the ideals and realities of sustainable consumption.
Anna’s theme was “Cultural Conventions and the Contradictions of Sustainable Clothing Consumption”.
SIFO researchers Kirsi Laitala, Harald Throne-Holst, and Ingrid Haugsrud were co-authors in two presentations from the Horizon Europe project CARE. Harald presented “Sustainable Interventions in Clothing Consumption and Food Waste: A Systematic Literature Review,” which was part of the “Interventions Toward Circular Consumption” session. Nina Mesiranta from Tampere University presented “Circular Consumption Behaviour Change from a Practice Theoretical Lens: A Systematic Literature Review,” in the session on “Practice Theory & Sociology.” Both presentations were based on a systematic literature review conducted in the CARE project.
The reviews focused on interventions and their effectiveness in shifting consumer behavior toward more circular and sustainable practices, particularly in food waste and clothing consumption. From a theoretical standpoint, our research aimed to assess the extent to which interventions with practice theory or practice theory-based elements have been applied. We found that the most effective interventions combined multiple strategies or adopted a systems approach. The results of these studies are crucial for guiding future efforts to shift consumer behavior and practices toward greater sustainability, as they highlight effective intervention strategies and provide valuable empirical evidence to inform policy development, helping to design more impactful programs and initiatives.
Harald on stage.
SIFO also presented two posters:
“The Impact of Shopping Practices on Reusable Bag Consumption: A Nationally Representative Study from Norway” by Hanna Seglem Tangen and Live Bøyum, and
“Invasive Products – The Case of Disposable Gloves in Norwegian Everyday Life” by Atle Wehn Hegnes, Kirsi Laitala, and Nina Heidenstrøm.
Both poster presentations aimed to reduce plastics consumption by examining single products such as plastic bags and disposable gloves, to better understand the conditions of their use practices.
Other Conference Contributions on Clothing and Textiles
Two dedicated sessions focused on clothing and textile research.
“Sufficiency business models: Fashion sector case studies” highlighted production-side strategies for a more sustainable fashion industry. Topic included reuse and recycling, marketing approaches to reduced consumption, circular strategies among designers, circular fashion business models, and the “Wellbeing Wardrobe” as a tool for just transitions in the industry.
“Fashion and Textiles”, chaired by Lars Fogh Mortensen (European Environmental Agency), opened with findings from the EEA’s latest report “Circularity of the EU textiles value chain in numbers[1]”.
Arjan de Koning (Leiden University) presented findings based on an examination of the post-consumer textile management chain in the Netherlands including a mapping of stakeholders. They found that tension existed between actors in this network when interests became competing. In addition, they discussed the problems with the legal definition of textile waste as “intention to dispose” as this creates heterogenous perspectives on what waste is and is not.
Frida Eggert (Lund University) presented findings from her PhD project about secondhand shopping on digital platforms. She has explored the Swedish platform Sellpy enables different modes of shopping. Findings showed that the platform made slow and fast shopping, two opposed models of secondhand clothes shopping, possible at the same time.
Nicole Berggren (Lund University) explored the repair intention-behavior gap through a case study of Nudie Jeans.
Mariko Takedomi Karlsson (Lund University) initiated her presentation with a reference to the SIFO publication “The Plastic Elephant”[2]. They carried out a policy document analysis on plastic and textiles investigating the coherence across and between relevant European Commission’s strategies anchored in the Circular Economy Action Plan (CEAP) as well as subsidiary instruments such as directives and regulations. Tentative results indicated a limited coherence between the plastic and textile strategies regarding problem definition and scope, e.g. plastics are mainly discussed in the textiles strategy in relation to microplastic pollution, but not in relation to how integrated plastics and textiles truly are regarding issues of (eco)toxicological risks, fossil fuel use, and climate impacts of production. In addition, the textile strategy differed from other strategies which largely focused on protecting the consumer (for example from hazardous chemicals) whereas the textile strategy focused on consumer responsibility.
Jason Graham-Nye (University of Technology Sydney) presented their project on sustainable nappy alternatives. They carried out a qualitative field trial of compostable nappies with a collection system in Sydney and presented findings related to the complexities of implementing this sustainable alternative. Among other things, they found that the busy everyday life of parents allowed little room for adoption of new practices. However, their efforts had eventually been successful in Samoa where different systems of waste management had allowed for implementation.
