Life cycle assessment to advance the fashion industry’s sustainability: A review

Introduction

The production of natural and synthetic fibres within the textile industry demands a substantial amount of water, energy and chemicals, resulting in adverse impacts on local water bodies. The global distribution of textiles contributes to greenhouse gas emissions and waste. In 2015, textile production generated 1.2 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, exceeding international aviation and shipping combined (EIONET–EEA, 2019).

Estimations indicates that the textile sector contributes approximately 9% of global emissions and causes 20% of water pollution and generates around 92,000 tonnes of textile waste (Niinimäki et al., 2020).

Particularly, with a market share exceeding 30%, the European Union (EU) stands as a leading net importer in the global textile business and is also among the foremost exporters. According to the European Apparel and Textile Confederation EURATEX, the EU textile and clothing sector is estimated to have 143,000 enterprises in 2021, employing 1.3 million people and generating a turnover of 147 billion euros (EURATEX, 2022).

To address these challenges, the EU aims to enhance production, design, innovative materials, infrastructure and capacity through recovery and long-term investments. Due to lower production costs and stricter ethical standards outside Europe, the textile sector competes under unequal conditions. Despite efforts towards sustainability, Europeans still use an average of 26 kg of textiles annually, resulting in 11 kg of textile waste per person annually, mostly from developing nations (EC, 2022).

According to the ‘Study on the technological, regulatory, economic, and environmental efficacy of textile fibre recycling’ conducted by the EU Commission (EC, 2021), the direction the textile industry will take in the future is relevant to a number of recent EU policy objectives and initiatives, as the EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles would include policies that will help recycling, such as examining the viability of standardising separate garbage collection across the EU. Private entities and governmental organisations have started recognising the potential economic, social and environmental benefits of a circular textiles system (EEA, 2019).

To mitigate the sector’s environmental impact, consumers bear responsibility for the use and disposal phases. Overbuying and consumer behaviour have serious repercussions on the environmental impact of the sector (Papamichael et al., 2023). Therefore, the contribution from the final user is essential to influence the entire life cycle impact. The fashion industry’s significant contribution to waste requires innovative solutions, for a transition to a sustainable and circular economy and the pursuit of Sustainable Development Goals and the European Green Deal Strategy (Papamichael et al., 2023).

On the other hand, producers must embrace sustainable practices, including the use of low-impact materials and processes, and reduce packaging waste and greenhouse gas emissions.

There is a growing adoption of circular and sustainable business models based on the so-called R-strategies as highlighted in the dissertation on the best practices to enable sustainable business models in the textile industry conducted by the authors (De Ponte et al., 2023), where emerged that many technologies, models and processes have been developed to improve current business models by acting at different levels of production for the transition towards Sustainable Business Models.

The research from Rossi et al. (2021) underscores the importance of considering the entire supply chain for environmental sustainability in fashion and shoe production, Overall, it stresses the critical role of sustainable practices in reducing the fashion industry’s environmental footprint and calls for innovative, eco-friendly solutions.

However, to adopt business choices that positively affect the actual impact of producers, it appears to be crucial the adoption of monitoring systems which enables companies to individuate the hotspots and gaps towards a strategic transition to a more sustainable business model, allowing a better communication with the stakeholders, especially the final users, both in terms of transparency and awareness.

In this sense, the corporate responsibility emerges as a priority, and monitoring tools have an important role in supporting it.

In this sense, Directive (EU) 2024/825 aims to empower consumers and promote sustainable consumption habits by tackling misleading information and unfair commercial practices. It emphasises the importance of accurate information for consumers to make informed choices that support sustainable practices, introducing measures to combat the greenwashing phenomena, particularly impactful in fashion industry (Alizadeh et al., 2024).

Moreover, Directive (EU) 2022/2464 outlines several key objectives for corporate sustainability reporting and environmental protection. The directive seeks to enhance sustainability reporting by mandating comprehensive disclosures on environmental and social factors, aligning with existing EU regulations, such as Regulations (EU) 2019/2088 and (EU) 2020/852, which govern the disclosure of sustainability information by financial market participants. It supports the European Green Deal’s aim for a resource-efficient, competitive economy with zero net greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Additionally, the directive promotes sustainable investments by establishing a classification system for environmentally sustainable activities to prevent greenwashing. These objectives highlight the EU’s dedication to transparency, accountability and long-term sustainable development. Companies need to consider the evolving context and adapt to maintain their competitiveness.

The identified challenges call for systematic assessments, robust data collection and in-depth evaluations through instruments such as life cycle assessment (LCA), that could guide research and development for eco-design, efficient waste segregation and the integration of appropriate collection systems (Papamichael et al., 2024).

LCA has broadened its scope through time to include a wider range of products and systems, with studies commissioned by industries and governments. The development of LCA methods continues, with an increased emphasis on building international scientific consensus and standardising LCA and related approaches (Bjørn et al., 2017). Now LCA is a science-based process, standardised by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO, 2006a, 2006b) for monitoring a product’s or service’s environmental impact over the course of its life cycle. This covers raw material environmental aspects, production, usage and end-of-life treatment and disposal. LCA is a valuable technique for determining the ecological impacts of circular economy methods (Peña et al., 2021). The method proves to be a tool with multiple benefits for the company, encompassing production eco-efficiency, image improvement and marketing campaigns (Bevilacqua et al., 2011). Furthermore, the use of a comprehensive set of impact categories in LCA allows for a more holistic perspective in decision-making, considering not only the biosphere but also the social and economic dimensions affected by the decision (Peña et al., 2021).

