Traceable and transparent fashion: is it possible?

Zoom on the label

* Writhing in discomfort from an itchy back *

“Aaaah but what’s itching here?” … "The label ! But it is way too long! What could they possibly write about that?”

Whether well placed or indiscreet, the label may have already caught your attention, like me. From picto-style washing recommendations to a translation of the composition into 17 languages, including a simple Made In : the label always has something to say.

Only, we read unhelpful information like Ironing after washing when we want to know the origin of the cotton or the manufacturing workshop.

Why is this not always notified? Why are there so many differences from one brand to another?

Because the basic problem is traceability. And the transparency of companies regarding it.

Let's try to understand the challenge of the textile sector in the face of an increasingly awakened ecological conscience among consumers.

What information do we expect from a piece of clothing that catches our eye? We would like to know what material it is made of. Where it was made. By whom perhaps? We would like to know more about raw materials. What country do they come from? What about merino wool? My pro-vegan friends would like to make sure that New Zealand's livestock are doing well? …Too much?

Ok but that's the idea, right? Have sufficiently relevant information for the consumer. Whether he is attentive to ethical, health or environmental issues. Or that he just needs to know how to wash his jeans.

I suggest you take an item of clothing and read its label (discreetly if you choose the one on your pants and you are at work...). If you read the name of a fast-fashion brand like H&M or Zara, it is very likely that the information is written in multiple languages, so small that a magnifying glass may be necessary, if it has not been rendered illegible when machine-washed.

(Between us, spending five minutes deciphering this little piece of fabric to try to find out what the percentage of polyester is quickly discourages me, but let's move on.)

These brands manufacture products for stores around the world, hence the need for a single multilingual label that respects all the constraints of the territories in which they are marketed.

So many countries, so many laws

This is why specific legislation must be taken into account depending on the country of marketing. For example, if writing down the composition of the garment is obligatory for industries in Europe, the maintenance conditions, size or origin of the garment are most often optional.

Other particulars are required:

• in Italy the name of the person responsible for placing it on the market must be indicated, followed by their full address.
• Same in Spain, where you must also indicate the tax number (intra-community VAT) of the company.
• In the United Kingdom and Ireland, a Keep away from fire statement must be written on sleepwear and children's clothing.
• In Finland, clothing packaging must include the following information: name of the product, name of the person responsible for placing it on the market, followed by their full address, the weight and size of the items.

So many countries, so many laws.

Now let's look at the labels of BonneGueule parts. I take my “speckled gray” shirt from my closet and grab the piece of fabric that is sticking out. I read: “98% cotton, 2% polyamide, Made in Portugal, Italian fabric from Albini”. Material composition, manufacturing origin, fabric origin.

On the other hand, I don't know where the cotton or the polyester comes from. There we touch the heartstrings. Because obviously BonneGueule asked the suppliers where the cotton used for the chosen fabric came from. But they are not always able to give the answer with exact precision.

“Why?”, you ask. Because its supplies are diverse, for two reasons:

For volume issues

Take the example of cotton.

The raw material used, cotton flower, does not always come from the same sources, the quality of which may vary.

Depending on the weather, and therefore the volume of the cotton harvest, and more generally the volatility of the market, the weaver will not source all his fabrics from a single producer.

He will therefore have to supplement with other cottons from other crops. And mix them for his creations. Depending on the fabric he wishes to create, the weaver buys the raw material he deems most relevant for his product, depending on its quality but also of course its cost.

For questions of quality/price ratio

Because you should also know that not all cotton is equal. Some of our suppliers have very high requirements for the strength of the cotton fiber which will result in a better quality fabric. For example, the famous Japanese denim brand Momotaro uses cotton from Zimbabwe, known for its strength and its ability to fix indigo.

This cotton is rarer and to obtain enough of it, you sometimes have to mix several batches from different countries and cultures. Hence the difficulty of precisely tracing the cotton present in the finished product.