In a newly published article from Consumption Research Norway SIFO at Oslo Metropolitan University, Who Can Stop the Greenwashing, penned by Ingrid Haugsrud and Ingun Grimstad Klepp, the authors literally lambaste how the Sustainable Apparel Coalition (now Cascale) misused outdated and faulty data for their launch of a Higg (now Worldly) consumer-facing sustainability label.
In a detailed and thorough review of the case brought forward by Naturvernforbundet (Friends of the Earth) in Norway against sportswear actor Norrøna, who used the Higg MSI tool-based labeling scheme to market an organic cotton t-shirt as ‘less thirsty’ than a conventional cotton t-shirt, the authors question who has both the will and the impetus to stop greenwashing.
In the chapter, which is published in Mediating Sustainability in Consumer Society (Routledge 2024), they highlight the specific case in which The Norwegian Consumer Agency (NCA) issued a ruling in 2022: “the Higg MSI data did not constitute sufficient documentation for the claims made by the Norwegian trader in their marketing. The NCA concluded that the trader’s use of Higg MSI data in marketing was misleading, and therefore prohibited under the Norwegian Marketing Control Act”.
How the Higg Index Sustainability Profile Label was presented by Norrøna.
The result of the ruling was massive international media coverage, name-changes for both Higg and SAC, and that the Higg MSI-based label was discontinued. Assistant Director Tonje H. Drevland was responsible for the case on behalf of the NCA and is therefore an important part of this case. In addition to ruling that “Higg MSI data in marketing [is] misleading, and therefore prohibited under the Norwegian Marketing Control Act, which is based on the EU Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD). This conclusion could be seen as a warning to other traders operating in the EU/EEA area, as the NCA found that the use of Higg MSI data in marketing towards consumers in general could easily be misleading.”
Brad Boren (Norrøna) and Tonje Drevland (NCA) discussing the ruling.
The ruling was presented in letters, on webpages, in the aforementioned guidance, in lectures, and in the SAC’s annual conference for the textile industry. Here, Drevland’s message is particularly clear: “I want H&M, Inditex, all large players to take a step back and realize that the steps they are taking internally may feel [like a great cost] to them but remember to look at it from the other side, from the environmental perspective.” She also stressed that “wrong information is worse than no information“.
Which, of course, is counter to the argument used by SAC (Cascale), who have repeatedly claimed that lack of perfection should not come in the way of using the Higg data, nor hinder it from being fed into the Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules data-base.
Ingun Grimstad Klepp explaining the process that is also described in the recent publication.
The critique from the NCA on the use of the Higg MSI or rather the Higg Index Sustainability Profile is as follows:
Global averages are not product-specific.
The LCA data that backs the global averages and the Higg MSI is outdated.
In addition, the LCAs underpinning the claims were not intended for the comparisons that were made.
More consequences followed: The NCA sent a warning to the Swedish fast fashion actor H&M, in case they considered using the Higg Index Sustainability Profile in marketing in Norway, as well as a letter to the SAC (Cascale) telling them to inform all their members about the ruling, and what consequences similar claims on the market in Norway could trigger. In addition, they informed other consumer authorities in the EU/EEA about the decision and issued a general warning to “other traders operating in the EU/EEA area”. Furthermore, NCA started a coordinated action from the Consumer Protection Cooperation Network (CPC), coordinated by the European Commission and led by four consumer protection authorities from Germany, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden against Zalando. According to a press release from the EU from February 2024, Zalando removed all their misleading environmental claims from their website. Thus, a large international player was forced to follow “the ruling”.
The SAC issued a response to the NCA ruling, stating that they will launch a third-party expert review of the Higg MSI and collaborate with the NCA on how to present information to consumers, and in 2023 KPMG did publish a report, but this did not answer the main question whether the data was suited for consumer-facing information or not. They wrote that this would depend on how PEF developed. The NCA’s strong criticism of the Higg Index Sustainability Profile was particularly serious as the SAC and their work with the Higg have been central to the development in the early stages of the EU’s planned anti-greenwashing weapon, PEF. Seeing the ruling and PEF (and the data underpinning PEF) in coherence is a discussion theme – which the EU Commission has tried to avoid – repeatedly dodging the “bullet” and insisting that they are not at all related.
