ITC Product - Textiles and Clothing - Eco-Labelling and Environmentally Friendly Products and Production Methods Affecting the International Trade in Textiles and Clothing

Eco-Labelling and Environmentally Friendly Products and Production Methods

Affecting the International Trade in Textiles and Clothing

by

Mr. Antero Hyvarinen

International Marketing Expert

Geneva, Switzerland

Introduction:

There has been a significant increase over the past few years in the use of eco-labels, i.e. environmental labels attached to a variety of products to attract the attention of consumers about the environmentally positive features of the products. Generally these labels are voluntary and mostly used for the promotion of the products on the basis of their environmentally friendly characteristics. In the case of textiles and clothing there are for the time being no eco-labels the use of which has been enforced by mandatory rules.

Eco-labels are normally issued either by Government supported or private enterprises once it has been proved that the product of the applicant has met the criteria set by them for the label. The criteria for the use of eco-labels are mostly based on the “cradle-to-grave” approach, i.e. the life-cycle analysis of the product. The cradle-to-grave approach for textiles and clothing is making the assessment of the impact on the environment of the product during its life-cycle: processing of raw materials, production, distribution, consumption (maintenance, i.e. washing, ironing, dry-cleaning) and finally disposal of the product. Admittedly there are big differences between various eco-labelling schemes, some of which are based on detailed analysis of the environmental impacts as again some other systems may analyse only certain stages of the life-cycle.

There are different eco-labelling schemes both in developed and developing countries. The following list includes some of the government sponsored and some private labelling schemes:

Government sponsored schemes:

Blue Angel (D), Eco Mark (JPN), Environmental Choice (CND), White Swan (Nordic Countries), EU, Eco-Mark (India), Green Label (Singapore)

Private labelling schemes:

eco-tex, Oeko-Tex(textiles and clothing)(D). Green Seal (US), Bra Miljöval(Sweden), Britta Steilmann Collection (D) etc.

The EU eco-label is valid in all 15 member countries, but the national ones are normally valid only in one country. The exception to this rule is Nordic Swan, which is
valid in all Nordic countries. This is naturally a potential problem for developing country producers, since they would have to apply separately for the eco-award in each country.

Producers/exporters in developing countries are somewhat apprehensive about these eco-labelling schemes which one day may become an additional barrier for local manufacturers. These schemes may eventually reduce the chances for market access and there may also be some incentive schemes in the future for environmentally friendly products.

Lately the consumers in several European markets have become acquainted with so-called Fair Trade label. These labels mainly focus on the improvement of living and working conditions in those developing countries where the labelled products are coming from. Environmental issues, however, play a somewhat minor role within the Fair Trade labels. Products are normally agro-based products, such as tea, coffee, honey and textiles. The best known is Max Havelaar label, which was launched in the Netherlands in 1988 for coffee. The Trans Fair International was established in 1992 by the European Free Trade Association and Trans Fair Germany. The main focus is the social aspects related to people working in agriculture in developing countries. The market for Fair Trade products is still rather limited, even though it has been gradually growing. The suppliers in developing countries are also helped to improve the working conditions, health care etc. The Dutch Clean Clothes Campaign is trying to improve the working conditions in the garment industry in developing countries. In a similar manner some major retailers in Switzerland, such as MIGROS, MANORA, Coop etc. are following SA 8000 (Social Accountability) in order to improve the garment workers’ health care, working environment etc. in developing countries. It is clear that the buyers in developed countries have become aware of the potential dangers of “bad press” if their suppliers are seen to use child labour or the working conditions are “inhumane” etc. Once the quotas are gone the social consciousness amongst Western consumers may eventually be used against garment producers in DCs and TEs.

In this connection it may be mentioned that the US Administration introduced some years ago a Code of Conduct, which has to be signed by US importers to guarantee that their suppliers are following the rules of the Code of Conduct. The EU has also introduced its Code of Conduct, even though it has not been implemented in a similar fashion as the American one. Instead, in Europe several major retailers have introduced their own Code of Conduct which has to be followed by their suppliers.

Some years ago it became evident that fast-moving changes in the area of ecologically friendly products, added by an array of new country-specific schemes of eco-labelling, were and are causing a lot of confusion and concern amongst the producers/exporters of textiles and clothing in developing countries and transition economies. Some of the major problem areas were initially information, transparency, eco-labels, problems in developing countries and market factors. There seemed to be lack of information; basic concepts and terminology were confusing. Furthermore, there seemed to be no clear definition of eco-label parametres and there are significant differences between various eco-labelling schemes.