In this perspective, the concept of Organisational LCA (ISO, 2014) could assume a key role in bringing small and medium-sized companies closer to the life cycle approach. Its focus is on the whole company, encompassing both its direct and indirect upstream- and downstream-activities. This approach would enable companies to conduct monitoring on business performance at a higher level of abstraction in the case where they have never adopted any monitoring methodology on environmental sustainability, allowing them to carry out monitoring to collect and communicate information useful for the preparation of annual sustainability reports (UNEP–SETAC–LCI, 2015).

EU is one of the most advanced in terms of efforts for sustainability and believe in the importance of monitoring tools as an instrument to individuate hotspots and support policymaking processes. In fact, the European Commission employed it to assess the impacts and benefits of different options of proposed policies. In particular, features such as a whole life cycle perspective, identification of system boundaries and the most relevant stages and points in the life cycle, as well as understanding the relationships of impacts to each other (EC-JRC, 2017), make the LCA a powerful and useful tool in a wide range of situations, from European policies to business and product case studies.

The EU has made significant strides in incorporating LCA, through initiatives such as the European Platform on Life Cycle Assessment – EPLCA – and Environmental Footprint – EF – methodology, in its two variants (Product and Organisational EF).

EPLCA supports the methodological development of LCA by examining supply chains and end-of-life waste management, while also meeting business and policy needs for sustainable production and consumption (European Commission, 2023).

The Environmental Footprint methods use recognised, scientifically rigorous assessment techniques to measure and communicate the total environmental impact of products, services and organisations over the course of their life cycle. These techniques cover 16 environmental factors, including land use, toxicity, water, air and climate change. In addition to certain calculation guidelines, they make it easier to compare the environmental performance of similar goods and businesses in related industries (European Commission, 2021).

In terms of employing life cycle approaches in European policies, it played a role in several crucial strategies, such as the European Green Deal (EC, 2019), Circular Economy Action Plan (EC, 2020b), Farm to Fork Strategy (EC, 2020a) and EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles (EC, 2022), as analysed by Sala et al. (2021).

Moreover, LCA helps identifying discrepancies between consumer perceptions and objective environmental data, informing recommendations for improvement. Comparison between LCA results and consumers-perceived environmental sustainability of three swimming products, conducted by Cappelletti et al. (2023), emphasise the importance of aligning consumer perceptions with objective environmental data to drive sustainable practices.

In all these cases, the life cycle approach proves to be a valuable and useful tool for assessing the environmental impact of products, services or processes in a systematic, comprehensive and comparable way.

Methodology

To pursue the goal of the article to provide a comprehensive overview of the role of LCA in the fashion industry highlighting the benefits and limitations of it, the first step has been to conduct a scientific literature review within the research domain of ‘Life Cycle Assessment in the fashion industry’. The approach adopted derive form the systematic protocol outlined in the Scientific Procedures and Rationales for Systematic Literature Reviews (SPAR-4-SLR), by Paul et al. (2021). This methodological framework, represented in Table 1, ensured a comprehensive and structured exploration of the existing literature, allowing for an investigation into the role of LCA in the context of the fashion industry according to the scientific literature.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

SPAR-4-SLR implementation for the present research.

Assembling	Identification Research domain: Life Cycle Assessment in the Fashion Industry Research questions: • What is the state of the art for the implementations of LCA in the fashion industry according to the literature? • What are the benefits, and limitations, of LCA in the fashion industry? Source: Journals – Scopus
	Acquisition Search period: 2013–2023 Search keywords: Boolean search using combination of words in Title, Author keywords and Abstracts. RESULTS: 716
Arranging	Organisation Organising codes: Language, Documents Type, Source Type, Title and Abstract analysis
	Purification English – Research articles – Journals – Correlation with the Research Domain RESULTS: 149
Assessing	Evaluation Analysis method: Contents analysis
	ReportingReporting convention: words (benefits and gaps)Limitation: Related to data type and topic/sector considered, year of publication, Language

LCA: life cycle assessment; SPAR-4-SLR: Scientific Procedures and Rationales for Systematic Literature Reviews.

The results obtained through this process allowed to search for the benefits and limitations of the LCA in the fashion industry with the real-life example of some companies.

SPAR-4-SLR is a three-step process: Assembling, Arranging, Assessing.

In the initial phase, two distinct sub-steps emerge: firstly, the Identification involves pinpointing the documents for review, and secondly, the Acquisition entails the initial search for these identified documents on chosen databases.

The Reference Domain is ‘LCA in the Fashion Industry’. This comprehensive exploration, guided by the Research Questions, delves into the scientific literature.

To ensure source quality, the Scopus database was selected, recognised for its comprehensive coverage and broader category indexing, as advised by Paul et al. (2021). For the same reason, in the Acquisition, Scopus served as the primary search tool and material source, due to the extensive integrated and advanced research tools.

The choice of search period fell on the last 3 years, 2013–2023, when the review was completed.

Search keywords, agreed in collaboration with other academics, were searched in the Title, Author keywords and Abstract to cover the topic of Fashion Industry with reference to sustainability aspects, using Boolean operators and wildcards in searching for the following terms:

Upon concluding the initial phase, the search yielded a total of 716 results.