The SAC (Cascale) is also a member of the Policy Hub. Prior Chair of the Policy Hub Baptiste Carriere-Pradal has been the Chair of the Technical Secretariat of the Apparel EU Product Environmental Footprint. The secretariat voting members are dominated by the industry, and the SAC members have a majority of the vote, which they pay a substantial sum to have. As already mentioned, the data and the studies that underpin the Higg MSI are to a large extent the same data and studies that are being used in the development of the PEFCR.
Discussing the ruling during the IWTO Roundtable in Nürnberg in 2022.
The European Commission’s Joint Research Centre has been tasked with verifying the scientific robustness of the database. Obtaining new Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) suitable for comparison is both challenging and expensive, and even more difficult if global averages cannot be used, which is the mainstay of the LCA-based Higg MSI. Another problem is that parts of the tool are behind a paywall and therefore unavailable to consumers and for documentation, further hindering a democratic process. When the complaint was filed by Friends of the Earth Norway, they chose to pursue the case because the complaint referred to scientific papers that questioned the Higg MSI data.
This gave research and critical journalism an important role in unpacking the issue. Most notable was the work of Veronica Bates Kassatly, an independent analyst and consultant who has authored several white papers with Dorothée Baumann-Pauly: The Great Green Washing Machine: Part 1 and more importantly Part 2) The Use and Misuse of Sustainability Metrics in Fashion. Worth mentioning is also her significant contributions related to cotton and other fibres, and how the incorrect claims and misuse of LCA data abound. The articles can be found here.
Both academic research and critical journalism have pointed out serious weaknesses in the Higg MSI in general, and the claims surrounding cotton in particular. It is also evident that research and critical journalism played a role in documenting the controversies and providing the necessary information to the consumer authorities.
The NCA’s ruling stated that the Higg Index Sustainability Profile was greenwashing if the use of the scheme was consumer-facing. In contrast, their authority had no means to say anything about the tool as such. It can still be used business to business (B2B). The same information used B2B could be particularly harmful because it is to a greater extent used as a basis for decisions – which in turn affects the consumers’ options and the downstream producers. It is also possible that the power of consumer authorities, and especially the NCA, shown in the ruling, is easily pulverized if the communicator of the unreliable information is no longer the company itself, or industry organizations such as the SAC (Cascale), but authorities such as the EU, through tools like the PEF.
The article stresses that this perspective is important, and also resulted in a lot of attention in the international press in the aftermath of the ruling. Articles with headlines like “EU PEF tool’s regulations in question now after Higg’s MSI” stating that “A group of 12 organisations have expressed their concerns over the EU Commission’s plans to use Product Environment Footprint category rules (PEF-CR) ‘as a standalone method’ for communicating green claims in apparel and footwear” or “After Higg Came Under Fire for Greenwashing, Now This One’s in the Hot Seat, Too”. PEF might, in other words, just as well be a powerful greenwashing tool – if the knowledge it is based on is insufficiently documented, outdated, contested, or irrelevant, to mention some of the criticisms against the Higg MSI.
The SAC (Cascale) themselves, have called for speeding up the PEF process, and one can wonder why.
It will become more difficult to stop greenwashing based on a lack of documentation if this is hidden in the PEF system. Finding the numbers behind the score will demand a lot of detective work from consumers and others. It will perhaps become even more important to establish what is essential and relevant information for consumers.
Tonje Drevland discussing the consequences of the ruling during an OECD conference.
“Mediating Sustainability in the Consumer Society”, edited by Astrid Skjerven, Lisbeth Løvbak Berg, Liv Merete Nielsen and Dagny Stuedahl, will be launched in Oslo January 29th 2025, 4 PM. More info here.
The article Who Can Stop the Greenwashing, can be accessed here (routledge.com).
Clothing Research’s Lisbeth Løvbak Berg, who is co-editor, also has written the last article in the book: Indigenous approaches to mediation of the climate and nature emergency: a conversation with Vanessa Andreotti.
