For FASH455: You must watch the video before commenting on the post. When writing your comment, you may consider addressing the following aspects.
- Based on the video and the lessons from Reju, how would textile-to-textile recycling reshape the traditional global apparel supply chain? Which stages of the supply chain are most likely to relocate back to the U.S., and which will remain global?
- Based on the video and the lessons from Reju, what are the biggest barriers to scaling textile-to-textile recycling? What risks may investors face when funding capital-intensive recycling plants in the US?
- Will textile-to-textile recycling enable a meaningful revival of the U.S. textile and apparel industry and why?
- Would “Made with recycled U.S. waste” be as valuable to consumers as “Made in USA”? Why?
Additional reading: 2026 Textile Recycling Expo USA Interview Series
- Scaling Fiber-to-Fiber Recycling: UNIFI’s Vision for a Circular Textile Future: Interview with Meredith Boyd, Executive Vice President and Chief Product Officer, UNIFI
- Can Recycled Cotton Scale in the U.S.? Opportunities, Challenges and the Circular Future: Interview with Sheng Lu
[Discussion is closed for this post]
FASH455 Global Apparel & Textile Trade and Sourcing 
A concept from class that relates to this video is product innovation and exploring more niche markets. In class we learned that U.S. textile companies are focusing more on new technologies and specialized products instead of competing in more basic low-cost production. In the video, this shows up through textile-to-textile recycling. Instead of just making fabrics the traditional way, companies are trying to turn old clothing into new fibers; this, in turn, creates a more environmentally focused product. This process fits with the idea of targeting niche markets, since sustainability is becoming more important to certain consumers and brand identities. Going forward, I think this could give U.S. companies a competitive advantage since they can’t really compete on low costs anymore. Focusing on sustainability might help them stand out.
What if other countries see textile-to-textile recycling as an opportunity too? As the recycled textile market grows, will it no longer be a “niche” market?
Even so, I think U.S. textile companies could still benefit. Once a market becomes less niche, being an early leader and already having the infrastructure and production/technological processes in place could help the U.S. maintain an advantage. Being a leader in terms of innovation gives the U.S. a competitive edge if they utilize it correctly, especially in terms of sustainable brand partnerships as well.
A concept from class that relates to this post is the concept of nearshoring, moving supply chain processes closer to home to improve speed and maintain more control. Using this framework can aid in explaining how textilelto textile recycling can change the supply chain. Recycling these materials either directly in the US or near-shore can lessen reliance on global suppliers, and connects with the advantages of the US, technology and capital. Generally, apparel manufacturing would be less effected by this as it is always more cost effective abroad, in countries that have the strength in their labor force. Recycling would make the supply chain more local, yes, but it would not fully revitalize large scale US apparel production. This is because US apaprel production would involve increased costs and an expansion of existing infrastructure, which would take more time and capital.
One thing we learned in class that has to do with this video is how the global clothing supply chain is set up based on differences in cost, labor, and capital. We talked in class about how making clothes takes more labor and is often done in developing countries, while making textiles needs more capital and technology. We can see this in the video with Reju and recycling textiles into textiles. Since they rely more on technology than cheap labor, this process could change the supply chain by bringing back capital-intensive stages like fiber recycling and material production to the U.S. However, stages that require a lot of labor, like putting together clothes, will probably stay global because they are still cheaper to do in developing countries. The video also talks about problems like the high cost of investing and the difficulty of making recycling systems bigger. I believe that recycling textiles into textiles could help the U.S. textile industry, but it won’t bring back all of the jobs that were lost in clothing manufacturing. Investors also have risks because they don’t know what the returns will be if recycled fibers can’t compete with cheaper ones. Some people might like “Made with recycled U.S. waste,” but it might not mean the same thing as “Made in USA.”
A key concept we talked about in class that relates to this video is the post-maturity stage of textile development. This stage is referred to as the end of life stage usually where mostly man made fibers are disposed of. In class we talked about the fact that there is a significant decrease of employment here, but the U.S. company IBM and the French company Technip Energies have created a new method to eliminate polyester waste. This company, however, has started chemical recycling polyester, which has the most waste in the textile industry. Producing recycled textiles using this new method can help significantly reduce the amount of polyester waste created by fast fashion. This is important because polyester does not break down naturally and has continuously built up. Chemical recycling is when the polyester proton is taken apart by its dye and rebuilt into new fabric, this process uses no burning, so it is less expensive because it does not use as much energy and does not release any harmful chemicals. This high tech practice is sustainable and eliminates waste. I think implementing this technology in other places would help the environment and remove more of the polyester waste. While this is a good thing the fashion industry is currently on cheap and fast moving trends, so using recycled polyester might be a struggle to sell because of its higher price. I would suggest advertising these recycled textiles to companies that are higher priced and looking to be more environmentally friendly.