The second phase involves two key sub-phases: Organising and Purification. In the Organising, the focus is on selecting appropriate Organising Codes (i.e. filters), whereas the Purification involves the actual application of these chosen filters.

Given the utilisation of Scopus as the primary search mechanism, among the filters at disposal were applied the following: Language (English), Document Type (Research Article) and Source Type (Journal). This strategic filtering aimed to refine the outcomes, ensuring greater relevance to the research questions, and excluding areas less pertinent to the topic after a thorough review of the title, abstract and full article. Focusing on research articles on journals, the review excluded review articles, editorials, conference papers and books, to aim to more on point, empirical and complete results.

The results considered refer to the last decade (2013–2023). Moreover, only the top five journals in terms of number of results were considered: ‘Journal of Cleaner Production’, ‘Sustainability Switzerland’, ‘International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment’, ‘Resources Conservation and Recycling’ and ‘Journal of Industrial Ecology’. Additionally, a linguistic aspect played a role, with a focus on English-language results, reflecting its widely recognised status for scientific communication. At this point, the results were 184.

Finally, by analysing the contents of the results, some exclusions were made based on the relevance of the results.

Upon completion of this phase, a total of 149 results were obtained.

In the Assessing phase, our research adopted a thematic approach, focusing on identifying the benefits, and limitations, of LCA according to the literature, exploring how LCA can be leveraged to promote sustainability within the sector.

It is essential to acknowledge certain limitations in this work, such as a temporal aspect, as results before 2013 were not considered, and language restrictions were applied. The analysis focused on the benefits and limitations of LCA in the fashion industry domain: this has been done by reading the articles emerged and selecting the parts where they mentioned results achieved, added value from the utilisation of the methodology, as well as the limitations encountered. Then, these aspects have been clustered into six categories for the benefits, whereas the limitations evidenced a high number of overlaps, which make it not significative to cluster them.

Results

As for the literature review results, a year-by-year breakdown of published articles from 2013 to 2023 is provided in Figure 1. We observe a general rising trend, with a spike in 2020 in terms of documents per year retrieved, signalling a growing interest on the analysed domain in the academic research.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Number of publications analysed over the last decade.

As for publication countries, as illustrated in Figure 2, countries that have contributed 10 publications or more over the past decade are highlighted.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 2.

Number of documents per countries.

In Figure 3, it possible to observe the trend in the number of publications per journal during the investigated period, focusing on those that have published five articles or more. The fields covered by these journals are diverse, encompassing topics related to sustainability in both scientific research and production domains. Notable journals include the Journal of Cleaner Production, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Sustainability Switzerland, Resources Conservation and Recycling and Journal of Industrial Ecology.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 3.

Number of documents by source.

As for the subject areas, the most present is Environmental Science, as expected. Follows Energy, then Engineering and Business, Management and Accounting and Social Sciences, with more than 40 presences (see Figure 4).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 4.

Subject areas form the research results.

The examination of contributions within the sphere of LCA in the context of the fashion industry has revealed a spectrum of benefits associated with its implementation, mentioned by the articles analysed. Authors have clustered these benefits into six areas. In the ‘Discussion’ section, the six areas are discussed starting from the contributions clustered in each of the six areas. Table 2 presents a structured overview of the identified categories of benefits of LCA within the fashion industry, offering a concise yet comprehensive understanding of its implications for sustainability in this sector. As for the limitations, few elements emerged recurrently, those are mostly related to the uncertainty of the results, due to the difficulty of getting primary data and the precise conditions required, which make the reliability of data case dependent.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

Benefits of the LCA according to the literature review.

Benefits (clusters)
• Reduction of environmental impact (ENV)• Support of decision-making processes (DM)• Support for supply chain and waste management (SCWM)• Aid in policymaking processes (PM)• Provision of data for green marketing strategies (GM)• Increase in overall efficiency (EFF)

LCA: life cycle assessment.

Each article could refer to one or more benefit areas; therefore, a matrix has been used to represent the results for clarity. In Figure 5, the results are visualised in terms of the number of documents, where the six benefit areas have been identified. The intersections represent how many articles appear in each category as well as for the combination of categories.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 5.

Matrix representation of the results according to the benefits individuated.

In Table 3, the detailed list of articles analysed.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 3.

List of scientific contributions analysed associated with the benefits emerged from them.

