Month: February 2024

Sourcing Sustainable Fashion Products (II): FASH455 Exclusive Interview with Megan Dawson-Elli, Product Sustainability Manager at Tapestry (UD & FASH BS16)

About Megan Dawson-Elli

Megan Dawson-Elli graduated from the University of Delaware (UD) in 2016 with a degree in Fashion Merchandising. During her time at UD, she was the winner of the Fashion Scholarship Fund case study, a highly competitive national competition. Early in her academic career, she identified her interest in environmental sustainability within the fashion industry. This inspired Megan to study abroad in Hong Kong in 2014, where she was a Sourcing & Sustainability intern for Under Armour. After graduation, Megan worked in merchandising and sourcing before starting her career in environmental sustainability at PVH in 2018. Presently, Megan holds the position of Product Sustainability Manager at Tapestry, where she leads their work on product impact, environmentally preferred materials, and circularity.

In her free time, Megan enjoys reading, running, and traveling. She lives in NYC with her fiancé, also a UD graduate, and likes spending her weekends in Central Park.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this interview are those of Megan Dawson-Elli and do not reflect the views or positions of her employer or any affiliated organizations.

Sheng: What does a Product Sustainability Manager do? Can you walk us through your typical day at Tapestry? Also, what makes you love your job?

Megan: As a Product Sustainability Manager, I work as an internal consultant to our brands to support their progress towards our Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) goals and their desire to market and evaluate the environmentally preferred attributes of our products. Many initiatives fall under Product Sustainability, but I would bucket most of the work into several categories: marketing claims substantiation, environmentally preferred materials, product impact, circularity, and packaging. Every day can look different in this role, which keeps it exciting! One day I will be working with teams to craft a marketing claim about a product and the next I will be collecting data from suppliers for a life cycle assessment. My work is very dynamic, with some projects lasting days versus months. I love my job because I get to work with teams across the company that are passionate about sustainability, and even though I no longer work to create products, it’s still the focus of my work.

Sheng: Consumers today, especially our Gen Z students, want to see more “sustainable” fashion products in the market. What does “sustainable product” mean in practice? Can “sustainability” be objectively measured?

Megan: The term “sustainable” has become difficult to define as many initiatives can fit under it, like environmentally preferred materials, responsible sourcing, circularity, etc. It can also be seen as a yes/no question, while sustainability is a journey where progress should grow as new innovations become available. At a product level, the most visible sustainability initiatives that can be seen are environmentally preferred materials or social impact claims being made about the item. There are plenty of initiatives that companies are doing across their supply chain and their operations. Checking out a company’s annual Corporate Responsibility report will show a greater picture of its efforts, commitments, and progress.

Sheng: How can sourcing contribute to a fashion company’s sustainability efforts and make more sustainable products available to consumers?

Megan: At Tapestry, we follow an internal framework known as “Style, Performance and Impact.” This ensures all products meet our high standards of craftsmanship. The framework also guides our decision-making around environmentally preferred materials and material innovation investments.

  • Style: Does it meet design needs or the intended design function of the product?
  • Performance: Does it meet expectations of quality and cost?
  • Impact: Does the material or decision have a measurable reduction in environmental impact?

Additionally, suppliers play a critical role in helping companies realize their environmental and social ambitions. We consistently partner with stakeholders across our value chain to work toward more responsible practices that their businesses can incorporate, especially through increased implementation of environmentally preferred manufacturing practices and using preferred materials.

Sheng: Related to sustainability are the buzzwords “supply chain transparency” and “traceability.” What progress has been made, and what are the key steps for fashion companies in achieving greater transparency and traceability in their supply chains and sourcing?

Megan: To ensure a more responsible and transparent supply chain, it is critical to map supply chains and the relationships between suppliers. At Tapestry, we have begun the process of onboarding suppliers to join TrusTrace, a cloud-based web platform for sustainability, where we intend to conduct more upstream supply chain mapping and the collection of documentation to establish material and product traceability. We envision the platform will help us meet enterprise-wide sustainability commitments and goals, and help us align with upcoming regulatory requirements and industry best practices.

We have also improved downstream traceability by launching a digital product passport program, most notably through Coachtopia products. Customers can hold their smartphones against the cloud emblem on their Coachtopia product until the pop-up appears and then learn the total environmental impact of the product, along with all the potential avenues to extend its useful life under the sub-brand’s circular principles.

Sheng: As legislation related to fashion companies’ sustainability practices continues to be newly implemented or is on the horizon, are there any specific regulations you would recommend our students closely monitor?

Megan: There are many emerging ESG regulations, especially in Europe. Below are some that would be interesting to review.

Europe:

USA:

Sheng: Any reflections on your experiences at UD and FASH? What advice would you offer to current students preparing for a career in fashion sustainability after graduation?

Megan: My “lightbulb moment” for wanting to pursue a career in sustainability happened while I was at UD, specifically from taking the ethics and sustainability in the fashion industry class. After identifying environmental sustainability as my focus and passion, I found ways to include it in every project, case study, and internship during school. The great thing about sustainability is that every department in a company can be part of the collective efforts, so even if you aren’t on an ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) team, you can make an impact. If you are specifically interested in pursuing a role on an ESG team, I recommend networking with people in the industry that have those roles to learn more about what the job looks like and staying up to date on the latest news, innovations and regulations in the space. Also, there are plenty of college courses and industry certifications in sustainability that can be a great learning resource.

–END–

Sourcing Sustainable Fashion Products (I): FASH455 Exclusive Interview with Julianna Alfieri, Senior Global Sourcing Specialist at Amscan (UD & FASH BS22)

About Julianna Alfieri

Julianna Alfieri is the Senior Global Sourcing Specialist for Amscan, which serves over 40,000 retail outlets across the globe and owns Party City Holdings Inc. Born and raised in Long Island, Julianna has always had a passion for all things fashion. This passion led her to pursue a Bachelor’s degree in Fashion Merchandising and Management, with a minor in Sustainable Apparel & Textile Innovation, from the University of Delaware. Julianna furthered her expertise with a Graduate Degree from Parsons School of Design in Fashion Sustainability. Her diverse background includes experience in fashion styling, retail, marketing, and indexing, all of which have shaped her approach to global sourcing. With these educational and professional experiences, Julianna has built a solid foundation and acquired the necessary tools to excel in the industry.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this interview are those of Julianna Alfieri and do not reflect the views or positions of her employer or any affiliated organizations.