EU Eco-label

The European Commission published a directive in May 1996 for the EU Eco-labels for T-shirts and bed linen. By May 1999 only nine EC eco-labels had been awarded to producers of T-shirts from a number of EU-countries.

In March 1999 the existing criteria for T-shirts and bed linen were eventually included in a larger EU eco-labelling scheme for all textiles and clothing products, as well as yarn and fabrics for use in clothing or interior textiles. The new rules aim in particular at promoting the reduction of water pollution related to the main processes of the textile manufacturing chain starting from fibre production to dyeing and finishing of fabrics. The criteria also include different emissions to air and relevant toxicological issues, as well as setting an appropriate standard for the fitness for use of the final product. It may also be mentioned that the criteria does exclude the use of dyes that are carcinogenic (certain AZO-dyes). This means that the regulation for banning a number of AZO-dyes in Germany some years ago by the German Ministry of Health will then cover all the 15 EU member states for those products which will be awarded the EU eco-label for textiles and clothing. The criteria were introduced for an initial period of three years, and it has now been slightly revised and extended till May 2007.

It remains to be seen whether the interest amongst the producers/exporters towards the new EU eco-label criteria will be any better than that towards T-shirts and bed linen. By November 2002 some 45 (primarily EU) manufacturers of textiles and clothing have been awarded the EU eco-label. The products include mainly bed linen and knitted products from a number of EU countries, such as Denmark, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain. The luke-warm reception amongst the possible applicants has no doubt been the voluntary nature of the EU eco-label. The producers/exporters/traders do not seem to be convinced about the possible advantages of attaching the EU eco-labels to their products. It is true that generally there is a positive attitude in Western markets vis-à-vis environmentally friendly products and production methods. That does not, however, necessarily mean that the consumers would be prepared to sacrifice fashion, colours etc. for the sake of the environment when making decisions about the purchases of textiles and clothing.

Natural dyes

Another problem area is natural dyes, which have attracted the producers of ecologically sound products. Not so long ago colours seemed to have vanished from fashion due to environmental trends and textiles were primarily off-white, often in loom-state. Colours, however, have come back and from time to time the question of natural dyes comes up. According to industry sources it takes about 20 grams of synthetic dyestuffs to dye 1 kg of textile fabrics to a medium shade colour. To obtain the same with vegetable dyes about 1 kg of dried leaves would be needed, i.e. an equivalent of 5-10 kg of freshly picked leaves. This means that natural dyes are not really a commercially viable alternative and they should primarily be used for niche market products only.

The same will probably apply to the production of so-called coloured cotton, which is an environmentally friendly product with a (limited) variety of appealing natural colours. So far the limited number of colours, such as blue, green, brown and purple, has been one of the obstacles for growth. Coloured cotton is being produced in Peru, Brazil, the US, France Australia, Israel, China etc. As regards transparency there is a problem in setting the criteria and standards of different schemes. Furthermore the different sectors in developing countries have not been included in the process of formulating criteria and setting standards.

Organically grown cotton is increasingly in demand amongst the importers in the Western world. However, for the time being there is only a very limited amount of organically grown cotton available, i.e. some two percent of the total cotton production. This means that some major companies, such as Nike, which have already indicated that they will go for organically grown cotton products in a big way, cannot find the necessary quantities for this purpose. It remains to be seen how organically grown cotton products will actually sell in shops. Some major retailers, such as Marks&Spencer launched men’s shirt collection in organically grown cotton in summer 2000. The price of these shirts was some 15-20% higher than the price of other cotton shirts, which did not attract many consumers.

Too many schemes and parametres

One of the main problems with present eco-label schemes is their sheer number. The selected criteria for specific schemes does not have a common range and the eco-labelling schemes do not take into account particular environmental and labour conditions in individual developing countries. Additional problems for developing countries included the lack of an infrastructure for testing, auditing and verification procedures in developing countries. The high cost of the procedures, the lack of technical know-how and the difficulty of controlling the various stages of the life-cycle have also made the export efforts more difficult. The competitiveness may also be affected by higher costs incurred in compliance with the latest requirements. As regards the markets it should be remembered that at present the eco-labels are not more than a market niche and eco-labels seem so far to be primarily a commercial and marketing tool, rather than an eco-consideration. Some years ago there were many “eco-products” offered in European markets, especially in Germany where the Green movement has been stronger than anywhere else in Europe. There were “eco-jeans”, T-shirts made of handpicked cotton only, bio-dynamic underwear.