One key concept from our class that relates to this blog post is sourcing criteria and cost competitiveness. In class, we discussed how fashion companies prioritize factors like cost, scalability, and efficiency when making sourcing decisions, rather than just focusing on location or sustainability. In this blog post, textile-to-textile recycling is presented as a way to potentially reshape supply chains and even support U.S. manufacturing. However, this post explains that recycled fibers may struggle to compete with cheaper traditional materials, and there is uncertainty for investors. This connects directly to what we learned, since companies are more likely to choose sourcing options that are cost-efficient, even if they are less sustainable. From a managerial perspective, this suggests that recycling innovations will only become widely adopted if they are economically competitive. Otherwise, brands may hesitate to invest in them despite the environmental benefits. It also makes me wonder whether consumers would actually pay more for products made from recycled U.S. waste, or if price will continue to be the main factor in purchasing decisions.
A concept from class that can relate to this video is specialization. Specialization is a company providing a unique service or product that not many have. For the American textile industry, its main competitive advantage is specialization. The companies that have been successful are the ones that provide textiles for the medical field. Effective remanufacturing of polyester fibers would provide US companies a huge change to specialize. This type of textile recycling would work great for the US climate. It is capital intensive and feeds off major waste that the US produces. The US ships tons of thrown away clothing overseas that represent a huge amount of lost value. This type of manufacturing would be a great way to lessen waste as well as create additional value. While this technology does present a risk as it is still in the prototype stage, it represents a huge opportunity to create value in waste. The manufacturer might even add labour intensive jobs as clothing would need to be sorted.
One key concept discussed in this video is capital and technology-intensive production. In class, we talked about how the United States depends on textile companies using advanced machines in order to stay competitive, especially because labor costs are so high. This concept connects to Reju and their textile-to-textile recycling process, since their technology relies heavily on complex equipment and large investments. There are also many risks that investors might face when funding capital-intensive recycling plants in the U.S. For example, there can be long payback periods, uncertainty around policies and regulations, and strong competition from other alternative recycling technologies. I wonder what needs to happen in the industry for textile-to-textile recycling to become widely adopted, especially considering the high costs, technology challenges, and uncertainty in regulations.
One concept from class discussed in the video is the Idea of specialization. Specialization is when a brand or country provides a product or service in a way that others can not. An example of specialization within the American textile industry is companies focusing specifically on medical textiles, and making advancements in this specific field. Focusing on one product field, allows the brand to make advances in that field that would not be possible if their focus was spread across more than one product field. Textile recycling would be a great path for US fashion companies to take in terms of specialization. The US sends off thousands of pounds of unwanted clothing every year, if US brands learned how to recycled these fibers (a process that would be very capital intesive, which the US has) they could use the recycled fibers in making new products. Many of these fibers would be polyester, which could go back into the medical textiles field where many of the fibers used are polyester.
A topic we learned during class that relates to this post is the concept of supply chain management and product innovation. In order for companies to stay competitive in the fashion industry, they need to look into new technologies that will cater to the quality and specialization of the product. In this video, employees of Reju mention how they are using technology to increase their sustainability effort by reshaping the production process. What Reju is doing that other brands have not begun is stepping away from labor production and instead using machines to manufacture their garments. This connects to what we have learned in class about how consumers are prioritizing cost rather than seeking sustainable efforts. However, this shift towards technology has the potential to help reduce long-term production costs and limit manufacturing that goes on in other countries that consists of high tariffs. In my opinion, the use of technology in factories could be essential for the future of the industry. It will ultimately improve efficiency, maintain the supply chain and control the cost of production.
