Five years ago, in a grand gesture of collective responsibility, 32 of the world’s most powerful fashion and textile companies signed The Fashion Pact. Presented to heads of state at a G7 summit in Biarritz, it was a landmark commitment to shared environmental goals, a promise to collectively mitigate fashion’s colossal impact on our planet. The signatories read like a who’s who of luxury and high-street powerhouses: Chanel, Hermès, and Prada stood alongside Zara’s parent company Inditex and H&M Group. The ambition was as vast as the problem itself, with a focus on three key pillars: halting global warming, restoring biodiversity, and protecting the oceans. But half a decade on, with the climate crisis more urgent than ever, the question that hangs in the air is a simple one: is it working?
The Promise of a Greener Wardrobe
The initial momentum was palpable. The Fashion Pact, spearheaded by Kering’s chairman and CEO François-Henri Pinault, was lauded as a game-changer. For the first time, competitors were joining forces, sharing knowledge and resources to tackle systemic issues that no single company could solve alone. The Pact’s annual progress reports paint a picture of steady advancement. We’ve seen a collective shift towards sourcing more sustainable materials, with a reported 80% of members’ cotton now being from more sustainable sources. There has been a significant push in phasing out single-use plastics in packaging, and a concerted effort to transition to renewable energy across supply chains. Brands like Burberry have made headlines with their commitments to become climate positive by 2040, while Stella McCartney, a lifelong champion of sustainability, continues to innovate with materials like mycelium leather. The Pact has undoubtedly succeeded in making sustainability a C-suite priority, embedding it into the corporate vocabulary of an industry once notoriously opaque.
The industry has the opportunity to lead a shift towards a more sustainable future. Collaboration is vital if we are to develop a truly sustainable industry.
However, as the initial fanfare has faded, a more complex and critical picture has emerged. While the Pact’s intentions are noble, its non-binding nature has led to accusations of it being a ‘paper tiger’. Critics point to the fact that despite the high-profile commitments, the industry’s overall environmental footprint has not shrunk. A 2024 report from the Financial Times revealed that more than a quarter of the Fashion Pact’s signatories had failed to even set basic climate targets aligned with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C pathway. This raises uncomfortable questions about accountability. Without penalties for inaction, is the Pact merely a sophisticated greenwashing exercise, allowing brands to bask in the glow of collective action without making the difficult, and costly, changes required?
Cracks in the Green Veneer
The most damning criticism, however, may not be about what the Fashion Pact is doing, but what it is pointedly *not* doing. The entire framework is built on environmental goals, with a conspicuous silence on the social dimension of sustainability. The garment workers who form the backbone of this multi-trillion-dollar industry are notably absent from the conversation. As one academic from the University of Montreal argued, this constitutes a form of “procedural injustice.” The people with the most at stake—the workers in factories in countries like Bangladesh, Vietnam, and Ethiopia, who face low wages, poor working conditions, and the most immediate effects of climate change—have no seat at the table. Of the dozens of signatories, only a handful are manufacturers, and there is zero representation for the workers themselves.
An initiative claiming to transform the industry into a ‘more just’ one cannot be credible if it excludes the very workers who suffer the most injustices.
This exclusion has tangible consequences. By focusing solely on environmental metrics, the Pact risks perpetuating a “substantive injustice,” where the human cost of fashion is ignored. It’s a narrative that conveniently sidesteps the uncomfortable truths about the industry’s business model, which is predicated on a relentless cycle of newness and consumption, driven by low production costs. It’s a model that has made fortunes for the very companies signed up to the Pact, while the wages of garment workers have stagnated. Can a brand truly be considered sustainable if its environmental progress is built on the foundation of an unjust social structure? Can we celebrate the use of organic cotton in a £2,000 handbag if the person who stitched it can’t afford to feed their family?
The Path Forward: Accountability or Aspiration?
The Fashion Pact is at a crossroads. To maintain its credibility and deliver on its initial promise, it must evolve. The first step must be to address its glaring social blind spot. Integrating social targets, such as living wages and binding agreements on workers’ safety, is not just an ethical imperative, but a commercial one. The modern luxury consumer is increasingly savvy to the nuances of sustainability; they are looking for brands that align with their values, and that includes how they treat their people. The argument that including more stakeholders would be too inefficient is a weak defence against the moral and reputational risks of inaction.
Ultimately, the success of the Fashion Pact will not be measured in the number of reports it publishes or the number of CEOs who attend its meetings. It will be measured in tangible, verifiable outcomes: in gigatonnes of carbon removed from the atmosphere, in the revival of ecosystems, and in the lives of the millions of people who make our clothes. The past five years have shown that collaboration is possible. The next five must be about turning those aspirations into accountability. The world is watching, and its patience is wearing thin. The luxury fashion industry has the power, the resources, and the creative ingenuity to lead the way. The question is, does it have the will?
