Why Fashion Needs Better Sustainability Conversations — Not Better Claims

Jenny Daphne Pitsillides – Editor | Re:Fabricate — Real Solutions for a Better Fashion Industry

Claim fatigue

Sustainability language has become fluent. It moves quickly, confidently, across campaigns, websites and product descriptions. Eco-friendly. Responsibly sourced. Net-zero. Terms that signal intent, but increasingly struggle to sustain belief.

The fashion industry is not short of sustainability messaging. What it is short of is trust.

This is less a failure of ambition than of communication. Claims have multiplied faster than shared understanding. And as sustainability has moved from specialist concern to mainstream expectation, the gap between what is said and what is understood has become harder to ignore.

Trust as a communications issue

Research shows growing scepticism towards environmental claims that feel broad, unqualified or thinly evidenced, often interpreted as greenwashing rather than progress (Li et al., 2025). This erosion of trust is not rooted in rejection of sustainability itself, but in frustration with how it is framed.

Fashion operates within layered systems: global supply chains, regulatory asymmetries, material constraints, labour realities, cost pressures. Sustainability decisions are negotiated, not absolute. When communication reduces these realities to a single claim, it asks audiences to accept conclusions without seeing the working.

Trust, however, is built through explanation.

Evidence as narrative infrastructure

More credible conversations begin when brands shift from assertion to articulation. Instead of declaring a product “sustainable”, they explain the decision-making behind it. Why this intervention. What impact it addresses. What remains unresolved.

Evidence-led communication, grounded in data, recognised standards or clearly defined methodologies, consistently outperforms vague claims in building confidence (Trace for Good, 2025). This is not about overloading audiences with information. It is about narrative discipline.

When handled well, evidence becomes invisible scaffolding: present, supportive, rarely foregrounded. Transparency reads not as exposure, but as competence.

The quiet pressure of regulation

Regulation is reshaping the sustainability landscape, often without much noise. Across markets, claims are being held to higher thresholds of specificity, substantiation and verifiability. What once functioned as aspirational language is increasingly treated as a factual statement with legal weight.

In this context, sustainability storytelling is no longer just reputational. It is operational. Words carry consequences. Narratives create obligations.

Yet regulation alone does not restore trust. Tone matters. So does honesty about limits.

Moving beyond binary narratives

Binary framing, sustainable or not, good or bad, remains common in fashion communication. It is also rarely accurate. A recycled fibre may reduce virgin resource use while increasing energy demand. Local production may lower transport emissions while limiting scale or affordability.

Acknowledging these trade-offs does not weaken a story. It strengthens it. As Sierra (2025) notes, meaningful sustainability dialogue depends on recognising layered realities rather than moral certainty.

Audiences are capable of holding complexity. Many now expect it.

From persuasion to participation

This expectation marks a shift in how sustainability communication functions. It moves from persuasion towards participation. Consumers, partners and stakeholders are less interested in slogans than in understanding how systems work, and where their own choices sit within them.

Transparency, in this sense, becomes relational. An invitation to engage rather than a demand for approval. Research suggests that such openness supports long-term trust, even when brands acknowledge areas still in progress (Li et al., 2025).

Storytelling with responsibility

For brands, this opens up different kinds of storytelling. Conversations about overproduction, product lifespan, care, repair and resale are no longer peripheral. They reflect operational truth.

When communicated responsibly, they support trust not by presenting perfection, but by demonstrating intent, evidence and accountability.

In this environment, sustainability communication becomes a form of stewardship. Not louder claims, but sturdier ones. Not simplified stories, but credible ones.

Fashion does not need better sustainability slogans.
It needs better conversations, grounded in evidence, shaped by transparency, and told with an understanding of how they will be heard.

 

References

Li, M., Chen, Y., Wang, S. and Zhao, L. (2025) ‘Consumer awareness and scepticism towards greenwashing in the fashion industry’, Sustainability, 17(7), p.2982.

Trace for Good (2025) Beyond the green claims vacuum: Communicating responsibly in fashion. Available at: https://www.traceforgood.com/ressources/article/beyond-the-green-claims-vacuum-communicating-responsibly-in-fashion (Accessed: 10 November 2025).

Sierra, B. (2025) Why the sustainable fashion conversation needs nuance. The Sustainable Fashion Forum. Available at: https://www.thesustainablefashionforum.com (Accessed: 10 November 2025).