A topic we learned during class that relates to this post is the concept of supply chain management and product innovation. In order for companies to stay competitive in the fashion industry, they need to look into new technologies that will cater to the quality and specialization of the product. In this video, employees of Reju mention how they are using technology to increase their sustainability effort by reshaping the production process. What Reju is doing that other brands have not begun is stepping away from labor production and instead using machines to manufacture their garments. This connects to what we have learned in class about how consumers are prioritizing cost rather than seeking sustainable efforts. However, this shift towards technology has the potential to help reduce long-term production costs and limit manufacturing that goes on in other countries that consists of high tariffs. In my opinion, the use of technology in factories could be essential for the future of the industry. It will ultimately improve efficiency, maintain the supply chain and control the cost of production.
One key concept from our class that relates to this blog post is the rise of technology in the production of textiles. In class, we’ve discussed that high-tech textile production is important because it allows the U.S. to contribute to the textile and apparel industry without necessarily making the apparel itself. This development of recyclable polyester will further boost textile production in highly developed countries, which can further boost the U.S. economy. I think that the development of recyclable polyester will cause a huge advantage for developed countries, but this can cause harm to textile producers with less developed technology and cause buyers to shift away from these producers.
In this blog post, we can see that the nature of capital-intensive processes being located in highly developed countries is true and causes a division of labor around the world. The companies developing the recycling technologies for polyester are located in wealthy countries, so this shows that specialization in the textile and apparel industry is very prominent.
Going forward, we can further explore how the recycling process affects the planet, specifically when it comes to water use. Although not having to create new polyester when making clothes, I wonder how other resources will be impacted by the recycling process.
Cost competitiveness and sourcing criteria are two important ideas from our lesson that are relevant to this blog article. In class, we talked about how fashion firms don’t simply focus on location or sustainability when making sourcing decisions; they also consider issues like cost, scalability, and efficiency. Textile-to-textile recycling is discussed in this blog post as a means of perhaps changing supply chains and even boosting American manufacturing. This article clarifies that investors are uncertain and that recycled fibers might find it difficult to compete with less expensive conventional materials. Since businesses are more inclined to select cost-effective sourcing solutions, even if they are less sustainable, this directly relates to what we learned. Technology application in factories may be crucial to the industry’s future, in my opinion. In the end, it will control production costs, maintain the supply chain, and increase efficiency.
Yeah I agree with this, especially the part about cost still driving most decisions. Even if recycling sounds good in theory, companies aren’t gonna switch unless it actually makes sense financially. That ties directly to what we talked about with sourcing criteria not just being about sustainability.
Also, your point about technology is true, because that’s probably the only way recycling really becomes competitive. If production gets more efficient and cheaper through tech, then it actually has a shot. Otherwise, like you said, firms are just gonna keep going with the cheaper traditional materials.
One key concept from class that relates to this blog post is the post-maturity stage of the US textile and apparel industry. In class, we talked about how this stage involves declining employment and production in the US, with most apparel manufacturing moving overseas, while textile production becomes more technology and capital focused . In the video, textile-to-textile recycling fits into this shift pretty well. Since recycling relies more on advanced technology than cheap labor, it makes sense that parts of the process (like sorting and fiber regeneration) could move back to the US. At the same time, actual clothing production would probably still stay global because it’s more labor-intensive and cheaper abroad. So instead of fully reshoring, it’s more like rebalancing the supply chain. From a managerial perspective, this feels like an opportunity for US companies to focus on innovation and sustainability rather than trying to bring everything back domestically. But there’s still lots of risk, especially with how expensive it is to scale recycling. I also wonder if consumers will value sustainability enough to really drive this shift
One key concept from class that connects to this post is global sourcing. The post and video show that textile to textile recycling could bring some parts of textile production back into the United States. Even if the recycling gets moved back into the United States, production will still be heavily dependent on overseas locations. Many countries specialize in cheap labor, low production costs, and reliable manufacturing. The United States heavily relies on countries that specialize in these areas making it hard to fully move away from overseas production.
One key concept from our class that relates to this blog post is the changing structure of U.S. Textile & Apparel manufacturing. As we talked about in class the changing structure of US T&A follows three patterns; that being the industry has shrunk in size, is changing in nature, and textile vs. apparel sectors follow different growth paths. We discussed how U.S. apparel production declined due to labor costs, while textiles have remained more resilient through technology and innovation. This article shows that through technological advances (which inherently require capital investment countries support), this new form of production in making garment polyester soluble, we can reduce textile waste.
