1. Preferred Fiber and Material Matrix: The Preferred Fiber and Material Matrix (PFMM) is an interactive tool for brands to use to inform and guide material sourcing decisions, as well as for standards systems to view their performance across impact areas in a standardized way and toward a shared “direction of travel.” It includes over 50 fiber and raw material standards systems, accounts for eight core impact areas, and incorporates both qualitative and quantitative indicators. The PFMM is intended to be used to compare the environmental and social performance of standards systems within fiber categories.

2. Materials Impact Explorer: Built on Google Earth Engine, the Materials Impact Explorer (MIE) uses Google Cloud computing to assess the environmental risk of different fibers and raw materials across countries as they relate to environmental factors such as biodiversity, climate, and water. It also provides brands with recommendations for targeted, country-specific risk reduction activities, including opportunities to work with farmers and producers.

The post What impact tools do we offer to drive progress toward our GHG reduction target? appeared first on Textile Exchange.

For each figure on the dashboard, there is an information “call-out” which describes the figure, provides an overview of the methodology, and includes the data sources2.

The post What is the Climate+ Dashboard? appeared first on Textile Exchange.

Textile Exchange is actively working with expert partner organizations that are developing methodologies and modeling approaches to capture industry progress in these other impact areas beyond climate.

The post What is “LCA+” and how is it implemented? appeared first on Textile Exchange.

The GHG impact modeling against the 45% reduction target looks at climate impacts only (not including carbon removals), and does not include other impact areas such as biodiversity, soil health, and, water.

The full list of included and excluded fibers and raw materials and the associated modeling approach, along with other details on the GHG impact reporting methodology, are all included in the GHG impact reporting methodology document. This can be found in the library of the Impact Measurement community on The Textile Exchange Hub.

The post What is the scope of the GHG impact modeling conducted by Textile Exchange against the 45% target? appeared first on Textile Exchange.

The post How is this modeling intended to be interpreted? appeared first on Textile Exchange.

2. In 2021, we began the process of transitioning to a unified standards system. While our standards are currently focused on practice-based requirements, this process will see us move to a hybrid approach that combines traditional, practice-based requirements with key Climate+ outcomes. We will use impact data to monitor progress over time, and the model for monitoring and evaluating the impacts of those standards is in progress. You can find out more about our unified standard system, the development timeline, and the opportunities for public consultation, on our website.

The post How is Textile Exchange working to fill data gaps within its own standards system? appeared first on Textile Exchange.

1. Leading baseline LCA studies for cashmere, cotton, polyester, nylon, and leather, along with several additional studies on materials certified to Textile Exchange standards (see below) and potential expansion to other fiber and material categories in the future. At a minimum, we are aiming for results at a country level for each study. Results will be made publicly available.

2. Developing a Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) Library to house the underlying input/output data from LCA studies for open-source access, enabling the industry to fill additional gaps more efficiently in representative GHG emission factors.

3. Hosting an Impact Measurement community space on the Textile Exchange Hub, our dedicated online member platform.

The post How is Textile Exchange working to fill data gaps across the industry? appeared first on Textile Exchange.

It does not capture all impact areas such as soil health, biodiversity, animal welfare, and social impacts; it can be cost-prohibitive and resource intensive; there can be significant variability across LCA studies in the scope of what is covered as well as in other assumptions that are made; system boundaries defined for LCA studies can vary within and across fiber types; and results from LCA studies can be presented in multiple ways (e.g., “global averages” or regional impacts).

Finally, most of the LCA data collected is at the global level and thus is not a full representation of country or regional production.

The post What are the limitations of the current LCA datasets? appeared first on Textile Exchange.

The post Are modeling calculations expected to change? appeared first on Textile Exchange.

Rapidly and aggressively switching to preferred raw materials that have credible impact data (GHG emissions factors) to indicate a lower GHG impact. In 2022, Textile Exchange released new initial guidance significantly raising the bar on our definition of a “preferred” material, which can be found here. Given the number of gaps in available GHG emissions factors, it is currently not possible to model all material substitution options. GHG emissions comparisons should only be done within materials categories, not across distinct materials categories.

2. Closing the innovation gap

This includes new material solutions (sometimes referred to as “next-gen materials”) as well as other solutions that are not able to be modeled today, such as the potential carbon sequestration (removals) from regenerative agriculture.

3. Slow growth

Historically, fiber and raw material production for the fashion, apparel, and textile sector has increased year on year. But we will not reach the 2030 GHG emissions reduction target of 45% if we continue producing increasing amounts of materials and products. As an illustrative example, we have modeled a growth rate of 1% vs. the business as usual (BAU) growth rate of 3%.

The post What are the three key areas of action needed to reach the 45% GHG emission reduction goal by 2030? appeared first on Textile Exchange.