In recent years, the increasing awareness of fashion sustainability and the environmental impact of apparel production and consumption has motivated many fashion brands and retailers to provide “sustainable apparel” products. Although the concept of “sustainable apparel” continues to evolve, using preferred fibres like recycled materials and organic content are among the most popular and essential practices. 

While the United States traditionally is not regarded as a leading apparel-producing country, mainly due to its high wage levels, “sustainable apparel” could be a potential opportunity to promote US domestic clothing manufacturing.

On the one hand, studies repeatedly show that consumers generally have a favourable perception of clothing “Made in the USA” and regard such products as more environmentally friendly and socially responsibly made.

On the other hand, making sustainable apparel often requires substantial technology support and heavy research and development (R&D) investment. These unique features present a promising opportunity for US manufacturers to compete in the sustainable apparel market, given their access to abundant capital, human talent, research, and innovation resources, which are often lacking in a developing country. 

By leveraging thousands of product-level data collected from fashion companies’ websites, this study analysed the availability and detailed product features of sustainable apparel labelled “Made in the USA.”

These apparel products explicitly mention using recycled textile materials or organic fibres in the product descriptions. To capture the most timely and representative market trends, this study selected sustainable apparel for sale in the world’s leading consumer markets, including the US, EU5 (UK, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain), and Canada from January 2022 to September 2023.  

Country * UK   USA   Afghanistan   Åland Islands   Albania   Algeria   American Samoa   Andorra   Angola   Anguilla   Antarctica   Antigua and Barbuda   Argentina   Armenia   Aruba   Australia   Austria   Azerbaijan   Bahamas   Bahrain   Bangladesh   Barbados   Belarus   Belgium   Belize   Benin   Bermuda   Bhutan   Bolivia   Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba   Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana   Bouvet Island   Brazil   British Indian Ocean Territory   Brunei Darussalam   Bulgaria   Burkina Faso   Burundi   Cambodia   Cameroon   Canada   Cape Verde   Cayman Islands   Central African Republic Chad   Chile   China   Christmas Island   Cocos Islands   Colombia   Comoros   Congo   Democratic Republic of the Congo   Cook Islands   Costa Rica   Côte d"Ivoire   Croatia   Cuba   Curaçao   Cyprus   Czech Republic   Denmark   Djibouti   Dominica   Dominican Republic   Ecuador   Egypt   El Salvador   Equatorial Guinea   Eritrea   Estonia   Ethiopia   Falkland Islands   Faroe Islands   Fiji   Finland   France   French Guiana   French Polynesia   French Southern Territories Gabon   Gambia   Georgia   Germany   Ghana   Gibraltar   Greece   Greenland   Grenada   Guadeloupe   Guam   Guatemala   Guernsey   Guinea   Guinea-Bissau   Guyana   Haiti   Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See   Honduras   Hong Kong   Hungary   Iceland   India   Indonesia   Iran   Iraq   Ireland   Isle of Man   Israel   Italy   Jamaica   Japan   Jersey   Jordan   Kazakhstan   Kenya   Kiribati   North Korea   South Korea   Kuwait   Kyrgyzstan   Lao   Latvia   Lebanon   Lesotho   Liberia   Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein   Lithuania   Luxembourg   Macao   Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of   Madagascar   Malawi   Malaysia   Maldives   Mali   Malta   Marshall Islands   Martinique   Mauritania   Mauritius   Mayotte   Mexico   Micronesia   Moldova   Monaco   Mongolia   Montenegro   Montserrat   Morocco   Mozambique   Myanmar   Namibia   Nauru   Nepal   Netherlands   New Caledonia   New Zealand   Nicaragua   Niger   Nigeria   Niue   Norfolk Island   Northern Mariana Islands Norway   Oman   Pakistan   Palau   Palestinian Territory   Panama   Papua New Guinea   Paraguay   Peru   Philippines   Pitcairn   Poland   Portugal   Puerto Rico   Qatar   Réunion   Romania   Russian Federation   Rwanda   Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha   Saint Kitts and Nevis   Saint Lucia   Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and The Grenadines Samoa   San Marino   Sao Tome and Principe   Saudi Arabia   Senegal   Serbia   Seychelles   Sierra Leone   Singapore   Slovakia   Slovenia   Solomon Islands   Somalia   South Africa   South Georgia and The South Sandwich Islands   Spain   Sri Lanka   Sudan   Suriname   Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland   Sweden   Switzerland   Syrian Arab Republic   Taiwan   Tajikistan   Tanzania   Thailand   Timor-Leste   Togo   Tokelau   Tonga   Trinidad and Tobago   Tunisia   Turkey   Turkmenistan   Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu   Uganda   Ukraine   United Arab Emirates   US Minor Outlying Islands Uruguay   Uzbekistan   Vanuatu   Venezuela   Vietnam   British Virgin Islands US Virgin Islands   Wallis and Futuna   Western Sahara   Yemen   Zambia   Zimbabwe   Kosovo  