Sheng: What does a Senior Global Sourcing Specialist do? What does your typical day look like? Also, what makes you love your job, or what is the most exciting part of it?

Julianna: As a Senior Global Sourcing Specialist, my role revolves around fostering cross-functional collaboration and maintaining strong relationships with vendors and suppliers. I oversee specific categories of the company’s business, ensuring effective communication and negotiation to maximize the quality of goods while meeting financial objectives. This involves working closely with my sourcing team, global offices, and utilizing various systems to streamline sourcing processes.

On a typical day, I work closely with my sourcing team and global partners to analyze costs, manage vendor relationships, and collaborate on major projects within my designated categories. Additionally, I assist in updating data in relevant systems and ensuring smooth transitions for new suppliers while also contributing to major projects aimed at enhancing redundancy categories and diversifying our supplier base.

The dynamic nature of the role keeps me engaged and continuously learning, allowing me to apply my education to real-world scenarios and witness the tangible outcomes of our efforts, such as seeing products I’ve contributed to in stores. What I find most exciting is the opportunity for constant growth and the collaborative aspect of working with our global partners!

Sheng: Can you walk us through the sourcing process—for example, the main procedures, who will be involved, and the general timeline?

Julianna: The overall sourcing process is an extremely collaborative effort involving multiple teams and stakeholders. It begins with identifying the need for specific products, which could stem from various reasons such as new product development, transitioning from existing suppliers, or finding vendors offering better cost or quality.

Once the product to be sourced is determined, we engage with suppliers from our matrix. Communication is managed internally for domestic vendors, while for international vendors, our global partners are involved. We evaluate potential suppliers based on their capability to produce the desired product and then proceed to cost negotiations.

Sample gathering is a crucial step where we collect samples from all potential vendors to assess quality and cost-effectiveness. This decision often involves input from both sourcing and product development teams. Using Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) systems, we then generate artwork for the product, collaborating closely with the art team.

Once artwork is finalized, it is shared with the chosen vendor to facilitate production specifications. Lead times for sample creation and production are negotiated with the vendor. Once we receive a pre-production sample, either our global partners or product development teams evaluate its quality and suitability.

Upon pre-production sample approval, the sourcing team updates our systems to indicate the selected vendor for the product. Throughout this process, sourcing manages communication between cross-functional teams and partners.

The timeline for this process typically spans 3 to 6 months, varying on factors such as the country of sourcing, vendor payment terms, lead times, and sample production quality.

Sheng: We know retailers today need to “balance” many sourcing factors today, from costs and speed to market to compliance risks. In practice, how do these factors actually affect companies’ sourcing decisions? For example, are there any specific factors that hold particular importance or are given significant weight in the decision-making process?

Julianna: Sourcing decisions within companies are deeply influenced by a number of factors. Among these factors, cost stands out as a primary consideration, directly impacting the financial health and competitiveness of the company. Balancing cost-effectiveness with other factors is essential to ensure optimal value for the organization.

Quality is another factor that holds significant weight in sourcing decisions. Maintaining specific standards of quality is essential to uphold the brand reputation, customer satisfaction, and overall product integrity. Innovation also drives sourcing decisions, as companies look for suppliers with advanced products, technologies, or processes to stay competitive and meet changing consumer needs.

Other critical factors include supplier reliability and supplier diversity. Dependable suppliers ensure consistent delivery schedules, minimize disruptions, and foster trust, while diversification enhances resilience and flexibility. Building strong relationships with suppliers encourages working together, coming up with new ideas, and achieving long-term success!

Finally, sustainability is now a crucial factor in sourcing decisions, driven by increasing consumer and regulatory demands for environmentally and socially responsible practices. Companies favor suppliers committed to sustainability, such as reducing waste and upholding fair labor standards. Embracing sustainability not only reflects a company’s corporate values, but also ensures long-term business success and resilience in a market that values conscious practices.

Sheng: From your observation, what are the critical sourcing trends and key issues to watch in 2024?

Julianna: In today’s climate, it is evident that there are several critical sourcing trends and key issues to keep a close eye on in 2024. Among these, prioritizing resilience, sustainability, and diversification stands out as essential for companies aiming to navigate the evolving sourcing landscape successfully!

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a renewed emphasis on strengthening supply chain resilience. Companies are actively diversifying their suppliers and improving risk management to ensure operational continuity. Based on my personal experience in this industry, I’ve recognized the essential role adaptability plays in keeping operations running smoothly without interruption.

Additionally, there is growing attention on sustainability and ethical sourcing. Companies are under pressure to be transparent and accountable due to increased consumer awareness about environmental and social issues. In our organization, we maintain standards through the use of supplier audits to ensure sustainability compliance. Initiatives such as sustainable packaging and collaborations with suppliers certified by reputable organizations like the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) reflect our efforts to advance sustainability goals.

One of the key challenges I’ve encountered in my sourcing career is the reliance on a limited supplier base. This became evident during our paper bag project when antidumping duties significantly impacted our sourcing strategy. The imposition of antidumping duties on paper bags from certain regions prompted us to explore alternative suppliers globally. This highlighted the importance of diversifying our supplier matrix to reduce dependence on specific regions and mitigate risks associated with geopolitical tensions or trade regulations.

