Methodology
We’ve created our own Sustainable Stitch Rating System in order to help consumers make informed decisions when purchasing clothes. This article outlines the step-by-step guide on how our sustainability ratings are determined.
The process begins with gathering data from publicly-available and reputable sources. This is followed by the assessment phase, which we segmented based on the various stages of the apparel value chain. Next, we calculate the sustainability score by taking the weighted average of all category-specific scores. Finally, we convert the sustainability score into their Sustainable Stitch Rating—a measure that we developed to enable our readers to quickly and easily discern a brand’s performance in relation to ecological responsibility.
Data Collection
Overall Data
Most of the data used in our analyses were collected from publicly available sources. This includes, but is not limited to, company websites, annual reports, online product catalogs, social media pages, senior management interviews, press releases, and media mentions. In addition, we’ve also reached out to some brands to ask them directly about elusive details or verify any unclear information.
Fabric Data
Out of all the stages in the apparel value chain, fabric production is the most carbon-intensive and resource-depleting phase. At the same time, textile fabric is an essential and a distinct raw material used in the whole business of fashion. As such, this domain presents some daunting challenges in the industry’s pursuit to sustainability.
To help us evaluate how well brands are responding in this regard, we needed to know their fabric consumption by type. Collecting this data, for us, involves leveraging the product details that brands have made available through their online retail channels.
Instead of skimming through listings and guesstimating figures, we did a complete count of each brand’s fabric usage distribution to ensure that we’re only using accurate data in our analyses. Gradually, we’ve compiled the fiber content information of every product in numerous catalogs, including some brands that have hundreds of pieces in their line.
Brand Transparency
Our assessment places great value on transparency, which we define as a brand’s desire to disclose any progress or weakness in the realm of sustainability. Having this trait suggests accountability and commitment. It shows that they have no issues being vulnerable for the sake of informing their customers on where their priorities lie.
When designing our assessment guide, we put a premium on ensuring that every criterion was constructed from information that brands are obliged to provide their customers. Hence, the lowest criteria-specific score was given to a brand that lack any publicly accessible source that’ll show the standard as being met.
Assessment Process
Our assessment is divided into different categories, with each category representing a specific stage in the apparel supply chain. It includes the raw material production, assembly, distribution, and end of life stages of the process.
Overall Assessment
To identify areas that need to be addressed, our team did extensive research on the topic. This led to the development of a scoring guide that we used to gauge a brand’s performance level in various stages. For this section, a single-point scale was used to check if the standard was being practiced in the company.
ASSEMBLY | Brand communications highlight sustainability initiatives and educate consumers about the positive effects of taking action |
| Garment collecting programs were created to help instill the importance of recycling | |
| Care instructions that come with the products list some eco-friendly suggestions to clean the garment | |
| Efforts to actively promote long-term use of clothes are in effect (e.g. inclusion of replacement buttons, clothing refurbishment programs, garment rental services, etc.) | |
| Data on the life-cycle assessment results of products are being publicly shared by the company | |
| Renewable energy is used on at least 50% of the entire operation | |
DISTRIBUTION | Standard shipping options are available to consumers upon checkout |
| Incentives are offered to consumers who opt out of express shipping | |
END-OF-LIFE | Packaging uses a single and non-plastic material |
| Fewest material as possible is used in packaging the products |
Fabric Assessment
This section of our evaluation uses a percentile scoring system, which is based on the position of materials in our research about the environmental impact assessment and ranking of fabrics.
Sustainability Score
The overall rating for each brand is calculated using the weighted average of their categorical scores. The weighting factor that we’ve assigned to each category is proportionate to the average share of carbon footprint produced in that particular leg of the supply chain. For this portion, we’ve referred to the 2020 McKinsey & Company and Global Fashion Agenda report which illustrated the distribution of greenhouse gas emissions across the supply chain. We’ve adjusted some of their reported figures in order to make our calculation more straightforward:82% fabric and fiber production
10% assembly
4% distribution
4% end-of-life
Sustainable Stitch Ratings
The final step in our process involves translating the sustainability score into our sustainable stitch rating. Scores are converted as follows:81-100 — sustainability champ
61-80 — breath of fresh air
41-60 — garden-variety
21-40 — late bloomer
0-20 — weed out
Sustainability Champ
These brands are operating with sustainability in mind. They champion this cause by ensuring that their products are made of materials that have the least impact in our environment. In addition, they have several initiatives to reduce their carbon emissions throughout the value chain, are packaging and distributing responsibly, and are very transparent to their customers.
Breath of Fresh Air
These brands are ahead of the game in terms of taking action on environmental issues. Transparency is part of their company values and it is evident that there’s more to come. Nevertheless, they still have a potential to improve by introducing eco-friendlier materials in their production or broadening the use of such.
Garden-Variety
These brands are performing within the average, but could be inching towards more sustainable practices. A good portion of their collection is still made from materials that are harmful for our environment. However, we are hopeful that their use of less impactful materials on some of their garments is a sign that they’re transitioning to responsibly sourcing their entire product line.
Late Bloomer
These brands fail to incorporate environmental issues into their business goals and operations. They showed prevalent use of eco-destructive materials in manufacturing of their products. A portion of them might’ve also gotten this rating because of their ill-defined sustainability goals and of being covert about their most impactful practices.
Weed Out
These brands are implementing procedures that do our planet more harm than good. They landed this spot because the materials used to construct their garments are extremely polluting. When speaking of their future plans, there are no mentions of how they are planning to effectively tackle these issues. In addition to poor performance, some of them got this rating due to the lack of transparency needed to make evaluation work.