Industry *   Academia & Education   Aerospace, Defense & Security   Agriculture   Asset Management   Automotive   Banking & Payments   Chemicals   Construction   Consumer   Foodservice   Government, trade bodies and NGOs   Health & Fitness   Hospitals & Healthcare HR, Staffing & Recruitment   Insurance   Investment Banking   Legal Services   Management Consulting   Marketing & Advertising Media & Publishing   Medical Devices   Mining   Oil & Gas   Packaging   Pharmaceuticals   Power & Utilities   Private Equity   Real Estate   Retail   Sport   Technology   Telecom   Transportation & Logistics   Travel, Tourism & Hospitality   Venture Capital  

Tick here to opt out of curated industry news, reports, and event updates from Just Style.  

I consent to GlobalData UK Limited collecting my details provided via this form in accordance with the privacy policy  

Submit and download

The study’s findings provide valuable insights for fashion companies regarding the strengths and capacity of the United States to serve as a sourcing base for sustainable apparel products. The results can also inspire future policies to incentivise more sustainable apparel production in the US. 

Sustainable apparel ‘Made in USA’ market presence  

First, contrary to common perception, data suggests a decent presence of sustainable apparel “Made in the USA” in the world marketplace. For example, from January 2022 to September 2023, over 15,000 Stock Keeping Units (SKUs) of apparel “Made in the USA” using recycled textile materials and another 6,000 SKUs containing organic fibre were for sale in the US market and worldwide. Notably, even though clothing made from recycled textile materials is a relatively new and emerging product category, US manufacturers are among the world’s top suppliers.

Second, US-made sustainable apparel is popular in the domestic market and beyond. The domestic market remains the top priority for sustainable apparel “Made in the USA.” Specifically, measured in the number of SKUs, approximately 43% of US-made clothing using recycled textile materials and another 30% of US-made clothing from organic fibre were sold in the domestic market from January 2022 to September 2023.

Meanwhile, when measured by the number of SKUs, more than half of “Made in the USA” apparel using recycled textiles was sold outside the US, such as in Europe and Canada. The percentage was even higher for apparel products made from organic materials. These results reveal foreign consumers’ positive views of the United States as a trustworthy source of sustainable apparel and retailers’ global sourcing practices for such products.

Furthermore, sustainable apparel “Made in the USA” covers various market segments.  

When measured in the number of SKUs, over 70% of sustainable apparel “Made in the USA” for sale in the US domestic market during the examined period targeted the value and mass market segments. Consistent with the results, the top sellers of US-made sustainable apparel were also mostly mass-market retailers, such as Target, Zappos, Madewell, Lord & Taylor, and Macy’s. In other words, it could be different from the common perception that sustainable apparel “Made in the USA” was not necessarily beyond the affordability of ordinary consumers.  

Meanwhile, a relatively higher percentage of US-made sustainable apparel in the EU targets the luxury and premium market segments. This result reflects the distinctive market structure for sustainable apparel products in European countries, where a higher concentration of high-end fashion retailers is present, and both local consumers and international tourists are more inclined to pay a premium for clothing products made with environmentally friendly fibres. 

Product features

Results show that sustainable apparel “Made in the USA” has several unique product assortment features.  

First, sustainable apparel “Made in the USA” is more visible in specific categories than others. For example, regarding clothing using recycled textile materials, swimwear and hosiery ranked among the top categories of US-made sustainable apparel introduced to the market. This phenomenon can be attributed to the US being one of the world’s leading producers of recycled polyester widely used in swimwear. Also, compared to other apparel categories, hosiery manufacturing has become more automated today, allowing US producers to use machines, thereby reducing total production costs. Regarding clothing made from organic fibres, both US and non-US-made products exhibit a high concentration in tops, likely due to the prevalent use of organic cotton. 