Lastly, uncertain economic climates have significantly influenced what warrants close attention. Our company’s experience with Chapter 11 bankruptcy served as a pivotal moment, illuminating the crucial paths forward. As repeatedly emphasized, maintaining a diverse and resilient supplier base is essential for mitigating risks linked to potential disruptions in the supply chain. Additionally, closely monitoring costs and implementing cost-saving measures becomes imperative for navigating through uncertain economic times. Lastly, fostering robust supplier relationships and enhancing communication and collaboration with suppliers emerge as essential strategies for navigating challenges and ensuring continuity in the sourcing process, especially amidst economic uncertainty.

Sheng: Many retailers have adopted PLM (product life cycle management) and other digital tools to manage sourcing and the supply chain. From your observations, what changes have these tools brought to sourcing?

Julianna: Digital tools are vital for global sourcing as they streamline processes, enhance communication, and provide real-time insights, enabling companies to make informed decisions. Some important tools I work with closely include PLM (Product Lifecycle Management), BPCS (Business Planning and Control System), and Datamyne, as they help to optimize efficiency and mitigate risks in the complex global marketplace.

PLM helps to centralize information and documents, which ensures that all stakeholders have access to real-time data, updates, and feedback, leading to improved alignment. This helps for history purposes and checking previous decision making done by other team members. PLM also assists with processes such as supplier onboarding, product specifications management, and artwork/sample tracking.

BPCS provides a wide range of tools for managing inventory, procurement, and production planning. It helps ensure that inventory levels are optimized, procurement processes are efficient, and production activities are scheduled according to demand forecasts and inventory data. This visibility into inventory levels also allows sourcing partners to access crucial information, such as the amount of inventory on hand, helping us prioritize sourcing efforts based on urgency.

Lastly, Datamyne provides valuable insights into global trade data, including import and export information, tariffs, and compliance requirements. Datamyne also allows users to search for potential suppliers, thus mitigating risks associated with geopolitical factors and trade regulations. In response to the antidumping tariffs affecting our paper bags (previously mentioned), I utilized Datamyne to identify alternative vendors exempt from these tariffs. I thoroughly researched and explored these potential vendors to determine if they could serve as viable alternatives for sourcing paper bags, thereby circumventing the tariffs.

Sheng: Any reflections on your experiences at UD and FASH? What advice would you offer current students preparing for a career in sourcing after graduation?

Julianna: Reflecting on my experiences through the UD fashion program, I am grateful for the comprehensive education and real-world projects that have shaped my understanding of the fashion industry and the global sourcing world. UD provided me with valuable insights into various aspects of the industry and encouraged me to explore my interests deeply. Through specialized courses for my focus on sustainable apparel and textile innovation, I gained practical knowledge that is directly applicable to the sourcing realm. The exposure to relevant case studies and global issues was instrumental in honing my skills and preparing me for my career in global sourcing, and UD has paved the way for the inevitable challenges and opportunities ahead.

For current students preparing for a career in sourcing after graduation, my first piece of advice would be to prioritize networking and building relationships with peers and faculty members. Business is personal, and these connections can open doors to opportunities in the industry! Additionally, dedicating oneself to school projects and seeking any type of industry experience can provide clarity on career paths and offer invaluable insights into different work environments, and help in understanding one’s preferences within the industry.

Developing strong presentation skills and the confidence to speak up in team settings are essential for standing out as a leader and effectively communicating with vendors, global partners, and cross-functional teams.

Finally, staying informed about current events, especially in the sourcing landscape, is crucial for making informed decisions and staying ahead in the industry.

Feel free to reach out anytime if you’d like to connect, chat, or discuss industry insights – I am always here and eager to engage!

–The END–

Conversation with Katherine Tai, US Trade Representative, on International Trade and US Trade Policy (February 2024)

  • Speaker: Katherine Tai (U.S. Trade Representative, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative)
  • Presider: Michael Froman (President, Council on Foreign Relations; Former U.S. Trade Representative, 2013-17)

Excerpt from the conversation

Worker-Centric US trade policy

Question from FROMAN: “Back in the old days, there was a notion that since the U.S. market is relatively open—we don’t have that much protection here, the average applied tariff is about 3 ½ percent—that if we were able to reduce barriers to other countries disproportionately we could export more made by U.S. workers, and that export-related jobs paid more than non-export related jobs, and that we could use access to our market as a way of getting other countries to reform their labor practices and raise their standards, which would create a more level playing field. That theory is sort of out of vogue at the moment. But, tell me, can you envisage what an agreement that is worker-centric looks like that reduces barriers or increases trade?”

Response from TAI: “The percentage of (U.S.) exports to GDP is around 10 percent—maybe 11 or 12 percent. So it’s not very high. Some of our—some of our trading partners have very, very high exports as a proportion of GDP (e.g., 25 percent)…So you just have to put that (trade liberalization) into context. I think you also have to think about the fact of the balance of exports and imports…”

“We’re trying to create and maintain jobs, and good jobs, at home… so then the question becomes not what do I have to pay you to do X, Y, or Z, but how can we put the forces of our cooperation together? What does the deal look like where we are building our middle classes together? And I think that the worker pieces then come in, along with the environment pieces, as something that I shouldn’t have to pay you to do, but as something that you should want to do…”

“Traditionally we’ve kept our scorecard by, you know, how many trade agreements you finished and how many you’ve gotten across the finish line… Our progress lies very much in how the conversation has fundamentally shifted. That the conversation now is very much focused on supply chain resilience, on equity, and how not to leave those within our economies behind further, how not to leave those developing countries behind further.”

Digital trade

Question from FROMAN: “For a long time, the U.S. had a position around the free flow of data across borders, not taxing digital products across borders… given the fact that the U.S. economy is probably—certainly the leader in all things digital, what does it mean for us to move away from defending these principles that have been so core to what we’ve tried to do before?”

Response from TAI: “So in early 2000s that we’re negotiating (digital trade)… It’s called the e-commerce chapter. And it’s the e-commerce chapter in several iterations of FTAs (free trade agreements)…And I think that that makes sense if you think about what the digital economy looked like in the early 2000s. It really was about e-commerce…At the time—thought about e-commerce digital trade provisions as largely facilitative provisions. The flow of data was there, and we wanted to safeguard the flow of data to facilitate traditional trade transactions, the movement of goods across borders, the analogy to services we used also in digital.”