Because the intermediaries between the brand and the producer can be numerous or vague

When you approach a fabric supplier, it happens differently each time.

In the most common cases, the supplier has a sufficiently developed structure to deal directly with its customers. We meet him at trade shows dedicated to professionals in the sector (Première vision, Milano Unica, etc.) or in his showroom to choose with him the next fabrics that we will use for our products.

The supplier can already give us the main information relating to its samples (composition, weight, titration, etc.) which will allow us to make the right choice of fabric for the piece we want to develop.

But not all the information, such as the origin of the raw material, is immediately available, as surprising as that may seem.

Sometimes, the person who deals directly with the brands is an intermediary who helps give visibility to suppliers who are too underdeveloped to handle the export of their goods themselves.

Added to this is the language barrier which can slow down exchanges. As well as adaptation to the cultural specificities of each person. For example, the Japanese are very discreet about their sourcing and manufacturing process.

Some categorically refuse to talk to us about it under cover of confidentiality.

In the mass-market sector, that is to say the very large textile brands, there are also traders between the producers of raw materials and the spinners. Additional intermediaries therefore.

Others have not yet integrated traceability processes into their business . Which is not so surprising.

You should know that tracing your raw materials is a fairly recent concept! The editor-in-chief of BonneGueule, Christophe, taught me that “traceability” was a neologism not long ago.

It is the agro-food industry, around the case of mad cow disease, which has awakened the conscience of consumers who have today become more vigilant about the supply chain of the products he consumes.

And in the textile sector, very few brands before the start of the 21st century questioned their suppliers about the working conditions of employees, harvests or the manufacturing methods used.

Quite simply because we didn't see the point.

On the contrary, companies were relocating massively to North Africa then to China and finally to India, Bangladesh and Pakistan in a strategy to reduce costs.

You know the rest of the story: fast fashion then pushed textile workshops in developing countries to mass produce in order to justify its business model .

Very inexpensive labor was needed, who worked hard to carry out large productions within very short deadlines.

And the less we asked ourselves the question of traceability, the better. Because this involved deploying teams to production sites to check actual working conditions. A costly deployment which did not always fit into the strategy of these brands.

Especially since the question of subcontracting and control of this by the brands themselves arises.

The tragic event at Rana Plaza in 2013 has put its finger on these unsustainable practices of the textile giants and triggered general awareness on the subject.

Now the question arises of who makes our clothes, where and under what conditions. With what materials and what chemicals?

“ Who made my clothes? ” has become the hashtag symbol of the “Fashion Revolution”, this collective bringing together brands wishing to create a fairer industry.

So, the players in the sector, under pressure from consumers and the media, are starting to get started, to question, to question themselves and that takes time.

We realize that there are many more intermediaries than we thought. And that in fact the product was subcontracted to a subcontractor's subcontractor.

Ultimately, we know nothing about who, what, where, what. An industry so opaque that we can only do better.

Companies are trying to restore order in a globalized industry formatted by production at the lowest costs for the benefit of the highest margins. And not just in fast fashion .

The construction site is vast. But the work is progressing.

“Beware of greenwashing and socialwashing in fast fashion !” alerts Nayla Ajaltouni, spokesperson for the “Ethics on Etiquette” collective , which fights for respect for fundamental human rights.

And, in the textile industry, the violation of these rights is commonplace. Let's look at what is happening in Bangladesh, India, Cambodia, in these countries which work for fast fashion and mass distribution.

"The business model of these unscrupulous brands based on ever faster and less costly production is not compatible with working conditions that respect neither the worker nor the environment. Furthermore, they do not put in the means necessary to ensure that the workshops are safe for their employees. Companies will not change on their own because they see it as a risk to their profits. This is why we want to force them to do so by law! , adds Nayla.

The good news is that, among new brands, some adopt good habits straight away.