Nevertheless, most sustainable apparel products that are relatively more complex to produce, such as outerwear, were non-US made. The lack of cut-and-sew capabilities for such items in the US could be a critical factor behind the limited supply. 

Secondly, sustainable apparel labelled “Made in the USA” places a higher concentration on women’s clothing than products manufactured elsewhere. This was particularly the case for clothing made from recycled textile materials, where over 80% of US-made were womenswear compared to only 52% of non-US-made clothing items. Interestingly, there were significantly fewer US-made sustainable childrenswear items, possibly reflecting the requirement for more advanced production techniques to meet stricter safety standards in this category. 

Third, similar to products made elsewhere, sustainable “Made in the USA” apparel looks less stylish than regular clothing using virgin fibres. Specifically, more than 70% of US-made clothing made from recycled textile materials adopted the plain style without using any graphic or patterned design. Similarly, over half of US-made clothing using organic fibre also adopted the plain pattern. Previous studies consistently show that because of the fibre limitations leading to inconsistencies, technically, adding more graphic patterns to clothing items using recycled or organic fibres could be more challenging.  

Fourth, the percentage of sustainable apparel “Made in the USA” that provides fibre certification information remains relatively low, an area that needs improvement. In most markets, “Made in the USA” recycled and organic apparel reported a lower certification percentage than products made elsewhere. The scarcity of certifications may be attributed to the time and cost of obtaining them. Certification fees typically apply to each product order, regardless of size, making it considerably more expensive for sustainable apparel producers that carry orders with smaller SKUs. Nevertheless, studies indicate certifications are crucial for demonstrating credibility and communicating sustainability efforts to consumers. Governments worldwide are also working on new legislation to impose more restrictive requirements on certifying the garment’s recycled and organic fibre content.  

Additionally, for clothing made from recycled textile materials, intriguing distinctions exist between “Made in the USA” apparel and those made elsewhere in the selection of specific fibre content. Notably, about 37% of US-made clothing using recycled content consists of nylon, significantly higher than non-US-made items in the market. In comparison, whereas the supply of recycled polyester exceeds many other fibres worldwide, it appears to be less dominantly used in US-made clothing containing recycled textiles. One possible contributing factor is the product structure. For example, hosiery, which widely uses recycled nylon, is a leading category of apparel “Made in the USA.” Legal factors may also play a role. For instance, some US states have implemented regulations prohibiting certain plastic-related chemicals, such as bisphenol A, in clothing, which could result in US manufacturers’ more cautious use of recycled polyester generated from plastic bottles. 

Pricing strategies for sustainable apparel “Made in the USA”

Two patterns are worth watching regarding the price competitiveness of sustainable apparel “Made in the USA.” 

On the one hand, for clothing made from recycled textile materials, “Made in the USA” items are often priced relatively lower than those made elsewhere in the retail market. Some notable examples include bottoms, underwear, sleepwear, and product sets in the mass and value market and bottoms and sleepwear in the luxury and premium markets. To a certain extent, this result revealed the cost advantages of “Made in the USA” for clothing made from recycled textile materials and highlights US manufacturers’ leadership in production scale for such products. 

However, on the other hand, US-made apparel is often priced higher than those made elsewhere for clothing using organic fibre content. For example, both in the mass and value segments and the luxury and premium markets, US-made tops, dresses, and even swimwear are priced much higher than non-US-made. As many low-wage developing countries actively supply organic fibres such as cotton and the production process remains labour intensive, it could make it more challenging for the US as a high-wage developed country to compete on price.  

In conclusion, this study’s findings suggest a decent presence of sustainable apparel production and sourcing base in the United States. For relatively new product categories like clothing made from recycled textile materials, apparel “Made in the USA” demonstrates unique market competitiveness with future growth potential. To further promote sustainable apparel “Made in the USA” in the world marketplace, more efforts could be made to strengthen US production capacity beyond relatively simple product categories. Meanwhile, industry associations could consider developing more practical guidelines to streamline the certification process for recycled or other sustainable fibre content in garments.

Additionally, policymakers could explore measures to incentivise new investments in production capacity for sustainable apparel, facilitating cost reduction for manufacturers and encouraging fashion companies to expand domestic sourcing for such products.   

By Just Style