Retailers at a crossroads: what is their role in the growing textile waste crisis?

The UK’s fashion and retail sector is grappling with a mounting textile waste crisis. With an estimated 1.7 million tonnes of textiles consumed in the UK each year – and with around 336,000 tonnes ending up in household residual waste – retailers are increasingly being called upon to rethink how they handle products beyond the point of sale. 

While many brands have introduced take-back schemes to offer customers recycling options, industry experts suggest that current efforts, although well-meaning, are fragmented and far from circular. So, what can, and should, retailers be doing to address the growing environmental impact of used textiles?

Reuse, rental, and repair

Retailers have not been idle. The British Retail Consortium (BRC) says its members are working hard to extend the life of the products they sell. “Retailers are working hard to keep the products they sell in circulation for as long as possible – from improving the durability of their products and designing for recyclability to helping customers to get the most out of their clothes, through rental options, repair services and resale options,” says Sophie De Salis, sustainability policy adviser at the BRC.

She noted that many retailers offer their own takeback schemes, partnering with charities and other service providers to take back used clothing so they can be looked after responsibly.

These initiatives mark a shift in how retail businesses engage with sustainability. Yet while good for brand image, their impact is often limited by the absence of a unified system.

Amy-Grace Enzer, associate specialist textiles at WRAP, explains that brand and retailer take-back schemes are generally run as partnerships with collectors of used clothing, typically charities or third-party collectors and sorters, and that the process is “rarely visible” to consumers. “Garments are collected in store or via postal methods and transported to these organisations to be combined with wider textiles collections, and sorted as usual,” she continues.

However, the outcomes for these garments vary widely depending on the arrangements behind the scenes. “They can either be exported to sorting hubs around the world – such as the United Arab Emirates, or undergo sorting in the UK”, Enzer explains. “In the UK these volumes will most likely be sorted into 5 to 10 grades of used textile, but depending on the business, can reach 250 grades.”

According to her, variability is part of the problem. She says: “WRAP identified several issues with retailer-led textile tack-back schemes. These include: no uniformity across take-back schemes – inconsistent messaging on what can be collected and donated across businesses. Inconvenience of systems – difficult to locate take-back schemes, size of takeback boxes frustrate customers. Lack of knowledge both in terms of public awareness of the scheme/wider flow routes and retail staff best practise.”

Systemic barriers

Despite the ambition, both WRAP and the BRC stress that isolated take-back schemes cannot solve the problem without broader systemic reform. Enzer notes that the reuse & recycling (R&R) sector faces “major financial challenges” due to an oversupply of low-value textiles and limited demand for these volumes. 

This is a global issue, she explains, which has been “driven by increased global consumption and collection of low-value textiles, combined with a lack of scaling innovation in sorting, recycling and alternative applications (e.g. construction)”.

De Salis echoes this sentiment. “Lack of government policy here in the UK” is the key barrier, she says. “Currently retailers are offering takeback schemes on an individual basis, meaning the collection of used textiles rests on a small portion of the market. We need legislation in the UK to ensure all retailers take responsibility for their products after purchase.”

She points to how far the UK has fallen behind European counterparts. “The EU is streets ahead of us. In 2022, they launched a series of policies to facilitate circular fashion. These include the Eco-design for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR)… and proposals for an EU-wide approach to textile waste management, through a harmonised textiles extended producer responsibility scheme (tEPR) for all EU member states.”

So what does a more circular retail model look like? According to WRAP, it’s one that integrates more directly with a modernised and well-funded recycling infrastructure.

“We need to redesign the collections system, creating a more efficient and cost-effective system,” says Enzer. “Retailer takeback can play a critical role.” WRAP is currently working “with a select cohort of leading brands and the R&R sector” to develop its Textile Collections System Transition Programme. 

“This industry leading project will use the latest data and findings and pre-competitive collaboration… to shape a circular transition for textile collections, develop industry wide citizen behaviour change interventions with consistent and impactful messaging and set out a programme of action to get us there,” she adds.

Calls for a UK extended producer responsibility scheme

Both WRAP and the BRC are calling on the government to adopt an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme specifically for textiles. Such a scheme would legally require all retailers to manage the end-of-life impact of the products they sell.

De Salis argues: “We need a UK Textiles Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme. This will incentivise businesses to think more about what they put on the market, as carefully applied fees would be calculated by garment design and the circularity of a business model.”

She explains that an effective EPR “would also mean we could collect and recover more of the value in textiles through the financing of effective textile waste management systems in the UK”. She adds: “It would also help encourage green growth in the UK; to build the infrastructure and invest in technology, charities, and businesses to reuse and recycle those textiles.”

A key part of WRAP’s strategy lies in the development of Advanced Textile Sorting and Pre-processing (ATSP) infrastructure, underpinned by its ACT UK project.

Enzer notes that brands and retailers must go beyond collection schemes. “Forming direct supply partnerships that meet desired quality standards and contributing to the cost of non-reusable textiles handling can reduce Advanced Textile Sorting and Pre-processing (ATSP) facility costs… where ATSPs and closed-loop recycling markets are developing, and in the absence of textiles policy like EPR.”

Retailers should also “support Advanced Textile Sorting and Pre-processing by creating effective take-back schemes with charities and collectors to guarantee non-reusable textiles streams to ATSPs, ensure demand for recycled content through offtake agreements and letters of intent with recycling suppliers, and by designing products for recyclability.”

Shaping consumer habits

Interestingly, WRAP’s ACT UK trials revealed that clearer messaging around what customers can recycle – or what is reusable versus non-reusable – had a significant impact on textile volumes collected.

“There is also a public appetite for collection routes for non-reuseable textiles,” says Enzer. “Response to the citizen pre-sort trials from participants was overwhelmingly positive and users were strongly motivated by an environmental rationale.”

Retailers can play a vital role in amplifying this messaging and building consumer engagement. “Several participants wrote notes in sorting bags to saying thank you for the service, as they were looking for routes to discard their non-reusable textiles that were not the residual bin.”

A retail revolution?

As it stands, take-back schemes are a step in the right direction – but far from the solution. For retailers, the risks of inaction are both environmental and reputational. 

The BRC is clear. “Achieving a truly circular business model requires internal buy-in, as well as significant investment and change. It also requires customers to take better care of their garments and return used clothing to the right place, as well as an effective Government policy,” it says.

WRAP agrees, with Enzer urging retailers to reach out. “If you are brand or retailer and need support on take-back scheme design and insights contact WRAP for more information on the project, and for how we can help,” she says. 

De Salis leaves no doubt about the path forward: She concludes: “An EPR scheme for textiles is a complex system but is achievable through a producer-led organisation, collaborating across industry and with local authorities. We need the Government to be more ambitious and think about how we build a whole new circular system for textiles rather than only focusing on takeback as it is currently.”

For retailers looking to lead rather than follow, the message is clear: act now, collaborate boldly, and demand the infrastructure needed to truly close the loop on textile waste.