Not all of the fashion industry is playing its part on climate, according to the Fashion Industry Charter for Climate Action

As an underwhelming COP30 in Belém (Brazil) drew to a close at the end of November, the Fashion for Climate initiative published its annual report on December 16 on the sustainability efforts of the global fashion industry. Entitled “From Commitments to Transparency,” the report describes efforts that are… stalling.

Seven years after the launch of the Fashion Industry Charter for Climate Action, climate commitments are now widely articulated, shared, and integrated into strategic discourse. Yet the transition remains incomplete and unevenly implemented, particularly when it comes to turning promises into measurable emissions reductions.

60% of participating companies on track for Scopes 1 and 2

The Charter’s stated objective is clear: to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, with significant progress expected by 2030, in line with the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C. To achieve this, it structures action around a series of commitments covering all greenhouse gases (GHGs), aligned with the international Scopes framework. Scope 1 covers direct emissions (combustion, industrial processes), Scope 2 covers indirect emissions from electricity generation, and Scope 3 encompasses other indirect emissions, notably those from the supply chain, from raw materials through to product use.

The newly released report compiles data submitted by 69 signatory companies for the year 2024. Its initial findings are mixed. On Scopes 1 and 2, the results are relatively encouraging: almost 60% of the companies analysed are on track to meet their reduction targets. The growing use of renewable electricity, energy‑efficiency programmes, and the gradual phasing out of coal all contribute to this progress.

Indirect greenhouse gas emissions beyond electricity darken the picture

A number of companies provide concrete examples of these trends. Japanese manufacturer YKK, for example, has reduced its Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 57% since 2018, while completely eliminating coal‑fired boilers and powering over 60% of its sites with renewable electricity. Crystal International Group, meanwhile, demonstrates that energy efficiency can produce rapid results: thanks to more than 200 targeted projects at its factories, its carbon intensity has fallen sharply in just one year.

By contrast, Scope 3, which accounts for the majority of the sector’s carbon footprint, remains the main area of weakness. Only 30% of signatories are currently on a trajectory compatible with their objectives, according to the report. This difficulty stems from the structural complexity of fashion: dependence on globalised supply chains, a multiplicity of suppliers, and uneven access to low‑carbon technologies and finance.

Uneven, individual efforts

The report also underlines that transparency is improving, but remains uneven. While 80% of companies now report their emissions across all three Scopes, many still struggle to provide complete and comparable data, particularly for Scope 3. As Fashion for Climate points out, without robust data, it is impossible to steer decarbonisation effectively. Some initiatives, however, seem to show the way. Adidas, for example, has developed its in‑house EPIC eco‑design tool, capable of measuring a product’s carbon footprint across its entire life cycle. By integrating these data from the design stage, the brand demonstrates how measurement can become a strategic lever for transformation.

Finally, the report highlights a growing divide between “leaders” and “beginners.” The former combine validated targets, quantified transition plans, renewable energy uptake, and supplier engagement. The latter are still at the measurement or reporting stage. This asymmetry poses a major risk: without stronger mechanisms for co‑operation, finance, and the sharing of best practices, the collective trajectory will remain insufficient, the report concludes.