“And he don’t even care for clothes” sang Nina Simone in “My Baby Just Cares For Me” which is how the chapter “Clothing Care” opens in the new, impressive and comprehensive book “The Palgrave Handbook of Sustainability in Fashion”.
Clothing researchers in SIFO use the Nina Simone quote to discuss the connection between “care[ing] about clothes, people, and nature. There is a connection between care as something practical and mundane, such as washing and repairing clothes, and the more general feeling of wishing to preserve something. The chapter spans from presenting knowledge on techniques used to maintain (care for) clothing such as washing, repair and storage; to discussing the prerequisites for caring about this.”
Ingrid Haugsrud is the first author. The text is based on data from her MA thesis in Fashion and Society from OsloMet. In 2016, she performed a wardrobe study with six informants in their 20s, and 63 favorite garments that the informants valued especially were registered. These were the garments that their wearers cared for both in emotional and practical terms. The other authors, Ingun Grimstad Klepp and Kirsi Laitala, use these specific examples to paint a picture. Together, they have extensive experience with scientific publications about different care techniques such as washing, repair and clothing use, as well as repurposing of clothing in the wardrobe. As such the text summarizes a lot of knowledge in addition to relating it back to topical discussions today; what can lead to change and the relationship between technical lifespan and longer use time.
The chapter is a product of the CHANGE-project. It uses wardrobe studies, empirical data and discusses a variety of topics such as how one environmental challenge, the volumes of clothing that are being produced, can be reduced. It points out that helping consumers to better take care of their clothes is not a vailable solution, as consumers would only take better care of their if they owned fewer pieces. For Ingrid, this work is not only important because it brings forth the important work she did on her MA thesis, but also because it is an early preview of what she will work on in her PhD, which is fittingly a part of the larger CARE-project. She hit the ground running by acquiring a publication in the field at the very start of her PhD journey.
We have not read the book in its entirety thus far, yet we have to prize its wide subject matter. It does not only include the environmental side of sustainability, but also the cultural and social aspects. We were able to find much more information in this book compared to most books on topics such as clothing consumption and production of clothing and shoes in and outside of Western Europe and USA.
Dec. 13th 2024 15-16 CET (3-4 pm) and Jan. 16th 2025 15-16 CET (3-4 pm)
Two consecutive talks by Consumption Research Norway SIFO at OsloMet First one with Prof. Ingun Klepp and Tone Tobiasson and in January Kate Fletcher.
December 13th: Prof. Ingun Klepp, Professor at the National Institute for Consumer Research, and Tone Tobiasson, Author and journalist, from Oslo, Norway. One of the most passionate and influential tandems in the textile research / policy space, with a long track record of pioneering research projects that changed our understanding of the use phase of garments, post consumer textile flows and plastification of fashion.
January 16th. Kate Fletcher is one of the most renown sustainable fashion researchers. Her work, including that on systems change, post-growth fashion, fashion localism, decentering durability, Earth Logic and nature relations both defines and challenges the field of fashion, textiles and sustainability. She has written and/or edited 13 books available in eight languages, and in 2022 she was identified by author Margaret Atwood as a visionary. Kate is a co-founder of the Union of Concerned Researchers in Fashion. Her most recent work is about design, clothing and nature.
Join us for a thematic session at PLATE conference in Denmark (July 2025).
2025 is the last year for the CHANGE project and one of the closing activities is a thematic session at the Product Lifetimes and the Environment (PLATE) conference. The thematic session on “Rebound effects and critical views on product durability”, co-chaired by Irene Maldini, Ingun Klepp, Kirsi Laitala, Eléonore Maitre-Ekern, Harald Wieser welcomes contributions until November 29th, 2024. The conference will be held at Aalborg University in Denmark from the 2nd to the 4th of July, 2025, and you can read more here.
With this session we would like the PLATE community to press pause for a couple of days and reconsider: Are we moving in the right direction? What are the assumptions that underlie the claimed benefits of durability? Are our efforts really helping to reduce material depletion at a significant rate? What are the material and behavioural conditions that need to be met for durability to have the desired effect? And are these conditions present in real product lifetimes and in our everyday lives? What new ways of thinking can help us in advancing the field for more significant impact? These are questions that we (co-chairs of this session) find very relevant today and would love to address together with the presenting authors, while building on the quality research that we know this community can deliver.
