The Higg MSI, an index rooted in LCA assessments, emerged from the Sustainable Apparel Coalition, a non-profit group representing brands (like Nike and Patagonia) and fabric manufacturers (like Lenzing and Lycra) and environmental alliances (like TÜV and WWF).

The Higg Materials Sustainability Index aims to give each fabric type a sustainability “score”, based on its environmental impact from extraction (or production of raw materials) through manufacturing and finishing to the final product that is ready for assembly into a product. This is referred to as “cradle-to-gate.”

The single MSI score given by Higgs can be broken down into sub-scores for global warming potential, eutrophication, water scarcity, fossil fuels, and chemistry.

The wonderful thing about the Higg MSI is that it is intended to be used to compare different fabric types and determine - at a glance - which is more sustainable.

The Higg MSI relies heavily on LCA data, which shares many limitations with LCA assessments.

Additionally, the fact that the Higg Index has been developed under the leadership of SAC, whose members include the world’s largest fast fashion brands, has cast doubt on the tool’s validity.

Many consumers and environmental advocates are frustrated that the Higg MSI labels almost all fossil-fuel-based materials as being significantly more sustainable than renewable materials such as wool and cotton. This is primarily driven by the fact that the production of petroleum-based fabrics has lower resource demands than many common natural fabrics, which rely heavily on water and fertilizer. Because LCAs and Higg don’t consider garment care and end-of-life, they don’t credit natural fabrics with the fact that these materials are typically naturally biodegradable and do not contribute to microplastic pollution. In 2022, articles in the New York Times and The Intercept highlighted criticisms by analysts and environmentalists of the Higg MSI for using dubious data to promote polyester as the most sustainable fabric available. Because of this, the Norwegian Consumer Authority recently banned the Higg MSI, ruling that Higgs-backed marketing claims are considered inaccurate.

These issues aside, the Higg MSI is a valuable tool as long as its limitations are considered during decision-making and brands do not solely rely on these scores.

Source: Kymo

The “Made-By Environmental Benchmark for Fibers” was another attempt to compare the environmental impact of fashion's most commonly used materials. The Made-By Benchmark ranked 28 fibers on six criteria: greenhouse gas emissions; human toxicity; eco-toxicity; energy; water; and land. Each fiber was scored and placed into one of five classifications—Class A to Class E. Fibers for which insufficient data was available were listed as Unclassified.

The Made-By Benchmark was published in 2011 and does not - unfortunately - speak to significant trends that have emerged over the past decade, such as microplastics shed by polyester clothing or the technological advances of both mechanical and chemical recycling and new materials that are emerging in popularity.

When considering the Made-By Benchmark, it is important to recognize that it is outdated in this way.

Source: Common Objective

Higg focuses on cradle-to-gate, or the step in the supply chain right before materials become part of a finished product. Cradle-to-gate makes sense because much of a garment’s lifecycle depends on how the material is constructed, what kind of product it is going into, and what other materials are being used.

However, this is a significant limitation because garment care (and end-of-life) can significantly impact the planet.

There are two concerns regarding garment care - the release of microplastics into waterways and the volume of chemicals needed for laundering.

Synthetic fabrics generally shed microplastics when washed. These microplastics cannot be properly filtered in the laundry or by water treatment facilities, so they end up in our water supply and rivers, lakes, and oceans. The collective impact of these microplastics on human health, soil health, biodiversity, ocean life, and so much more is massive.

The potential for microplastic generation of apparel laundered relatively frequently - shirts, pants, undergarments, socks, etc. - should be a significant consideration when choosing fabrics. That said, some soft goods such as outerwear and shoes are not laundered frequently, if at all.

Most reusable packaging will not be laundered frequently. Reusable totes rarely, if ever, get washed. Reusable shippers are more likely to be wiped down than laundered. Given this, traditional microplastic issues may not be as important a criterion as they should be when considering materials for other products and garments.

The other critical garment care issue is whether or not chemicals must be used when cleaning garments. But, this is not a significant issue regarding reusable packaging.

92 million tons of textile waste is created by the fashion industry, and it is estimated that by 2030, an additional 57 million tons of waste will be generated annually, reaching an annual total of 148 million tons. Some of this waste comes from manufacturers and retailers, generating around 13 million tons of textile waste annually. This waste is mainly driven by the fact that they - by design - deliberately overproduce by 30% to avoid inventory shortages. They then want to landfill or burn excess goods to prevent deflation in their product and brand value.

