EU's move against textile waste: Comprehensive yet gaps remain

The Extended Producer Responsibility Act, passed last month by the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), applies to retailers and producers who sell their apparel in the EU. This act was introduced against the backdrop of escalating textile waste problems in the bloc, where the waste generated by clothing ranks as the second highest, trailing only behind food waste.

Solution with inadequate provisions

The main issue here is the total waste generated in the EU due to textiles. According to data from the European Economic Area (EEA), around 12.6 million tonnes of textile waste are generated, with 5.2 million tonnes being clothing waste. Alarmingly, only 1 per cent of discarded clothing or textile materials are recycled in Europe.

Under the new act, the EU aims to ensure that producers take full responsibility for the lifecycle of their clothing. However, the directives are not clear on the ground rules and requirements that producers must follow. It is mentioned that producers are responsible for the sorting, disposal, and recycling of textiles. Yet, there is a loophole: the announcement lacks directives on the quality thresholds for collecting textiles for reuse, recycling, and the preparation processes for the same by January 1, 2025.

The EU also mentioned tracking textiles and clothing disposal and identifying the types of materials disposed of into mixed waste. This will enable the bloc to analyse the kind of textile waste generated and its volume. More frequent tracking offers a greater scope for finding solutions to the problem. However, the current resolution has some gaps that the bloc has not yet addressed.

The problem

Although the EU is aggressively implementing this ambitious law, some issues remain unaddressed, or one must infer them indirectly from the act. The EU did not tackle the issue of in-house recycling capacities. The EU has highly limited recycling facilities; therefore, most donated or discarded apparel is exported to Africa. The destinations for its used apparel exports are expanding. Since 2019, there has been a spike in the volume of apparel exported to African and Asian nations.

Figure 1: EU's total exports of used clothing (in $ bn)

Source: ITC Trademap

Figure 2: EU's exports of used clothing to Africa and Asia (in $ bn)

Source: ITC Trademap

According to recent statistics from the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), of the total used apparel exported by the EU, 49 per cent is exported to Africa, where there is a higher demand for cheaper apparel. The items not deemed useful end up in landfills in the region. Africa has been facing the brunt of importing second-hand apparel, both environmentally and economically. Another significant chunk, 41 per cent, is exported to Asia, where, in the special economic zones, items are either sent for downcycling or exported to other countries for recycling. Therefore, this entire cycle is not considered in the EU policy scenario.

Polluter pays principle with loopholes

Although the current provision may appear to embody the classic polluter-pays principle, where manufacturers are supposed to bear the cost for the entire life cycle of the apparel, there is a twist in the current law. With no specific guidelines on textile waste management and prevention, there is very little incentive for producers to invest in the infrastructure necessary for recycling textile and clothing waste, leading to the continued export of used clothes to countries like Africa.

The issue, though not directly addressed by the EU, has been highlighted by France, which proposed to reduce and eventually eliminate the export of used clothing to African nations. This is because the current actions merely shift the problem from one place to another. The African economy is also suffering from the influx of second-hand clothing, and landfill issues are particularly acute in countries like Ghana.

Therefore, while the EU has achieved a significant milestone by announcing the implementation and extension of the EPR to textile and clothing producers, the lack of clear timelines and guidelines means that the law may not be effectively followed. To ensure that the polluter truly pays, the laws must be more stringent and enforceable.

ALCHEMPro News Desk (KL)