“In 2024, one of the things that you realize is that the flow of data, the decisions around where data needs to be stored, how it needs to be handled, has—on much, much different dimensions because over this period of time, in fact, in the digital economy the data is no longer just about facilitating traditional types of transactions. The data has become the commodity in and of itself. The data is now what has value. The ability to accumulate that data and for vast amounts of data then to be combined with computing power to create things like generative AI and large language models, it starts to give you a sense, just as a normal trade negotiator, that there are much, much bigger equities at stake in what we might be doing in our trade negotiations…It’s not just about facilitating trade, but around how we regulate data and how we regulate the companies that accumulate, harvest, and trade in this data is something that we need to resolve and advance before we can thoughtfully and responsibly engage in trade negotiations to figure out what the limits are in terms of what we should be doing, and what the goals are for what we should be doing with our trading partners… what underlies the digital economy and our digital existences, and just thinking about what the rules should be for how that data is handled, who has rights to that data, and then the international components around trade and prosperity but also trade and national security.”

Tradeoffs in trade policy

Question from FROMAN: “Trade is a great area to talk about tradeoffs. We hate being overly dependent on China for basic goods. We also hate inflation and higher cost of living. The actions taken to deal with the first one will likely exacerbate the second one… How do you talk about that tradeoff with communities around the country? And do you make explicit that, yes, you’re going to pay more at Walmart for this for that, but we’re going to become less dependent on China as a result?”

Response from TAI: “That today, we know that we have critical dependencies and vulnerabilities that are actually bad from a national security and just a geopolitical standpoint. For every sector where we feel that we are critically vulnerable to another country and, say, China in particular, I think that it creates a sense of angst and insecurity that is destabilizing for the world economy and, frankly, for the world… if you look at it from a more holistic, medium-term perspective, supply chain diversity and supply chain resilience is actually a management tool for inflation… “

“For as long as there are concentrated pockets for production and supply—and this is internationally, but this is also the logic behind taking on dominant players in our economy—for as long as you have that kind of dominance, you’re going to have in the hands of certain players the ability to distort the market and to take advantage of that dominance by jacking up prices, whether it’s shrinkflation, or greedflation, or in the international context economic coercion… if you think about the tradeoff as between today and tomorrow, it’s not zero-sum at all. And in fact, these changes are ones that we need to be able to manage, not being faced with the same risks over and over and over again.”

US trading partners

Comment from TAI: “when you talk about some evolution in our (trade policy) approach, I just want to be clear, the evolution in our approach is about what should be in those things, what should be in those agreements, what should be in the exercises and the cooperation that we undertake with our partners. This is not a walking away from those partners, at all…You’ll see how much time I spend in Brussels, how much time I’ve spent in Asia, and the Indo-Pacific over the course of the last three years. And you’ll see that the prioritization of our like-minded partners, our traditional partners if you will, is still very much there.”

Tariffs

Comment from TAI: “What is really important to appreciate about tariffs is that they’re a tool. They’re a tool that can be used in constructive ways… They’re a tool, at least for us, in trade remedies… They are a tool for remedying unfair trade. I actually kind of like the way the Europeans describe these types of tools—dumping, countervail. They call them trade defense instruments.”

“What I also want to reflect is that trade policy and economic policy isn’t just tariffs… we have kept a lot of the tariffs, because we see strategic value in those tariffs in this exercise of building up the middle class and reinvigorating American manufacturing and the American economy… it needs to take the tariffs as a tool, the investments as another tool to help reinforce, policies that support and empower all workers, and to encourage our partners to be supporting and empowering their workers, and then also promoting economic vitality, opportunity through the enforcement of our competition laws…”

Textile industry strategic or not?

Comment from TAI: “You know, there are things that are more strategic, things that maybe we feel like are less strategic or not strategic. But, you know, I think that is actually a really, really important question. And it’s a hard one—what’s strategic and what isn’t? We clearly did not think that surgical masks—surgical, you know, medical-grade gloves and ventilators were that strategic. And so we let that go wherever it was going to go. And in the early days of the pandemic, boy, did that hurt us a lot. So, you know, one of the—one of the stories that came out of the pandemic was all of our—all of our textile manufacturers, you know, were told your industry is not that strategic. They’d been told it for a long time. And yet, we know that it is important. It’s politically important. And USTR has for a very long time had a textiles office and textiles negotiator…it was that textiles industry, what we still have, that was able to repurpose their capabilities and to step up, and to actually start producing some of these things that we were really deficient in during the pandemic, and to save us. So I think that where you draw the lines on strategic and nonstrategic… It’s not necessarily obvious.”

Video discussion questions [For students in FASH455, please address at least two of the following questions in your response]

#1: Tai emphasizes the importance of creating and maintaining good jobs at home and building middle classes together with trading partners. How can the textile and apparel trade contribute to the goal?

#2: Reflecting on the textile industry’s response during the pandemic, Tai raises questions about what industries are considered strategic and the implications of such categorizations. How should policymakers determine which industries are strategic, and what criteria should be used in making these decisions?

#3: How has the role of data evolved in trade discussions, and what are the potential challenges in regulating data in international trade agreements? What are the implications of digital trade governance on today’s fashion business?

#4: Tai discusses the strategic importance of supply chain diversity and resilience. How might diversifying supply chains contribute to national security and economic stability, and what are the challenges in achieving this diversification? Please use the textile and apparel sector as an example.

#5: Any other reflections, thoughts, or feedback on the conversation?

[discussion is closed]

Patterns of US Apparel Imports in 2023 and Critical Sourcing Trends to Watch in 2024

The latest data from the Office of Textiles and Apparel (OTEXA) and the United States International Trade Commission (USITC) suggested several key patterns of US apparel imports in 2023.