In the field of eco-packaging hit may be mentioned that in the textile and clothing sector the questions related to environmentally friendly packaging are not very relevant. Nevertheless, it may be mentioned that different importing countries adopt varying eco-packaging laws and regulations so that the developing country exporters are often have to change their packaging for different markets. It is therefore very important that the exporters of textiles and clothing are aware of the different eco-packaging policies and their trade implications. However, the problems arising from the recycling or disposal of the packaging at the global level have so far very much concentrate in the Western world, the U.S market consuming almost one third of the total packaging materials in the world. The share of three EU-countries, Germany, the UK and France, is more or less at par with the US.

Future Activities

It is clear that the producers in developing countries and transition economies need to be kept informed about the latest developments in the field of environmentally friendly products and production methods so that they will be better prepared for the forthcoming changes. It has become obvious that developing countries (many of whom depend very heavily on exports of textiles and clothing) had to learn quickly how to comply particularly with new rules, such as the banning of Azo-dyes in Germany. It is very important to know those rules, which are or will be mandatory, such as the banning of Azo-dyes. It must, however, be noted that rules such as the banning of certain Azo-dyes in some European markets are not related to eco- labelling. The actual cause for the ban is the claim that some Azo-dyes may be carcinogenic, i.e. they may be harmful to the health of the consumers, or at least to the workers producing these dyes.

Indirectly, however, the German ban on certain Azo-dyes seems to have rather a dramatic impact on the sudden demise of clothing industries particularly in several African countries. This has happened largely due to the enormous quantities of second-hand clothing being imported to developing countries which until recently had some modest garment production mainly for the local markets. The German ban on Azo-dyes initially included recycled garments until it was realised that there was no feasible way of certifying that the second-hand clothing would not contain the banned dyes. Thus, there has been a fast increase in exports of second-hand clothing to many developing countries. Originally to be distributed free of charge to the poorest people nowadays large quantities of second hand clothing have been be sold by several charitable organisations, such as Red Cross, Caritas, Oxfam etc., in local markets and thus successfully competing with locally made products.

In general it may be emphasized that it is very important to be well informed about any new plans and schemes related to environmental matters in the textile and clothing industry in importing countries in the West, even if these plans are not obligatory, yet. One practical way of doing this is through close cooperation with the importers or their agents who will have to know about the latest trends and their importance, because it is naturally in their interest to import goods, which comply with the existing regulations.

Some concluding remarks:

There is no doubt that the environmental matters will continue to have a central role in the future development of international trade in textiles and clothing. There seem to be many open questions to be solved and a much closer global cooperation is called for. In general terms nobody is really arguing against the methods, which may lead the world into a cleaner way of living. One of the open questions, however, is the marketability of the garments. At the end of the day the garments should be sold to consumers. It may be so that the production of man made fibres is more environmentally friendly than the production of natural fibres, such as cotton, which will require the use of pesticides, insecticides and fertilizers. It may also be questioned whether an average consumer will be willing to pay a “premium” for an environmentally friendly product if there is a choice of an identical - and most probably cheaper - product which does not carry an eco-label. Perhaps there would be some reason to conduct detailed and objective surveys amongst the consumers about the environmentally friendly products in order to find out whether they are indeed interested in eco-matters - and at which price.

What about the maintenance of garments? This feature is often ignored and, yet, it is the maintenance during the life cycle of garments that will actually have an important impact on the environment. The washing of garments will use lots of water and detergents and the ironing will consume electricity. Dry-cleaning labels are still favoured by many producers - especially in the case of silk and other luxury fibres, even if hand washing were possible. However, dry cleaning is not an environmentally friendly cleaning method and it is clearly contributing towards increased pollution. Some time ago Journal du Textile indicated that French women do appreciate the easy care feature for garments, but at the same time it was emphasized that this meant that the garments should be washed machine washed instead of dry cleaning.

The consumers may be willing to change their taste a little, but the basic fashion elements will most probably continue to prevail. When designing new environmentally friendly products, we should keep in mind that the modern consumer will primarily have other parameters than environment in mind when making the choice. If the garment is pleasing to the consumer, it would probably be an additional asset if it were produced in an environmentally friendly manner.

Some other potential problem areas for the producers/exporters of textiles and clothing in developing countries and in transition economies: social clause, social labels, child labour and, most recently, code of conduct, initially introduced by the US authorities and similar action is also forthcoming within the EU. Here again it is in the interest of developing country producers to remain well informed about the latest developments and any new rules, which may be introduced in the restraining countries in the West. The end of the ATC 31.12.2004 will bring about new quota free trade in textiles and clothing, but it does not necessarily mean that trade will be entirely liberal.