Climate change will specifically affect luxury fashion because the
industry is particularly dependent on raw materials, thus already feeling
the impact of changes in climate and environment in terms of business
disruptions and increasing costs. This finds a new report by French luxury
goods holding company Kering and British consultancy Verisk Maplecroft
titled “Climate Change: Implications and Strategies for the Luxury Fashion
Sector”. The report identifies six materials – beef and calf leather, sheep
and lamb leather, silk, vicuña, cashmere and (extra fine) cotton – as
endangered, particularly the last three due to their limited geographical
availability and dependence on natural systems.
While some of these impacts like transport and delivery disruptions,
resource scarcity and challenges of social change are common across
industries and companies with a global footprint, the report points out
that the luxury sector is “particularly sensitive” to climate change
because of its reliance on high-quality raw materials and those stemming
from natural and agricultural systems that are limited geographically.
According to the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), around 50 percent of
an average corporation’s carbon emissions stem from the supply chain, and
in regards to the luxury sector, the majority of these emissions occur at
the raw material production and the initial processing stages.
The report outlines the climate risks facing global luxury fashion
companies, focuses on the impact of climate change at the raw material
production level and the impact on the natural and agricultural systems
that deliver them. It also looks at current climate risks for the six key
raw materials identified and shows in useful ‘raw material hotspot maps’
the expected change between 2036 and 2060 for each geographical area and
raw material.
Climate-related hazards like a change in the intensity and frequency of
extreme weather events like hurricanes, droughts, floods and changes in
precipitation patterns will affect the availability of water while the
vulnerability and exposure of natural systems will lead to a loss and
degradation of biodiversity and ecosystem services such as water
filtration, soil replenishment and crop pollination) as well as related
social consequences, for example loss of livelihoods.
The report then continues to look at the specific risks per raw material
– e.g. reduced water availability and temperature increases for cotton;
droughts and availability of water for feed and warming climates for beef
leather and sheep and lamb leather; increased temperature, droughts and
fluctuations in humidity for silk; restricted water availability, droughts
and restricted geographical range for vicuña – whose hair is widely
considered the most expensive animal fibre in the world – and degradation,
desertification and a restricted geographical range for cashmere.
In conclusion, the report states that “in particular, luxury fashion
companies that focus on innovative approaches to resilience in raw material
production will preserve their value proposition at its core”. While COP21
and global efforts by the three largest GHG emitters – the US, China and EU
– will aid climate regulation, it is up to the luxury brands to push for
change: They will need to ensure an adequate supply of high-quality raw
materials as well as promote climate-smart approaches and adequate and safe
water supplies at the base of their supply chains.
The report advises luxury fashion companies to tackle climate change
with three steps: invest in targeted raw material resilience, prepare
operations for a low-emission future and assume a leadership position when
it comes to climate action and provides case studies of Ikea, Chetna
Organic and the Australian ‘Cool Cows’ programme as well as an overview of
collaborative initiatives and platforms.
What the report fails to mention is that it may be easier, more
economical and more sustainable in the long-term to at least consider
and/or develop man-made alternatives to the scarce ‘raw materials’
mentioned. Especially with pressure from animal rights groups mounting and
many consumers consciously choosing to give animal products a miss, this
may be a truly forward-thinking approach.
Images: Kering-Maplecroft report