Reduction of environmental impact

Abu-Qdais et al. (2021); Agnhage et al. (2017); Avadí et al. (2020); Bacardit et al. (2015); Baydar et al. (2015); Bianchi et al. (2022); Bianco et al. (2023a); Biedermann et al. (2022); Busi et al. (2016); Carrières et al. (2022); Catalán et al. (2019); Cheah et al. (2013); Clarke-Sather and Cobb (2019); Daddi et al. (2017); de Albuquerque Landi et al. (2023); Diekel et al. (2021); Esteve-Turrillas and de la Guardia (2017); Fidan et al. (2021); Gomez-Campos et al. (2021); Gonzalez et al. (2023); Gu et al. (2021); Gül et al. (2015); Gurova et al. (2020); Hammar et al. (2023); Hannouf and Assefa (2017); Herrera Almanza and Corona (2020); Hicks and Theis (2017); Hildebrandt et al. (2021); Hischier (2018); Ingrao et al. (2021); Iturrondobeitia et al. (2023); Jonkers et al. (2016); Kelleret al. (2021); Kitamura et al. (2020); L’Abbate et al. (2018); Laitala et al. (2018); Laurenti et al. (2017); Li et al. (2019); Li et al. (2021); Liu et al. (2020a); Marrucci et al. (2022); Mölsä et al. (2022); Mora-Sojo et al. (2023); Morita et al. (2020); Nakhate et al. (2020); Navarro et al. (2020); Nørup et al. (2019); Oesterreich et al. (2020); Payet (2021); Peñaloza et al. (2019); Petrescu et al. (2016); Phan et al. (2023); Poldner et al. (2017); Roos and Peters (2015); Roos et al. (2016); Roos et al. (2019); Salah et al. (2022); Schmutz et al. (2020); Shi et al. (2016); Shi et al. (2019); Shou and Domenech (2022); Sim and Prabhu (2018); Slotte and Zevenhoven (2017); Steen and Palander (2016); Suarez et al. (2022); Subramanian et al. (2020); Szajczyk et al. (2023); Tasca and Puccini (2019); Terinte et al. (2014); Testa et al. (2017); Van Der Velden et al. (2014); Vergara et al. (2016); Wiedemann et al. (2015); Wiedemann et al. (2016); Wiedemann et al. (2022); Wiedemann et al. (2023); Xu et al. (2022); Yacout et al. (2016); Yasin et al. (2016); Yasin et al. (2018); Yuan et al. (2013); Zamani et al. (2015, 2017, 2018); Zhang et al. (2015); Zhu et al. (2022)

Support of decision-making processes

Agnhage et al. (2017); Al Alam et al. (2023); Astudillo et al. (2014); Bacardit et al. (2015); Bandinelli et al. (2021); Baquero et al. (2021); Bech et al. (2019); Bianco et al. (2023b); Biedermann et al. (2022); Carrières et al. (2022); Catalán et al. (2019); Cheah et al. (2013); Daddi et al. (2017); de Albuquerque Landi et al. (2023); De Saxcé et al. (2014); Demirdelen et al. (2023); Fidan et al. (2021); Gloria et al. (2014); Herrera Almanza and Corona (2020); Holmquist et al. (2021); Ingrao et al. (2021); Johnson and Plepys (2021); Jonkers et al. (2016); Klepp et al. (2020); Laurenti et al. (2017); Lenzo et al. (2017); Liu et al. (2020a); Manda et al. (2015); Monreal-Perez et al. (2022); Morita et al. (2020); Navarro et al. (2020); Oesterreich et al. (2020); Oliveira et al. (2023); Patora-Wysocka and Sułkowski (2019); Pegoretti et al. (2014); Penz and Drewes (2022); Powar et al. (2021); Resta et al. (2016); Rodrigues et al. (2022); Roos et al. (2015, 2019, 2020); Sandin et al. (2013, 2015); Schmutz et al. (2021); Shi et al. (2016); Shou and Domenech (2022); Terinte et al. (2014); Van Der Velden and Vogtländer (2017); Van Der Velden et al. (2014); Wiedemann et al. (2015, 2019); Wiedemann et al. (2022); Yacout et al. (2016); Yang et al. (2020); Yasin et al. (2016)

Support for supply chain and waste management

Abu-Qdais et al. (2021); Al Alam et al. (2023); Arafat et al. (2015); Astudillo et al. (2014); Bech et al. (2019); Biedermann et al. (2022); Colombo et al. (2023); Daddi et al. (2016); Donatello et al. (2020); Fidan et al. (2021); Gomez-Campos et al. (2021); Gonzalez et al. (2023); Hall (2019); Howard et al. (2022); Iturrondobeitia et al. (2023); Kılıç et al. (2023); Kissinger et al. (2013); L’Abbate et al. (2018); Liu et al. (2020a); Liu et al. (2020b); Mair et al. (2018); Manda et al. (2015); Mellick et al. (2021); Morita et al. (2020); Nørup et al. (2019); Oesterreich et al. (2020); Poldner et al. (2017); Rodrigues et al. (2022); Roos et al. (2019); Rosson and Byrne (2020); Salah et al. (2022); Semba et al. (2020); Tedesco and Montacchini (2020); Wiedemann et al. (2016); Wiprächtiger et al. (2022); Yang et al. (2020); Yasin and Sun (2019); Yasin et al. (2018); Yuan et al. (2013); Zamani et al. (2018)

Aid in policymaking processes

Al Alam et al. (2023); Avadí et al. (2020); Bianco et al. (2023a); Chkanikova and Kogg (2018); Clarke-Sather and Cobb (2019); Colombo et al. (2023); Daddi et al. (2016); Ding et al. (2019); Golsteijn and Vieira (2020); Gu et al. (2021); Güereca et al. (2015); Herrera Almanza and Corona (2020); Howard et al. (2022); Laurenti et al. (2017); Li et al. (2021); Muthukumarana et al. (2018); Nørup et al. (2019); Oliveira et al. (2023); Payet (2021); Prado et al. (2021); Testa et al. (2017); Turner and Nugent (2016); Wood et al. (2018); Xu et al. (2022); Yacout et al. (2016); Yuan et al. (2013); Zamani et al. (2018); Zhang et al. (2015); Zhao et al. (2021); Zhu et al. (2022)