Textile-to-textile recycling reflects this shift. Reju’s chemical recycling focuses on fiber production suggesting this will promote growth of textile plants in advanced, capital-intensive manufacturing in the U.S. Meanwhile, apparel assembly will likely remain offshore. This aligns with the trend of textiles evolving toward high-tech processes while apparel continues to decline domestically.
From a managerial perspective, this suggests U.S. firms should continue to invest in innovative textile production rather than apparel assembly. Recycling technologies could strengthen domestic textile capacity, but high costs and scaling challenges remain key risks for long-term growth.
One key concept from class that relates to this blog post is specialization. In class, we discussed that countries focus on producing goods or services where they have a comparative advantage, which increases efficiency and overall output. Specialization is important because it helps explain patterns in global trade and stages of production. In this blog post, textile-to-textile recycling changes the usual pattern of specialization in the apparel supply chain. The U.S. has traditionally focused on high-end design and fiber production instead of mass garment manufacturing. At the same time, labor-heavy garment assembly will likely stay in countries with cheaper labor. The Reju example shows how new technology can expand a country’s specialization while other parts of the supply chain remain global. I am curious to see if fashion companies will make new changes to their supply chains and how apparel trade will continue to change.
After reading this article, one key concept I noticed from our class that relates to this blog post is the difference between capital-intensive and labor-intensive production. In class, we learned that textile manufacturing is much more capital and technology intensive, while apparel production tends to be labor intensive and harder to automate.
I think that this concept helps to better understand why textile-to-textile recycling could reshape the global supply chain. Recycling processes rely heavily on advanced machinery, chemicals, and new technologies, which makes them better suited for developed countries like the U.S. rather than places that depend on low-cost labor. Because of this, stages like fiber production and textile processing could move back to the U.S., while labor-intensive apparel production would likely stay overseas. For example, companies like Reju demnstrate how innovation plays a major role in driving change in apparel production and manufacturing.
In my opinion, attempting this model could be difficult due to the high costs that are required to invest in technology, along with the uncertainty around demand for recycled materials. This creates potential risks for investors if improvements are not made to become cost-competitive. It also makes me question whether recycling alone is enough to significantly improve and bring back apparel manufacturing in the U.S. in the long run.
The course concept that relates to this post is comparative advantage, supply chain specialization, and circularity. We discussed in class how certain countries are better than others at producing certain items based on their resources. For example, the US is more capital intensive so we specialize in textile manufacturing, but Bangladesh is labor intensive so they have more workers and factories and are better at apparel manufacturing. The video discusses how the brand Reju was looking for a more sustainable solution for apparel and began textile to textile recycling and shifting production back to being more capital intensive which is ideal for developed countries. One question this video raised for me was if this could be the new norm for fashion companies. While the sustainability aspect of this model is promising, I wonder if it is practical enough to replace lower cost supply chains
One key concept from our class that relates to this video is the circular economy in the textile and apparel supply chain. In class, we talked about how a circular model focuses on recycling and reusing materials instead of constantly producing new ones, which helps reduce waste and environmental impact. In the video, this is shown through new technology that can break down polyester and turn it back into new fibers, which is important since less than 1% of textile waste is currently recycled into new clothing. The fact that polyester production keeps growing while recycling stays so low really highlights the problem and why this innovation matters. In my opinion, fashion companies should start paying attention to and investing in these kinds of recycling solutions to stay competitive and meet sustainability expectations, but it also makes me wonder if this can actually scale fast enough to keep up with how quickly the industry is producing waste.
One concept in class we discussed that relates to this video is cost competition. We have repeatedly talked about how important pricing for brands when it comes to sourcing, and just how much tariffs have affected that concept. Brands need to be able to trust the places and companies they are sourcing from, and typically that comes from building a relationship overtime. With new tariffs in place, but also with tariffs getting taken away and new ones replacing them, it has been hard for brands to stick to trusted relationships because of the ever-changing costs. This is where brands have to balance what is more important, cost or reliability. And, typically what comes with lower costs is a lack of eco-responsibility, which is where this video comes in.
I do think that eventually, textile-to-textile recycling could bring back a stronger sense of U.S. production, but that it will take a lot of time to build up. I think what’s talked about in this video is a very good start to something that could hopefully be a long-term solution to textile waste. I also believe that consumers would strongly value seeing tags that say ‘made with recycled U.S. waste’, because this would allow them to feel that they aren’t contributing to textile waste, and would therefore push more brands to accommodate to this in order to attract more customers.