This is the difference between an “ethical” brand which will develop a business by taking into account CSR issues upstream in all its approaches and a brand which has become “responsible” which gradually improves its value chain already built on an old model. Like century-old fashion houses for example.

But ethical brands are developing more slowly due, in addition to financial resources, to the difficulty of setting up an entire production meeting very high ethical and eco-responsible standards.

“It’s difficult but it’s possible. You have to go there, ask a lot of questions, ensure the working conditions of the workers, it takes time... but when you want you can!” tells us Julia Faure who is developing the Loom brand with her partner. .

“We advocate responsible consumption of fashion and it is true that we have developed few products compared to a more classic ready-to-wear brand but we prefer to produce less and better.”

Indeed, it is easier to adopt high ethical standards and traceability in your production when it is small. So, when a brand manages globalized production, is it able to improve it in terms of traceability?

This of course depends on the pace of collection. And its values.

The case of luxury

If in the textile industry, certain players have a different approach to sourcing , it is luxury.

In order to offer the best products, luxury houses must find the most beautiful fibers, the most beautiful skins, the most beautiful stones.

Logically, companies are very demanding and impose rigorous specifications on the producers of these materials.

This quality requirement therefore naturally goes in the direction of traceability and responsibility. We understand that luxury houses cannot afford to have gray areas in their value chain.

They also try as much as possible to be vertically integrated, that is to say, to control their supply chain from raw materials to distribution of the finished product. Always with a concern for quality. This requirement is logically found among consumers and INGOs .

Associations like Greenpeace and PETA have much more visibility on the internet and social networks. They put pressure on brands to force them out of silence.

“How are these skins produced? By who ? In which country ?" are the kinds of questions these brands are asked publicly. “A refusal to respond and bad buzz is guaranteed!”, tells us Hélène Sarfati-Leduc, luxury fashion and sustainable development expert consultant at Le French Bureau. “They therefore have every interest in being transparent, especially since they are not the worst students.”

Over the last ten years, we have found among certain luxury houses a strategy resolutely focused on sustainable development.

This is demonstrated in particular by the Kering group which includes, among others, the brands Gucci, Balenciaga and Saint Laurent.

Formerly PPR, the group did not change its name by chance. Kering (pronounced “caring” in English, which means “taking care” in French) is a pioneer in carbon footprint analysis and is increasingly demanding of its suppliers on the traceability and environmental safety of their products. manufacturing processes.

At Hermès, the traceability of diamonds is particularly advanced thanks to in-house control at each stage from the extraction of the stone until the sale of the finished product.

The protection of plant and animal species which have an interest in luxury has been at the heart of the strategy of the major French houses.

The LVMH group created the ethnobotany department to preserve the plants necessary for perfume and cosmetics. Still at LVMH, the Loro Piana brand signed an agreement (in 1994!) to have the exclusive right to purchase, process and export vicuña wool from Peru.

Enough to ensure the sustainability of their business but also perfect traceability. And it is with pride that they communicate it on their site.

Where the problem lies is in noting the gap sometimes between declarations of intent, the strictest specifications in the world and the reality of their implementation, the difficulty of controlling subcontractors and subcontractors of the latter. The issue of Cash Investigation on France 2 entitled “ Luxury, the underlying shocks ” strongly attests to this. In particular, the part of the subject devoted to tanneries in Italy.
And demonstrates how these large luxury groups still have progress to make when a grain of sand interferes with a beautiful, well-oiled communication.

False transparency

If today companies are working to have more complete traceability, some brands go so far as to speak of a “completely transparent” model for the manufacturing of their products.

Understand “here is the photo of the factory we work with and here are the margins we charge”. Watch out for the tree that hides the forest!

If displaying prices in complete transparency is a rather laudable initiative, the customer must not be satisfied with it and must continue his questions regarding the product. Because he knows how much it cost, in the case of Maison Standards for example, to manufacture his shirt but has no further explanation on the price.