Provision of data for green marketing strategies

Astudillo et al. (2014); Biedermann et al. (2022); Carrières et al. (2022); Castro-López et al. (2021); Chkanikova and Kogg (2018); Diekel et al. (2021); Ding et al. (2019); Donatello et al. (2020); Gomes et al. (2022); Hall (2019); Hicks and Theis (2017); Johnson and Plepys (2021); Kılıç et al. (2023); Kissinger et al. (2013); Kitamura et al. (2020); L’Abbate et al. (2018); Laurenti et al. (2017); Lenzo et al. (2017); McNeill et al. (2020); Penz and Drewes (2022); Polizzi di Sorrentino et al. (2016); Rodrigues et al. (2022); Roos et al. (2018); Roos et al. (2020); Satinet and Fouss (2022); Schmutz et al. (2021); Shou and Domenech (2022); Vanacker et al. (2022); Wiedemann et al. (2019, 2022)

Increase in overall efficiency

Agnhage et al. (2017); Bianco et al. (2023b); Carrières et al. (2022); Fidan et al. (2021); Jonkers et al. (2016); Kılıç et al. (2023); Liu et al. (2020a); Liu et al. (2020b); Manda et al. (2015); Muthukumarana et al. (2018); Navarro et al. (2020); Oesterreich et al. (2020); Pegoretti et al. (2014); Roos et al. (2018); Sander-Titgemeyer et al. (2023); Sandin et al. (2013); Terinte et al. (2014); Van Der Velden and Vogtländer (2017); Wiedemann et al. (2015, 2020); Xu et al. (2022); Yuan et al. (2013); Zhao et al. (2021)

Discussion

The analysis of published articles spanning 2013–2023 reveals a positive trajectory, marked by a noticeable increase in numbers of results on the topic. This denotes a significant attention directed towards the subject matter, influenced by evolving industry trends, policy developments and technological advancements sparking renewed academic inquiry.

This sustained engagement underscores the enduring significance of LCA methodologies and sustainability considerations within the fashion sector, motivating ongoing academic exploration and inquiry into these critical areas.

The substantial scientific literature output from Italy and China underscores their influential roles in the discourse on sustainability in the fashion industry. This mirrors the broader trend of these countries being key players in terms of both production and consumption within the fashion sector. Italy’s historical significance in fashion design and artisanry, coupled with China’s vast manufacturing capacity, positions both countries as pivotal contributors to discussions around sustainable practices, reflecting their evolving roles in addressing environmental concerns and driving sustainable innovations within the industry.

Sweden’s notable contributions in the scientific literature underscore its active engagement and multifaceted involvement in the fashion domain. Renowned for its commitment to research and innovation, Sweden’s influence spans various facets of the industry, encompassing design, production processes and a particular focus on end-of-life considerations.

Furthermore, the heightened attention to sustainability demonstrated by other European countries solidifies its position as a global leader in advancing sustainable practices within the fashion industry. This collective emphasis on environmental considerations, coupled with a commitment to research and innovation, reinforces Europe’s role as a hub for fostering and disseminating knowledge and advancements in sustainable fashion practices.

The spectrum of Journal fields encompassing publications on sustainability within the fashion industry highlights the multidimensional nature and widespread impact of this subject. This underscores how sustainability in fashion transcends disciplinary boundaries, requiring insights and contributions from various fields such as environmental science, business, design and social sciences.

The conducted analysis identified elements representative of several advantages of using LCA in the fashion industry. These aspects were categorised into six main benefits, namely: reduction of environmental impact, support for decision-making processes, assistance in supply chain and waste management, contribution to policymaking processes, provision of data for green marketing strategies and enhancement of overall efficiency.

First of all, among others, the positive impact of the LCA method on environmental impact has been extensively documented. In Phan et al. (2023), where the authors emphasise the substantial environmental benefit of selective solvent-based dissolution in reducing CO₂-eq. emissions from elastane textile waste. Their study, applying the LCA, underscores the method as an eco-friendly alternative to incineration, affirming LCA pivotal role in advocating sustainable practices in the textile industry.

The study by Zamani et al. (2017) underscores the environmental impacts of clothing libraries and emphasises collaborative consumption. Analysing key garments, it highlights the potential benefits of clothing libraries in reducing environmental impact per garment use, contingent on prolonged service life. However, substantial service life extension is crucial for tangible environmental gains. The study stresses the role of LCA in assessing climate change, water consumption, ecotoxicity and eutrophication, linking these to the clothing sector’s environmental relevance.

Laitala et al. (2018) scrutinised textile usage across fibre types and highlighted the drawbacks of solely assessing environmental impacts based on fibre production differences, neglecting product lifespan and quality. According to the study, LCA, measuring emissions and resources per function, enables product comparisons and supports environmental enhancements, mitigating environmental impacts.

In a study by Roos et al. (2016), the sustainability of Sweden’s apparel sector is examined through an LCA-based approach. By highlighting environmental issues in textile consumption, the study delves into sustainability performance, identifying interventions for improvement. Understanding these links enables targeted actions to reduce environmental footprints.

The study by Bianco et al. (2023b) conducts an LCA analysis to assess the environmental impacts of leather shoe production. It pinpoints critical factors within the production chain – companies, processes and materials – highlighting areas with the highest environmental footprint. This underscores the necessity for organisations to address sustainability not just internally but across their supply chains.