Consumers also throw a lot of clothes away. The average American throws away 81 lbs of clothing annually. Unfortunately, most are landfilled because consumers have limited access to textile recycling. So while a lot of apparel is donated, much ends up landfilled or clogging up the supply chains and struggling waste management infrastructure of underdeveloped countries.

Because of this, many sustainable brands factor in end-of-life implications when choosing their fabrics, asking questions such as: Can the fabric and the final product be easily recycled? Can it be upcycled? How durable is it, and can it last a particularly long-time before reaching the end of its useful life?

When comparing reusable with single-use packaging, it is important that reusable packaging be used enough times. This reusability is called the “cycles” of reusable packagingareBut this packaging will eventually end its useful life, at which point it should be recycled if possible. Because reusable packaging typically replaces single-use recyclable packaging, we believe it is crucial to factor fabric recyclability into the decision-making process.

Luckily, EcoEnclose takes back all of our reusable packaging options and ensures they are recycled back into fabric or furniture insulation.

Manmade cellulosic is a category of materials made from fibers derived from the dissolved wood pulp (“cellulose”) of trees or bamboo. Examples of MMCs include viscose, rayon, lyocell, acetate, and modal. While many embrace MMCs as a renewable fabric, they are made from trees, which may contribute to deforestation and the destruction of ancient forests. Additionally, converting tree fiber into a fabric is chemical and energy intensive.

As such, many brands have set sourcing policies in place that aim to ensure the MMCs in their products are not part of illegal logging, deforestation, or unsustainable plantation management. They do this through supplier mapping, working with fabric producers with well-vetted supply chain policies, and partnering with organizations like Canopy.

TENCEL Lyocell and TENCEL Modal are examples of MMCs produced by Austrian-based Lenzing AG, a company committed to sourcing all tree fiber from sustainably managed woodlots versus primary forests. Additionally, these fabrics are made from water-efficient eucalyptus and beech trees (respectively) and manufactured through a closed-loop system that recycles over 99.5% of the chemicals used in production, with the remaining 0.5% discharged as non-hazardous effluent.

There is a big sustainability difference between traditional cotton and traditional hemp. Cotton has led to the destruction of so much forest and native grassland, depleted soils of nutrients, polluted waterways, and consumed unfathomable amounts of freshwater. Hemp is now used to fix carbon and regenerate soils. While hemp has water requirements, these requirements are much lower than cotton.

Hemp is imperfect, but it has significant advantages over other natural fibers.

Many brands have set materials and sourcing policies prioritizing using low-resource, more regenerative inputs. These brands tend to ensure they avoid traditional, chemical, and water-intensive crops, first embracing “organic” versions of these raw materials and then pursuing regenerative options.

A small but growing set of brands focus on “circularity” when developing their apparel lines.

Circularity encompasses some of the factors already outlined. At its core, it consists of a few concrete topics:

• As little material is used as possible to get the job done
• The item is as durable as possible
• The item is made with as much waste as possible
• The item can be easily recycled back into a high-value item in its next life

All of these are critical to consider regarding the design and fabric selection of reusable packaging.

It is important to note that most recycled natural fibers are pre-consumer and made with manufacturing scraps. This is important, as there needs to be an end market for those scraps; otherwise, they will overwhelm the waste management supply chains of countries that are often underresourced in this area. Recycled polyester (rPET), on the other hand, typically comes from post-consumer recycled PET water bottles.

While many materials are technically recyclable, most countries still need to implement a textile recycling infrastructure. Additionally, most apparel recycled in the US by consumers is often shredded and used to create furniture or home insulation.

According to Unicef, 170 million children, 11% of the global population of children, are engaged in child labor. Unicef states that child labor is particularly problematic in the fashion industry because much of the supply chain requires low-skilled labor. In addition, children better execute some tasks than adults. For example, small fingers are preferred for picking or pollinating cotton to minimize crop damage. The countries where child labor is most prevalent include India, China, Egypt, Bangladesh, Thailand, Uzbekistan, and Pakistan, which account for most of the world’s apparel manufacturing.

Again, certifications like Fair Trade and SA8000 Standard can help brands verify that their supply chain does not violate child labor laws; however, these certifications are never a perfect guarantee.

Furs, feathers, hides, and skins (such as crocodile skin and snakeskin) continue to be common materials in the fashion industry. An alarming number of animals are killed solely for fashion, such as raccoon dogs, minks, chinchillas, foxes, coyotes, alligators, snakes, and lizards. According to Collective Fashion Justice, 95 percent of all fur sold in the fashion industry comes from wild animals kept and killed in fur factory farms, mainly in the EU and China.

