Are Ecolabels Meaningful and Reliable? A Critical Review of UK Textile and Fashion Certification. A Research Report by University of Leeds Business School for the Back to Baselines in Circular Fashion & Textiles.

The textile and fashion industry (TFI) has a profound and multidimensional impact on the environment, contributing to climate change, biodiversity loss, water stress, and chemical pollution. Amongst increasing regulatory and societal pressure to align economic activities with environmental goals, ecolabels have become prominent tools for communicating sustainability credentials. But how effective are these labels in reflecting the real pressures linked to the industry’s global value chains?

In this report we critically examine the meaningfulness and reliability of ecolabels used by leading UK TFI firms, assessing whether their metrics, scope, and verification methods provide a credible basis for environmental improvement. We draw on prior research that maps ecolabels to environmental policy and recurring sustainability claims, we assess the alignment between ecolabel criteria and scientifically documented environmental impacts.

Our findings reveal that while ecolabels are widespread, they only partially reflect key environmental pressures. Widely used labels tend to prioritise procedural standards and fibre type over measurable environmental outcomes. High-integrity schemes like GOTS remain limited in uptake, while more common certifications (e.g., BCI) often rely on mass-balance systems and lack rigorous, outcome-based metrics.

This misalignment undermines ecolabels' potential to drive meaningful change. Most schemes focus narrowly on production pressures, with little connection to systemic environmental states or impacts. They are rarely integrated with science-based frameworks or corporate sustainability standards, limiting their role as credible tools of environmental governance.

To address these gaps, this report recommends that policymakers and industry stakeholders: - Align ecolabels with science-based metrics reflecting real-world environmental pressures; - Enhance traceability and verification, especially in systems using blended or mass-balance models; - Communicate outcomes more effectively, helping consumers and stakeholders understand the real-world impact of certified choices; and - Support high-integrity ecolabels through procurement, fiscal incentives, and trade policies, with a shift towards metrics that promote systemic impact prevention, not just recycling. Without such changes, ecolabels risk spreading green-ish practices such as greenwashing, greenwishing, greenlighting and greenhushing, rather than meaningfully contributing to the environmental sustainability of the textile and fashion industry.