Wiedemann et al. (2023) explore the environmental benefits achievable through optimised garment care and increased use, particularly focusing on wool sweaters. Their study underscores the significant variations between best, current and worst-case scenarios regarding environmental impacts throughout the garment’s life cycle. This research emphasises the crucial role of detailed garment care and lifespan data in accurately modelling the cradle-to-grave LCA, highlighting the substantial impact variations among different scenarios.

In addition, LCA also serves as a powerful tool for supporting decision-making that prioritises sustainability and environmental protection. By providing a comprehensive assessment of environmental impacts, LCA enables stakeholders to make informed choices based on a standardised and scientific approach.

A study by Daddi et al. (2017) underscores the significance of LCA in evaluating the environmental impacts with and without industrial symbiosis initiatives. By comparing scenarios with varying degrees of implementation of industrial symbiosis, the LCA reveals positive contributions in impact categories like climate change and terrestrial eutrophication. LCA proves instrumental in measuring improvements, identifying advantages and magnifying benefits across different environmental categories. This aids managers in decision-making, supporting investments for cluster strengthening and fostering competitiveness by overcoming traditional barriers in the implementation of strategies.

Mora-Sojo et al. (2023) analysed Norwegian households’ clothing system using LCA and Material Flow Analysis to evaluate the ongoing shift to circularity in the system. Their work highlights how decisions in circularity can be supported by using tools oriented to the life cycle thinking, to enhance efficiency while fostering a more sustainable approach in the textile industry.

Resta et al. (2016) introduced an innovative approach in textile sector environmental management utilising Organisational LCA (OLCA), demonstrating its potential as a dynamic environmental performance assessment tool at company level, enhancing decision-making processes, as it provides a managerial framework for environmental assessment.

Moving to the support for waste and supply chain management, numerous articles also prove LCA role as a reliable support in these operations.

Arafat et al. (2015) conducted a comprehensive LCA analysis comparing waste treatment processes for major waste streams. The study underscored the environmental advantages of specific methods. Notably, the study emphasised the significance of LCA in determining the most eco-friendly waste treatment methods, revealing how adopting LCA-guided strategies can significantly support waste management.

Yasin and Sun (2019) highlight the applicability of LCA in managing technical textile waste. Emphasising functionality-based waste treatment, they underscore the need to distinguish technical textiles from common textile waste in LCAs. Their gate-to-grave study reveals that LCA outcomes for technical textiles vary case by case, cautioning against equating them with general textile waste. Highlighting research gaps, the authors urge LCA integration throughout technical textiles’ life cycle, particularly in end-of-life phases, benefiting waste management.

The quantification of impacts in a leather shoe production chain conducted by Biedermann et al. (2022) revealed significant chemical use and water waste, particularly from slaughterhouses and tanneries, accounting for 70% of impacts across categories. Strategies including transport mode changes, material substitutions and diverse leather sourcing were simulated, showing considerable environmental gains. LCA unveiled current environmental footprints, enabling targeted improvement strategies and identifying critical supply chain elements, crucial for optimisation in the production process.

LCA is a valuable tool for evidence-based policymaking that promotes sustainable development and environmental protection. By providing comprehensive and reliable data, LCA can inform policy decisions towards sustainable solutions.

In their study, Al Alam et al. (2023) addressed the scarcity of life cycle inventory data in the global context, focusing on Bangladesh’s textile industry, particularly knitwear. Through robust field surveys and expert interviews, they conducted an LCA, evidencing fibre production as the primary source of environmental impact and proposing technological and policy interventions.

Wood et al. (2018) displayed LCA’s utility through case studies on diet and clothing. This approach delivers spatially specific insights into environmental impact reduction and potential rebound. This method offers estimates for prioritising diverse policy interventions and lifestyle choices across sectors. Leveraging extensive macro-level datasets, it facilitates quicker assessment, aiding policymaking by pinpointing interventions and products for environmental benefit.

Moreover, Laurenti et al. (2017) conducted a comparative analysis of vegetable and chromium leather processing in 12 global tanneries, assessing carbon, water and energy footprints. They employed both LCA approaches – attributional and consequential – for both tanning methods. The study highlighted that consequential approach offers superior precision in evaluating environmental impacts by considering indirect repercussions on other industries. The outcome of the study evidence LCA’s role in informing policymakers by providing comprehensive insights into production’s broader environmental effects.

LCA results also as a valuable tool for green marketing communication, enabling brands to build trust, differentiate themselves and demonstrate their commitment to sustainability. By effectively communicating their LCA-based data, brands can attract environmentally conscious consumers, gain a competitive advantage and contribute to a more sustainable future avoiding phenomena such as of greenwashing (Alizadeh et al., 2024) and burden shifting (Manzardo et al., 2018).

In the research of Polizzi di Sorrentino et al. (2016) on consumer behaviour, three key points emerge: firstly, a holistic view of product LCA necessitates incorporating insights from behavioural science; secondly, behavioural science offers tools to gauge consumer behaviour and explore avenues for altering it and thirdly, amalgamating behavioural science insights can enhance the modelling and evaluation of the use phase in LCA. This underscores LCA’s potential in informing green marketing strategies by integrating behavioural insights into environmental assessments, despite challenges in data retrieval and costs.

The study by Carrières et al. (2022) explores how blockchain traceability enhances LCA for textiles, revealing its potential to refine environmental impact assessments on a product-by-product basis. The integration of blockchain data can deepen understanding, aiding eco-design, bolstering supply chain sustainability and promoting transparency. LCA’s constructive interaction with blockchain fosters real-time sustainability management, customer communication and informs eco-design. Incorporating LCA into companies’ strategies supports green marketing through enhanced environmental responsibility demonstration and informed product development.

