Industry experts argue US fashion sustainability legislation is moving in the right direction at a state level but there is little appetite for country-wide policies that would give real incentives for fashion companies to change.

While many consider sustainability and climate legislation in the United States to be lagging behind Europe, a panel of speakers at the Global Fashion Summit in Boston argue that many state-level laws are starting to push for real change in the US.

“I think we need to correct that idea – a lot of states have economies that are larger than significant countries in Europe,” New Standard Institute’s director Maxine Bédat explained. She said there is a tendency to prioritise federal-level policy in the US, but a lot of meaningful action is currently taking shape at a state level.

US state legislation versus EU top-down policies

She said: “We’re seeing states like New York, California and Massachusetts taking the lead in the textile space.”

This summer (June) California, Maine and New York enacted laws and regulations against PFAS such as labels, restrictions or disclosures. Plus, the California Act, which will promote circularity and tackle textile waste in the state, was introduced in March.

Bédat highlighted this is in contrast to what she sees as a “top-down” climate legislation in the EU, with the Green Deal being pushed at an EU level going above and beyond many member state laws.

“We don’t have that same framework,” she said. However, she pointed out the US has made real progress in terms of legislation at the state level.

The EU’s Green Deal includes new laws to ensure that clothing sold in Europe is longer-lasting, easier to repair and traceable, under the EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles law. While there isn’t a similar pending legislation at a federal level in the US, some brands have taken steps towards similar goals with their own schemes.

Randi Marshall, the head of government and public affairs, Americas for Swedish fashion brand H&M, argued that digital passports, which  are a “turning point” for circulatory and transparency rules in apparel. Digital product passports are also part of the EU’s pending climate legislation but there aren’t plans to introduce anything similar in the US as of yet.

Marshall believes legislation would really help here and added this could give brands better data on the longevity of garments and their whole lifecycle.

He said: “This is the type of technology – and really the type of policy – that can really be helpful at turning the page and helping us get a little bit further down the road.”

The benefits of country-wide legislation for fashion brands

This is where country-wide legislation could really help US companies. The American Apparel and Footwear Association’s (AAFA) sustainability director Chelsea Murtha shared that brands are working on modernising fashion labelling but agreed that this change needs to be made on a federal level.

She stated: “We’re talking about replacing physical labels with digital labels,” but added these issues were not currently a priority for current presidential candidates. She believes that something at a federal level could have a much more significant impact.

Sustainable justice educator and content creator Dominique Drakeford agreed and said she’s aware of the missing drive for change at a federal level.

She explained: “American politics are a lot more interested in the symbolism of action as opposed to action taking place,” and added that they often see a “façade” of change, rather than concrete action.

Drakeford also pointed out that any discussion on improving sustainability in the apparel sector needs to take into account everyone in the supply chain, and not just the stakeholders sitting at the top of fashion companies.

American Circular Textiles executive director Rachel Kibbe looked to the energy and automotive sectors where federal legislation had helped push companies towards positive change.

She used it as an example of how this could work with the right political will and called for similar measures in apparel – particularly those that offered incentives and funding for innovation rather than just punishments for those that do not comply.

Kibbe stated: “There’s so much technology and science that’s going into making our industry more circular that could really benefit from policy that provides incentives.” She used the example of electric cars and how the cost to consumers has been reduced through government incentives and subsidies in many regions.

AAFA’s Murtha encouraged brands to consider hiring government affairs specialists to help them navigate these changing rules and ensure the industry has a voice when working with politicians.

New Standard Institute’s Bédat asserted the fashion and apparel sector has a “really powerful and important role to play” in creating legislation in this area. She said that, generally, legislation both in the US and Europe was heading towards more transparency and traceability.

Taking steps towards these goals would not be in vein with Bédat concluding: “If you are doing those things, as a company you are going to be in a good place.”

By Just Style