The origin of the materials is often unknown because, no, the cotton does not come from Portugal as their infographic might suggest. It is the workshop manufacturing the fabric or the one assembling the shirt which must be located in Portugal. Not very clear, therefore not really transparent.

Photos of factories can be reassuring but an exhaustive report of ALL the factories with which they work, detailing contracts and working conditions would be more coherent to justify this “transparent model”. With all the limitations of exercise.

Does “real” transparency exist?

Go see the Veja project : here we enter the “game” of transparency. And sincerity. We also understand very well what their limits are in terms of sourcing and social commitments. With several advantages in their case: they work in a short circuit on a single type of product (shoes), with few intermediaries, which they also know.

The work of the Asket brand should also be highlighted. For each product, each material, each thread is traceable. Or almost: it is noted that the search for traceability is underway for a few more production details. Work in progress … But at least we know where the raw material comes from.

And I'm not just talking about growing plant fibers! What about animal fibers? Traceability not necessarily simpler.

In certain cases where spinning is integrated and partnerships with farms created, the supplier can say precisely where the wool comes from and what precisely its quality is.

It's simple, it's cool, it's good, it's beautiful. Some brands like Icebreaker go so far as to communicate a report detailing their sourcing , mainly merino sheep farms.

We learn in particular that the brand and the breeders are linked by contracts lasting ten years. Relationships of trust therefore, beneficial for both parties. At BonneGueule, we know only too well the value of these relationships of trust with suppliers.

When the spinning mill is not completely vertically integrated, in the majority of cases, the wool can come from several suppliers.

And the only real means of control is to go on site to check the working conditions of the employees and the breeding of the animals.

In the absence of human and financial resources — and it takes A LOT to carry out this control work — the company must trust the supplier. But this can also reassure her via labels.

Environmental labels

There are many in the textile industry but few are truly reliable. We remember in particular this famous report on cotton pinning the BCI label but fortunately some are more solid.

GOTS (Global Organic Textil Standard) is one of them. The requirements of this label are interesting in many respects: environment (natural fibers grown in organic farming), ethics (social protection of workers) and health (constraints on chemical products).

Independent laboratories audit and monitor the proper implementation of these standards at production sites.

Can we trust GOTS labeled products? Always difficult to answer in the affirmative on this type of question because to be sure you would have to check it yourself.

But we really want to believe it for GOTS. In particular because of their complete specifications and the audit of the sites by a third-party laboratory.

With a downside according to Julien, our collection manager: "there is less choice at the moment, but we are seduced by GOTS. Knowing that there is no miracle solution".

But new avenues must be explored for better tracking: RFID-UHF and blockchain.

Technology to aid traceability

The RFID chip can contain and deliver data using radio frequency waves. This is an interesting tool for several reasons.

1. There is a use for the consumer: having all the information about the garment in store (or at home) with a simple scan.
2. And there are also several advantages for the brand: better tracing throughout the clothing supply chain as well as considerable time savings for stock tracking (inventory etc.).
3. Particularly interesting in mass-market brands which manage millions of products every day, the RFID chip also presents undeniable advantages at our level. If only to save time on tracing the goods from the manufacturing workshops.

Another technology that we talk about a lot because it risks disrupting the security of computer data on an international scale: blockchain .

Basically, the database will be distributed in “ block ” structures linked together, therefore forming a “ chain ”. This distribution makes it possible to fight against data falsification. This technology can therefore be applied to product traceability.

Provenance, an English company, helps brands set up a transparent supply chain for their consumers.

Each actor involved in the production process could add information to a QR code or an RFID chip located on the label or directly in the fabric.

Provenance collaborated with Martine Jarglaard (having cut her teeth at Vivienne Westwood), who launched her eponymous women's ready-to-wear brand. The first collection using blockchain at all stages of its value chain was launched in 2017.

Certainly Martine Jarglaard offers a reduced collection, built with few suppliers, but resolutely turned towards the future. That of a fashion that is more responsible towards its environment and more transparent with its customers.