First, affected by the macro economy, US apparel import volume in 2023 suffered the most significant decline since the pandemic. Specifically, US apparel imports decreased by 22% in quantity and value in 2023 compared to 2022, with none of the top ten suppliers experiencing positive growth.

Nevertheless, after several months of straight decline, US apparel imports finally bounced back in December 2023. Thanks to the holiday season and a gradual improvement of the US economy, seasonally adjusted US apparel imports in December 2023 were about 4.5% higher in quantity and 4.2% higher in value than the previous month. Highly consistent with trends, the US Consumer Confidence Index (CCI) increased from 67.2 in November to 76.4 in December (January 2019=100), suggesting US households turned more confident about their financial outlook and willing to spend. That being said, the latest January 2024 International Monetary Fund (IMF) forecasts still predicted the US GDP growth would slow down from 2.5% in 2023 to 2.1% in 2024. Thus, whether the US apparel import volume could continue to maintain growth after the holiday season remains a big question mark.

Second, while the pace of sourcing cost increases has slowed, the costs and financial pressure facing US fashion companies are far from over. Specifically, as of December 2023, the price index of US apparel imports stood at 106 (January 2019=100), almost no change from January 2023. However, two emerging trends are worth watching. One is the declining US apparel retail price index since August 2023, which means US fashion companies may have to sacrifice their profits to attract consumers to the store. The second trend is the surging shipping costs as a result of the recent Red Sea shipping crisis, which were not reflected in the December price data. According to J.P. Morgan, during the week of January 25, 2024, the container shipping rates from China to the US West Coast and East Coast saw a significant spike of around 140% and 120% from November 2023, respectively. Even worse, there is no sign that the Red Sea crisis will soon be solved. Therefore, 2024 could pose another year of financial challenges for many US fashion companies.

Third, diversification remained a pivotal trend in US fashion companies’ sourcing strategy in 2023. For example, the Herfindahl–Hirschman index (HHI), a commonly used measurement of market concentration, went down from 0.105 in 2022 to 0.101 in 2022, suggesting that US apparel imports came from even more diverse sources.

Notably, measured in value, only 71.6% of US apparel imports came from Asia in 2023, the lowest in five years. Highly consistent with the US Fashion Industry Association’s Benchmarking Survey results, OTEXA’s data reflected companies’ intention to diversify their sourcing away from Asia due to increasing geopolitical concerns, particularly the rising US-China strategic competition.

However, it should be noted that Asia’s reduced market share did not benefit “near-shoring” from the Western hemisphere much. For example, in 2023, approximately 14.6% of US apparel imports originated from USMCA and CAFTA-DR members, nearly the same as the 14.3% recorded in 2022. Instead, US apparel imports outside Asia and the Western Hemisphere jumped to 11.4% in 2023 from 9.8% a year ago. Some emerging EU and African suppliers, such as Turkey, Romania, Morocco, and Tunisia, performed relatively well in the US market in 2023, although their market shares remained small. We could highly expect the sourcing diversification strategy to continue in 2024 as many companies regard the strategy as the most effective to mitigate various market uncertainties and sourcing risks.

Fourth, US fashion companies continued reducing their China exposure as much as possible, but China will remain a key player in the game. On the one hand, about 20.0% of US apparel imports in value and 25.9% in quantity came from China in 2023, both hit a new low in the past decade. Recent studies also show that it became increasingly common for China to no longer be the largest source of apparel imports for many US fashion companies.

However, China remains highly competitive in terms of the variety of products it offers. For example, the export product diversification index, calculated based on trade data at the 6-digit HTS code level (Chapters 61 and 62), shows that few other countries can match China’s product variety. Likewise, product level data collected from industry sources indicates that China offered far more clothing styles (measured in Stock Keeping Units, SKUs) than its competitors in 2023. According to the results, rather than identifying 1-2 specific “next China,” US fashion companies appeared to leverage “category killers”—for example, utilizing Vietnam as a sourcing base for outerwear, underwear, and swimwear; India for dresses, and Bangladesh for large-volume basic knitwear items.

Related to this, another recent study found that the top five largest Asian suppliers next to China, including Vietnam, Bangladesh, Indonesia, India, and Cambodia, collectively can offer diverse product categories almost comparable to those from China in the US market.

Fifth, trade data reveals early signs that US fashion companies are gradually reducing sourcing cotton apparel products from Asia because of the implementation of the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA). Notably, when concerns about cotton made by Xinjiang forced labor initially emerged in 2018, US fashion companies quickly shifted sourcing orders for cotton apparel (OTEXA code 31) from China to other Asian countries. However, UFLPA’s enforcement increasingly targets imports from Asian countries other than China due to the highly integrated regional textile and apparel supply chain and Asian countries’ heavy reliance on textile inputs from China. Consequently, Asia (excluding China) accounted for a declining share in the total imports of US cotton apparel in 2023.

Meanwhile, affected by UFLPA’s enforcement, only 11.8% of US cotton apparel imports came from China in 2023, marking a further decline from 13% in 2022 and reaching a new low for the past decade. China also deliberately decreased the percentage of cotton apparel in its total apparel exports to the US market, dropping from nearly 40% in 2017 to only 25% in 2023. In comparison, cotton apparel consistently represented about 45% of total US apparel imports during the same period.

Additionally, while there was no substantial increase in the volume of US apparel imports from CAFTA-DR members, as a silver lining, the utilization of the trade agreement improved. In 2023, about 19.2% of US apparel imports claimed duty-free benefits under US free trade agreements and trade preference programs, a notable increase from 17.7% in 2022. Most such imports came under CAFTA-DR (45.4%) and USMCA (19.7%).