Materials like wool and duck feathers are taken without killing animals but can be obtained in cruel and unethical ways. For example, many sheep in the wool industry are subject to mulesing – where the skin around the backside is sliced off, and tails are severed. Alpacas have been documented vomiting under stress when tied down to be sheared. Leather is often derived as a co-product. Cattle are slaughtered for meat, and their skins are a byproduct used for leather. However, cattle are often treated horrifically in the food and leather industries. For example, their horns are often cut off or burned from their skull without pain relief.

Because of this, many progressive brands reject fur and skins and put clear sourcing protocols in place when working with materials like leather, feathers, and wool.

Jute fabric comes from the long, soft, and shiny fiber made from the cellulose and lignin material from the jute plant. While there are several species, most Jute fabric is made from Corchorus capsularis (white jute). Once processed, Jute fiber is used to make rope, bags, carpets, and much more. 90% of the world’s jute comes from Bangladesh, with India as the second largest producer of the fabric.

• Higg: Medium (standard), N/A for organic

• Made-By: N/A

• LCA Assessment:

• Standard Jute: Carbon Emissions: 3.2 kg CO2 eq. / 1000 grams | Freshwater consumption: 61.21 kg / 1000 grams | Energy Consumption: 41.79 MJ / 1000 grams

• Fabric Care and End-of-Life: Naturally biodegradable. Can be recycled but rarely is recycled by consumers.

• Issues: Highly water absorbent, making it extremely difficult to wash as the material can fall apart when soaked in water.

• General Recommendation for Reusable Bags: Consider for totes and inner packaging, but avoid when weatherproofing and washing are critical.

Hemp is a natural bast fiber, which means it comes from the stem of a plant (like linen, jute, and bamboo).

Hemp is often considered sustainable and far less environmentally harmful than natural fibers like cotton. It is carbon sequestering and strengthens the soil it is grown on. Many believe hemp does not need water or chemicals, but this is incorrect! Industrial hemp production - like most monocrop agriculture - needs water and fertilizers to maximize yields and profitability (though far less than cotton requires). Additionally, the steps to process hemp - chemical retting, bleaching, etc. - can be very energy and resource intensive. Finally, the cost of hemp is relatively high due to both how labor-intensive the crop is to cultivate and the minimal availability. There are fewer than 1 million acres of hemp under crop globally versus 33 million acres of cotton.

• Higg: High (standard), Medium (organic)

• Made-By: C (standard), A (organic)

• LCA Assessment: N/A

• Fabric Care and End-of-Life: Naturally biodegradable. Can be recycled but rarely is recycled by consumers.

• Issues: Industrially produced hemp carries many of the same challenges of all monocrop agriculture - water and chemical use - even though hemp’s requirements are far less burdensome than cotton.

• General recommendation for reusable bags: Consider for retail totes and inner packaging, but avoid if weatherproofing is critical. Opt for organic hemp.

• Preferred Hemp: Organic

Bamboo is often considered a sustainability superstar. It is a grass native to tropical and subtropical regions worldwide and is one of the fastest-growing plants. While the plant has many eco-benefits (though it is important to note that bamboo production can quickly lead to deforestation and the proliferation of invasive species), converting bamboo into fibers is not environmentally friendly.

Most bamboo fiber has been chemically processed (versus mechanical process), in which chemicals are used to crush the woody part of the bamboo plant, breaking it down into a cellulose solution. This solution is then treated with various chemicals, including carbon disulfide, caustic soda, and sulfuric acid, resulting in a soft fabric known as viscose bamboo or rayon. This process is quite energy-intensive and harmful to the environment, polluting local water sources and soil. Because of this, the Natural Resources Defense Council recommends avoiding bamboo fibers. If bamboo fibers are necessary, seek out mechanically processed or lyocell bamboo as a greener alternative.

• Higg: Medium (standard viscose)

• Made-By: E (standard viscose), Unclassified (natural bamboo)

• LCA Assessment: N/A

• Fabric Care and End-of-Life: Naturally biodegradable. Can be recycled but rarely is recycled by consumers.

• Issues: Converting bamboo into viscose is a dirty, energy-intensive, polluting process.

• General Recommendation for Reusable Bags: Avoid

• Preferred Bamboo: Mechanically processed or Lyocell bamboo