The study by Satinet and Fouss (2022) examines the challenges consumers face in gauging product sustainability due to complex certifications and limited comprehensive environmental impact labels. It proposes leveraging supervised machine learning, specifically the application of LCA, to swiftly evaluate the environmental footprint of clothing products. Such models offer a rapid means for online retailers to furnish eco-information, potentially facilitating clearer green marketing strategies or comprehensive environmental labelling.

It is also essential to note that LCA plays a crucial role in improving efficiency by identifying and implementing opportunities to conserve resources, reduce waste and minimise environmental impacts, while making processes and resources consumption more efficient.

According to Wiedemann et al. (2020), most LCA studies focus on partial supply chain impacts of garments, with few examining wools’ entire life cycle. In their study they addressed this gap by analysing a woollen garment’s cradle-to-grave LCA. Their findings highlight opportunities to enhance production efficiency, in terms of reduced resource use, and environmental impacts.

Moreover, Manda et al. (2015) conducted an analysis on antibacterial T-shirts, utilising LCA to enhance efficiency. LCA identified opportunities for value creation by minimising environmental impacts, cutting costs and mitigating risks, whereas another benefit is related to the transparent communication with customers.

The study by Navarro et al. (2020) examines a wastewater treatment facility servicing the Barcelona tanning cluster, employing LCA. Emphasising the growing demand for fresh water, the facility’s evolution towards circularity is explored. Remarkably, technological enhancements yielded a 97% reduction in nine impact categories over 6 years, requiring minimal investment. This success underscores LCA’s role in fostering efficiency, enabling companies, particularly small- and medium-sized enterprises, to adapt to industry changes, embrace circular economy principles and carve out market niches.

The aforementioned studies, underscore LCA’s benefits while also revealing some limitations.

Esteve-Turrillas and de la Guardia (2017) suggested LCA’s potential for comparing recycled and virgin cotton but emphasise the need for comprehensive data on disposal and transportation. Resta et al. (2016), Roos et al. (2016) and Wiedemann et al. (2023) pointed out data insufficiency for comprehensive cradle-to-grave analyses, especially concerning garment care and lifespans. Similarly, Schmutz et al. (2020) revealed limitations in system boundaries and data variability, whereas Astudillo et al. (2014) stressed the reliance on proxies due to scant specific data. Additionally, Sandin et al. (2013) called for location-specific data in LCIA methods, whereas Colombo et al. (2023) and Van Der Velden et al. (2014) mentioned uncertainties arising from inadequate data, model assumptions and complex supply chains. Carrières et al. (2022) and Subramanian et al. (2020) confirmed LCA’s uncertainties due to assumptions made in modelling and data unavailability across supply chains. Lastly, Yasin and Sun (2019) emphasised the case dependency of LCA results, especially regarding technical textiles and end-of-life considerations. These studies collectively stress the benefits of LCA in evaluating environmental impacts but underscore the persistent challenges stemming from data limitations, whereas precise conditions are required in order to obtain reliable results, as well as peculiarities make the comparisons between product-systems completely possible and uncertainties across various life cycle phases.

Finally, in terms of perceptions of the benefits from the point of view of fashion companies, a study carried out on Italian firms (Testa et al. (2016)) recognise the strategic value of LCA for decisions, product design and monitoring systems. LCA is perceived as a marketing tool for enhancing green attributes. Barriers include data collection and communication issues, with non-adopters overestimating challenges. The same study shows the importance of increasing awareness, training initiatives and financial support in fostering the LCA adoption. Despite non-adopters downplaying marketing opportunities, LCA adopters highlight its potential for market enhancement. Internal benefits included aiding decisions, informing design, improving monitoring and raising environmental awareness among top management.

Other examples of specific firms involved which claimed the implementation of LCA can be recognised. In the analysis of companies that adopted LCA, Levi Strauss & Co.’s (2015) detailed LCA on a pair of jeans offered valuable insights into critical hotspots, guiding sustainable decision-making, especially in terms of water recycling, as well as reducing the overall environmental impact of their products, as they claim. These findings have also contributed to social initiatives of awareness about responsible use of energy and water, and participation in virtuous programmes such as the Better Cotton Initiative to minimise water and chemical usage.

The North Face conducted an LCA to monitor the impacts of the Denali jacket over time (Long Trail Sustainability, 2017). The company actively monitored positive environmental changes resulting from alterations in the production process aimed at reducing the overall impact. The analysis also aimed to effectively communicate the results to stakeholders. The focus of the analysis was on the variation in impacts due to the introduction of recycled polyester and new dyeing solutions, resulting in positive developments in climate change, energy and water consumption and waste generation. Some of these improvements also led to a cost reduction.

Nike’s LCA, through third parties (Prè Sustainability, n.d.), compared the environmental footprints of green and traditional leather, offering consumers information for making informed and sustainable purchase decisions. Due to the use of a standardised approach, they can make reliable claims about their sustainability efforts. Moreover, they consider LCA results on materials to define the ‘Nike MSI’, an index to evaluate the sustainability of materials in their supply chain choices (Nike Supply Chain, 2012). Furthermore, LCA is employed for the packaging impact evaluation (Nike, 2022).