Meanwhile, in the first 12 months of 2023 (latest OTEXA data), about 70.2% of US apparel imports came from CAFTA-DR members claimed the duty-free benefit, up from 66.6% the same period a year ago. Particularly, 65.4% of US apparel imports under CAFTA-DR complied with the yarn-forward rules of origin in 2023, a notable increase from 61.3% in 2022. Another 2.6% of imports utilized the agreement’s short supply mechanism, which also went up from 2.3% in 2022. The results could reflect an ever more integrated regional textile and apparel supply chain among CAFTA-DR members due to increasing investments made in the region in recent years. However, there is still much that needs to be done to effectively increase the volume of US apparel imports from the region.

by Sheng Lu

Study: Destinations of Dutch used textiles (February 2024)

The study is available HERE (published by the Government of the Netherlands). Key findings:

Size of used textiles trade:

  • In 2022, the Netherlands exported 248,000 tons of used textiles (or over €193 million), the highest in the past five years. This trend aligned with the EU’s broader used clothing exports, which reached 1.7 million tons in 2019. The average European price for used textiles was around €0.76 per kg in 2019.
  • In 2018, 84% of used textiles collected in the Netherlands were exported, with 53% being suitable for re-wearing, 33% recycled, and 14% being nonrecyclable and non-renewable.

Destinations of the used textile exports

Trade data analysis (HS6309 and HS6310 from 2017 to 2022) and interviews revealed several key export destinations for used clothing exports from the Netherlands:

  • Poland and Pakistan as Import-export hubs. The high volumes of HS 6309 (used textiles) exports from the Netherlands to Poland likely reflect the lower labor costs for labor-intensive manual sorting in Poland. For the last five years, Pakistan has also been a top-five destination for Dutch used textile exports (under HS6309). Four of the six Dutch collector-sorters interviewed confirmed that Pakistan is a primary export destination, noting that the lowest quality textiles were usually sent there. However, Pakistan is also the world’s sixth largest used clothing exporter, suggesting Pakistan is unlikely to be the final destination for the Dutch used textile exports but an import-export hub.
  • India is positioned as a significant recycling hub, particularly for HS 6310 (sorted and unsorted used rags and textile scraps) imported from the Netherlands. India also receives a substantial volume of HS 6310 textiles originating from the Netherlands via France. Notably, India enforces trade restrictions requiring textiles under HS 6309 (used textiles) to be imported only through the Kandla Special Economic Zone (KASEZ), with a mandate for at least 50% to be re-exported. Panipat in India is home to numerous spinning companies, ranging from large to small. These companies specialize in cleaning and sorting textile waste to produce recycled yarn, which is then supplied to weaving and manufacturing units in Panipat and beyond. Most of India’s used textiles re-exports went to African countries.
  • Ghana and Kenya were significant recipients of used textiles from the Netherlands, yet their export volumes for HS6309 (used textiles) and HS 6310 (sorted and unsorted used rags and textile scraps) were comparatively low. The high import-to-export ratios underscore these two countries’ role as the reuse and disposal destinations of used textiles from the Netherlands.

Characteristics of the used textile exports

  • The report highlights divergent perspectives on the quality and rewearability of textile exports to African countries. Dutch collectors and sorters assert that all exports from the Netherlands to Africa consist of good-quality rewearables. They distance themselves from the problem of textile waste exported to Africa, attributing it to the unregulated practices of certain parts of the used textiles trade that involve illegal contractors and exports.
  • According to the study, textiles deemed suitable for currently viable closed-loop recycling technologies include those made of pure cotton, pure wool, pure acrylic, and cotton-rich and wool-rich blends exceeding 80%. However, the study noted a concerning decline in the proportion of collected textiles suitable for rewear, coupled with a rise in textiles containing synthetic fibers. Most interviewees explicitly attribute the degradation in the quality of used textiles over time to the influence of “ultra-fast fashion.”

Environmental and social impacts of used textile exports

  • Interviews revealed a significant variation in the perceived environmental impacts of the used clothing trade. For example, participants from import-export hubs like Pakistan and recycling hubs like India emphasized minimal environmental harm, focusing on the positive contributions of used textile imports. In contrast, interviewees from reuse and disposal countries, such as Kenya and Ghana, discussed environmental harms and their localized impacts. Interviewees also expressed concerns that “certain sustainability solutions may be developed in such a way that generates additional problems further away” and benefit actors in Europe and the West only.
  • The study also found that 99% of fashion brands “do not disclose a commitment to ultimately reduce the number of new items they produce,” and only 12% of fashion companies have even disclosed the quantity of products produced annually in 2023, down from 15% in 2022.
  • The involved parties acknowledge the considerable difficulty in completely disassociating any participant in the reverse supply chain from the adverse impacts of textile exports. Despite efforts, achieving complete transparency beyond EU borders is deemed nearly impossible, as highlighted by one used textiles collector.

Job creation

  • The used textiles value chain unambiguously generates a huge amount of employment, particularly for women, in the sorting, recycling, selling, cleaning, repairing, re-styling, and distributing processes.
  • A 2023 International Labour Organization (ILO) study showed that new recycling and reprocessing activities could create over 10 million jobs in Latin America and the Caribbean and around 0.5 million jobs in Europe.
  • However, concerns related to job quality and social risks were also raised in interviews, particularly concerning reuse and disposal countries. Even where waste management systems for used textiles are formalized and managed, they often rely on the “labors of informal actors” for various functions such as distribution, resale, and disposal processes. Gender-based disadvantage may also be a concern. For example, the study found that whereas recycling and sorting enterprises are overwhelmingly owned and operated by men, women perform the majority of lower-wage, non-technical, and manual labor-intensive tasks.

Regulations

  • The Dutch government’s Circular Textiles Policy Programme for 2020–2025 outlines a commitment to enhance the proportion of recycled materials in textiles and apparel products available in the Dutch market, including achieving a 10% reuse and 30% recycling rate of sold textiles and apparel by 2025.
  • The Dutch Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for textiles was officially implemented on July 1, 2023. Onwards, producers are responsible for “recycling and reusing of textiles…including an appropriate collection system, recycling and reusing of clothing and household textiles and financing this entire system.”
  • The policy landscape for managing and exporting used textiles in Europe has evolved to align with environmental goals, with key milestones such as the EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles in March 2022. While this strategy aims to create a greener and more resilient textiles sector, the report suggests a need for a bolder vision and more international orientation, emphasizing responsibility for socioenvironmental impacts beyond Europe.
  • The EU Waste Framework Directive (WFD) is another crucial instrument to tackle the environmental challenges of high textile consumption. The WFD regulates all aspects of textile waste management, including the specific obligations to ensure separate collection, treatment, and reporting requirements. The directive calls for all EU Member States to establish separate collection systems for used textiles by the beginning of 2025.
Supplementary video: Used clothing from Europe: Trash or treasure for Africa?

Exploring the Production and Export Strategies of U.S. Textiles and Apparel Manufacturers

The full study is available HERE.

Textiles and apparel “Made in the USA” have gained growing attention in recent years amid the increasing supply chain disruptions during the pandemic, the rising geopolitical tensions worldwide, and consumers’ increasing interest in sustainable apparel and faster speed to market. Statistics from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis showed that U.S. textile and apparel production totaled nearly $28 billion in 2022, a record high in the most recent five years. Meanwhile, unlike in the old days, a growing proportion of textiles and apparel “Made in the USA” are sold overseas today. For example, according to the Office of Textiles and Apparel (OTEXA) under the U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. textiles and apparel exports exceeded $24.8 billion in 2022, up nearly 12% from ten years ago.

By leveraging U.S. Department of Commerce Office of Textiles and Apparel (OTEXA)’s “Made in U.S.A. Sourcing & Products Directory,” this study explored U.S. textiles and apparel manufacturers’ detailed production and export practices. Altogether, 432 manufacturers included in the directory as of October 1, 2023, were analyzed. These manufacturers explicitly mentioned making one of the following products: fiber, yarn, fabric, garment, home textiles, and technical textiles.

Key findings:

First, U.S. textile manufacturers exhibit a notable geographic concentration, whereas apparel manufacturers are dispersed throughout the country. Meanwhile, by the number of textile and apparel manufacturers, California and North Carolina are the only two states that rank in the top five across all product categories, showcasing the most comprehensive textile and apparel supply chain there.

Second, U.S. textile and apparel manufacturers have a high concentration of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Highly consistent with the macro statistics, few textile and apparel manufacturers in the OTEXA database reported having more than 500 employees. Particularly, over 74% of apparel and nearly 60% of home textile manufacturers are “micro-factories” with less than 50 employees.

Third, U.S. textile and apparel manufacturers have limited vertical manufacturing capability. A vertically integrated manufacturer generally makes products covering various production stages, from raw materials to finished products. Results show that only one-third of U.S. textile and apparel manufacturers in OTEXA’s database reported making more than one product type (e.g., yarn or fabric). Meanwhile, specific types of vertically integrated production models are relatively popular among U.S. textile and apparel manufacturers, such as:

  • Apparel + home textiles (5.8%)
  • Fabric + technical textiles (5.1%)
  • Yarn + fabric (3.9%)

However, the lack of fabric mills (N=38 out of 432) appears to be a critical bottleneck preventing the building of a more vertically integrated U.S. textile and apparel supply chain.

Fourth, it is not uncommon for U.S. textile and apparel manufacturers to use imported components. Specifically, among the manufacturers in the OTEXA database, nearly 20% of apparel and fabric mills explicitly say they utilized imported components. In comparison, given the product nature, fiber and yarn manufacturers had a lower percentage using imported components (11%). Furthermore, smaller U.S. textile and apparel manufacturers appear to be more likely to use imported components. For example, whereas 20% of manufacturers with less than 50 employees used imported input, only 10.2% of those with 50-499 employees and 7.7% with 500 or more employees did so. The results indicate the necessity of supporting SME U.S. textile and apparel manufacturers to access textile input through mechanisms such as the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill (MTB).

Fifth, many US textile and apparel manufacturers have already explored overseas markets. Specifically, factories making textile products reported a higher percentage of engagement in exports, including fiber and yarn manufacturers (68.4%), fabric mills (78.9%), and technical textiles producers (69.1%). In comparison, relatively fewer U.S. apparel and home textile producers reported selling overseas.

Sixth, U.S. textile and apparel manufacturers’ export markets are relatively concentrated. Specifically, as many as 72% of apparel mills and 57% of home textiles manufacturers in the OTEXA database reported selling their products in less than two markets. These manufacturers also have a high percentage of selling to the U.S. domestic market. Likewise, because of the reliance on the Western Hemisphere supply chain, more than half of U.S. fiber and yarn manufacturers reported only selling in two markets or less. In comparison, reflecting the global demand for their products, U.S. technical textile manufacturers had the most diverse markets, with nearly 40% exporting to more than ten countries.

Seventh, while the Western Hemisphere remains the top export market, many U.S. textile and apparel manufacturers also export to Asia, Europe, and the rest of the world. For example, nearly half of U.S. textile and apparel manufacturers in OTEXA’s database reported exporting to Asia, and over 60% of U.S. technical textile manufacturers sold their products to European customers.

Additionally, over half of U.S. textile and apparel mills engaged in exports leveraged U.S. free trade agreements (FTAs). U.S. textile mills, on average, reported a higher percentage of using FTAs than apparel and home textile manufacturers. As most U.S.-led FTAs adopt the yarn-forward rules of origin, the results suggest that while such a rule may favor the export of U.S. textile products, its effectiveness and relevance in supporting U.S. apparel exports could be revisited.

Moreover, in line with the macro trade statistics, U.S. textile and apparel manufacturers in the OTEXA database reported a relatively high usage of USMCA, given Mexico and Canada being the two most important export markets. In comparison, U.S. textile and apparel manufacturers’ use of CAFTA-DR was notably lower, even for fiber and yarn manufacturers (37%) and fabric mills (33.3%).

by Kendall Ludwig, Miranda Rack and Sheng Lu

Picture above: On December 13, 2023, Kendall Ludwig and Miranda Rack, FASH 4+1 graduate students and Dr. Sheng Lu, had the unique opportunity to present the study’s findings to senior U.S. trade officials from OTEXA and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) in Washington DC, including Jennifer Knight (Deputy Assistant Secretary for Textiles, Consumer Goods and Materials), Laurie-Ann Agama (Acting Assistant US Trade Representative for Textiles), Maria D’Andrea-Yothers (Director of OTEXA), Natalie Hanson (Deputy Assistant US Trade Representative for Textiles) and Richard Stetson (Deputy Director of OTEXA).