Icebug’s LCA focused on understanding the environmental footprint of a shoe (ICEBUG, 2021), contributing to the broader understanding of sustainable practices in the footwear industry, comparing the results not only with their own level or reference but also with some competitors. The aim was to evaluate the environmental impact, compare the results and marketing purposes as well.

PrimeAsia Leather’s LCA initiatives (PrimeAsia, 2022) focus on identifying critical phases in the LCAs of their various products, aligning with their commitment to environmentally conscious manufacturing practices. The aim of their studies is to measure, manage and reduce the footprints of processes and products. The results were utilised to calculate the Higgs Index in the leather sector, serving comparisons and communication purposes.

An example of company retrieved from the scientific literature review is reported by Esteve-Turrillas and de la Guardia (2017): Hilaturas Ferre (2020) undertook a cradle-to-grave LCA approach for all its products, providing comprehensive insights that support green claims and contribute to the creation of a sustainable supply chain. The obtained results play a role in calculating the Higgs Index in the leather sector, serving both for comparisons and communication purposes.

Marks & Spencer’s LCA on apparel products (Marks & Spencer plc, 2002) explored different scenarios, facilitating a detailed comparison between raw material alternatives and contributing valuable data on the environmental footprint of the product, especially in terms of energy footprint.

Chargeurs Luxury Materials’ collaboration on an LCA case study utilising blockchain technology (Carrières et al. (2022)) aimed to overcome limitations in terms of precision and data gathering within the realm of LCA, showcasing the industry’s commitment to adopt new technologies for sustainable practices, allowing decision making support in terms of raw materials use – wool in this specific case study.

Manteco (2023), an Italian company specialised in wool products, adopted LCA to obtain and communicate the Environmental Product Declaration on its ReviWool fabrics. They quantified the major impact areas for their products to improve their processes and support the decision-making process regarding materials and design.

These case studies, combined with insights gathered from existing scientific literature, offer a perspective on the diverse applications of LCA across various industries. The experiences of these companies underscore the strategic role of LCA in fostering environmentally sustainable practices throughout diverse product life cycles. Communication purposes are among the priorities for the companies, which use LCA as a basis to substantiate their claims from a scientific and standard perspective. Decision-making processes, both in sustainability matters and in terms of economic efficiency, benefit from the LCA approach, providing a comprehensive understanding of the analysed product.

Table 4 provide an overview of these examples.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 4.

Results of the research on companies in the sector.

Company	Analysis subject	Purpose and benefits
Levi Strauss & Co.	LCA on a pair of jeans	Environmental impact of the product, identification of hotspots and communication of the results
The North Face	LCA on a jacket	Monitoring of the environmental improvements due to changes in the production and green claims support
Nike	LCA on green leather and traditional leather	Purchase decision support after comparing the impact of two products and green claims support
ICEBUG	LCA on a shoe model	Environmental footprint of the product and comparisons purposes
PrimeAsia Leather	LCA on products portfolio	Identifications the critical phases and environmental footprint of the company’s products
Hilaturas Ferre	LCA on products portfolio	Green claims support and creation of a sustainable supply chain
Marks & Spencer	LCA on trousers in different scenarios	Comparison between raw materials alternatives and environmental footprint of a product
Chargeurs Luxury Materials	LCA on wool batches using blockchain	Evaluation of modern technologies in the LCA for augmented reliability of the results
Manteco	LCA on wool products	Quantification of the fibres’ impacts, comparisons of impacts, communication purposes towards stakeholders

LCA: life cycle assessment.

Conclusions

LCA is a rapidly expanding area of research, with a substantial amount of existing data available. Industry professionals and academics can utilise this wealth of data as a starting point to comprehend the environmental impacts of their own products and processes, thereby mitigating the issue of data unavailability. Once life cycle environmental impact data are gathered, companies could evaluate the results and take actionable steps to reduce their environmental impacts.

An increasing number of companies in the fashion industry are recognising the benefits of adopting LCA due to the manifold advantages it can bring.

For these companies, adopting LCA means being able to acquire environmental certifications, product labels, and more broadly a solid base of scientific data to support their green claims.

New directives in corporate social responsibility require companies to be mindful of their impact and to be able to account for it. Therefore, it becomes crucial, from a company’s competitive advantage point of view, to demonstrate their commitment to sustainability through data and standardised methodologies.

Large companies have embraced this path earlier than small and medium enterprises (SMEs), partly due to more restrictive constraints imposed by law and stakeholders, but also due to higher economical possibilities. However, a similar commitment will also be necessary for SMEs, which encounter economic and technical challenges that slow the adoption of such tools.

Certifying a company in terms of its environmental impact using LCA would entail conducting multiple LCAs on the entire portfolio of products that the company offers. This represents a problem for smaller companies that have never approached sustainability issues from a quantitative and scientific perspective, facing economic and technical challenges that are not always easy to overcome.

The integration of LCA and OLCA could emerge as a transformative paradigm in sustainability research, offering a better understanding of environmental burdens throughout a product or organisational lifecycle. Unlike product LCA, OLCA empowers decision-makers to strategically address sustainability challenges from inception to disposal of the whole organisation.

The comprehensive approach to the life cycle fosters innovation and optimisation, guiding organisations towards environmentally responsible practices and enabling them to avoid the phenomenon of burden shifting, both at the product and company levels.