Check the Udaily article that features the research project and the presentation (February 2024).

FASH455 Video Discussion: The Outlook of China as an Apparel Sourcing Destination

Video 1: I Visited a Chinese Factory
Video 2: Comments from Kim Glas, President of the National Council of Textile Organizations (2023)

Additional background reading: China’s U.S. Exports See Biggest Drop in 30 Years (Source: Sourcing Journal| January 19, 2024)

Discussion questions:

#1 What makes China a controversial apparel-sourcing destination with heated debate? What are the benefits of sourcing from China, and what are the concerns?

#2 As noted in the background reading, China accounted for about 21% of US apparel imports 2023, which marked a new record low in the past decade. What are the key drivers behind this shift, and do you anticipate this trend to continue in the next 3-5 years? Why or why not?

#3 Should US fashion companies decouple or derisk with China and to what extent? Please provide reasoning for your recommendation.

#4 Why do you think the US textile industry cares about apparel imports from China? What factual data/statistics supports or challenges the comments in the second video?

#5 Feel free to share any other reflections on the two videos (e.g., anything you find interesting, surprising or thought-provoking).

New Study: Importing Clothing Made from Recycled Textile Materials? A Study of Retailers’ Sourcing Strategies in Five European Countries

Full paper: Leah Marsh and Sheng Lu (2024). Importing clothing made from recycled textile materials? A study of retailers’ sourcing strategies in five European countries. Sustainability, 16(2), 825.

Summary & Key Findings:

With consumers’ growing awareness of the environmental impacts of clothing production and consumption, retailers in Europe (EU) have expressed a heightened interest in selling clothing using recycled textile materials (referred to as “recycled clothing” in this study). For example, fast fashion giants like H&M and Zara and luxury brands such as Hugo Boss have started carrying recycled clothing, aiming to integrate circularity into their product designs and business models.

In the study, we examined retailers’ sourcing strategies for clothing made from recycled textile materials in five European countries, including the United Kingdom (UK), Italy, France, Germany, and Spain. These five countries represent the EU’s largest clothing retail markets, consistently accounting for over 60% of the region’s total apparel sales.

Through an industry source using web crawling techniques and manual verification, 5,000 Stock Keeping Units (SKUs) of clothing items made from recycled textile materials were randomly selected and analyzed. These items were sold by retailers in the UK, Germany, Italy, France, and Spain between January 2021 and May 2023.

The results show that Firist, EU retailers sourced clothing using recycled textile materials from diverse sources, including over 40 developing and developed countries across Asia, America, Europe, and Africa. Second, other than assortment diversity (i.e., the number of color or sizing options for a clothing item), no statistical evidence shows that developing countries had advantages over developed ones regarding product sophistication, replenishment frequency, and pricing for recycled clothing in the five EU markets. Third, a supplying country’s geographic location statistically affects the type of recycled clothing EU retailers import. For example, retailers in the five EU countries typically adopt the following sourcing portfolio by region:

  • Asia: relatively sophisticated clothing items (e.g., dresses and outerwear) targeting the mass and value market.
  • America (North, South, and Central): relatively simple clothing categories (e.g., T-shirts and socks) targeting the mass and value market.
  • Europe: sophisticated clothing categories primarily for the luxury or premium market
  • Africa: relatively simple clothing categories targeting the premium market

The findings offered new insights into the business aspects of recycled clothing, particularly regarding its intricate supply chains and leading suppliers. The study’s results have several additional important implications.

First, while existing studies often suggest “local for local” textile recycling, the study’s findings revealed promising global sourcing opportunities for clothing using recycled textile materials. Particularly, leveraging a diverse sourcing base would allow EU retailers to take advantage of each supplying country’s unique production strength regarding product categories and assortment features and more efficiently balance various sourcing factors ranging from costs and flexibility to speed to market. Meanwhile, the study’s findings indicate that many countries worldwide have begun producing and exporting clothing using recycled textile materials, and the sourcing options and capacities will hopefully continue to grow.

Second, according to the study’s findings, unlike the patterns of making regular garments using virgin fiber, low-wage developing countries demonstrated no noticeable competitive edges over developed economies regarding producing and exporting clothing using recycled textile materials. Instead, developed economies, including many high-wage Western EU countries, emerged as top suppliers and leading sourcing destinations for recycled clothing. Thus, expanding clothing production using recycled textile materials presents an exciting economic opportunity with a promising future in developed countries, where many have plans to revitalize the domestic manufacturing sector and establish a sustainable circular economy.

Third, building on the previous point, the sustained commitment of fashion brands and retailers to carry more clothing made from recycled textile materials in their product assortment could hold significant implications for the future landscape of global apparel trade and sourcing patterns. For example, whereas apparel products are predominantly exported from developing to developed countries today, more trade flows could occur between developed economies in the future, attributed to their increasing production capacity and growing demand for clothing using recycled textile materials. Similarly, major apparel exporters in Asia, such as China and Bangladesh, might assume a less dominant role as a sourcing base for recycled clothing due to their insufficient infrastructure for efficiently sorting used clothing and generating high-quality recycled textile materials.

By Leah Marsh and Sheng Lu

Discussion questions proposed by FASH455:

#1 How might EU fashion companies’ sourcing strategies change as they increase carrying clothing made from recycled textile materials?

#2 Could the US emerge as a leading sourcing destination for clothing made from recycled textile materials? What are the potential advantages and disadvantages?

#3 Is expanding clothing made from recycled textile materials the right approach to achieve fashion sustainability? What is your thought?