Brussels Proved Circularity Has Grown up; Now Industry Needs to Catch up

However, EPR is not a silver bullet. Too often, our industry searches for a single solution when the reality is far more complex. EPR without better product design will simply create more difficult material to manage. Mandatory recycled content without investment in collection and sorting infrastructure risks creating demand that cannot be fulfilled. Digital Product Passports without accurate data merely digitise existing problems, and recycling targets without recognising reuse risk undermining the very activity that delivers the greatest environmental benefit. These policies cannot operate independently; they need to complement one another if they are to deliver genuine circularity rather than simply shifting responsibility around the value chain.

One issue that received surprisingly little attention during some discussions is the continuing importance of the global reuse market. There remains a tendency in some policy circles to speak as though fibre-to-fibre recycling will eventually replace reuse. It won’t, nor should it. The hierarchy exists for a reason. Keeping clothing in use for as long as possible will always deliver greater environmental benefit than breaking it down and manufacturing something new.

The reuse and recycling sector has quietly been delivering circularity for decades. Long before the circular economy became fashionable, our industry was collecting, grading, repairing, redistributing and extending the life of millions of garments every year. It has built sophisticated international supply chains, created hundreds of thousands of livelihoods globally and prevented countless tonnes of clothing from becoming waste. That knowledge should not be overlooked simply because newer technologies have entered the conversation. In many ways, the existing reuse sector represents the foundation upon which future circularity will be built.

If governments genuinely want successful textile circularity, they need to support what already works whilst investing in what comes next. It is not a choice between reuse and recycling, we need both.

Perhaps the strongest message to emerge from Brussels was the growing recognition that collaboration is no longer optional. No single stakeholder can address these challenges in isolation. Brands, recyclers, collectors, charities and governments each have a role to play. Longterm purchasing commitments support infrastructure investment, improving product quality benefits collectors, sustainable partnerships strengthen the charitable sector and effective regulation depends on a clear understanding of how the supply chain operates.

Collaboration is no longer a nice idea. It has become an economic necessity.

One area that particularly encouraged me was the growing recognition of reuse within wider circular economy discussions. For too long, the conversation has focused almost exclusively on recycling.

Recycling remains essential, but we should never forget that the greatest environmental benefit comes from extending the life of clothing in the first place.

The reuse and recycling sector has quietly been delivering circularity for decades.

Long before circular economy became fashionable, our industry was collecting, grading, repairing, redistributing, and creating employment across global markets.

If governments and brands genuinely want a circular textile system, they need to bring the reuse sector into the centre of policy discussions rather than treating it as an afterthought.

Every part of the value chain depends upon every other part, and that interdependence has never been clearer. The businesses that will succeed over the next decade are unlikely to be those with the biggest marketing budgets; they will be those capable of forming genuine long-term partnerships across the entire value chain.

Another issue that deserves greater attention is product design. The industry continues to produce increasing volumes of clothing that is harder to repair, harder to sort and harder to recycle. Mixed fibres, complex trims, bonded materials and rapidly declining garment quality all increase processing costs long before recycling even becomes an option. The circular economy does not begin at the recycling plant, it begins at the designer’s desk.

Every design decision has consequences further down the supply chain. Those consequences are often invisible to consumers, but they are experienced every day by collectors, sorters, graders, recyclers and ultimately the markets that rely on good quality reusable clothing. This is why commercial reality has to replace good intentions. The industry cannot continue celebrating circularity whilst simultaneously increasing production volumes of products that have little prospect of a meaningful second life. That contradiction is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.

Perhaps the biggest lesson from Brussels was that optimism has finally returned, not the optimism built on ambitious presentations or aspirational roadmaps, but real optimism based on investment, engineering, commercial partnerships and businesses that are actively building the infrastructure we have spent years talking about.

The challenges remain enormous. Ultra-fast fashion continues to place unprecedented pressure on collection systems, global reuse markets continue to experience economic and political uncertainty, processing costs continue to rise, investment remains difficult, and legislative uncertainty still creates hesitation. None of these challenges disappear overnight.

But for the first time in several years, it genuinely feels as though the industry is beginning to move together rather than pulling in different directions. That matters, because circularity will never be achieved through technology alone. It will be built through trust, collaboration, sensible regulation, long-term commercial commitment, and recognising that reuse and recycling are complementary rather than competing solutions.

Most importantly, it will be built by accepting that there is no single technology, no single business, and no single piece of legislation capable of solving the textile industry’s challenges on its own. Brussels demonstrated that the innovation exists, the investment is beginning to follow, and the legislation is gathering pace. Now the industry must match that progress with commercial courage.

Because the future of circular textiles will not be decided by what we can build, it will be decided by what we choose to support. Brussels showed us what is possible.

Now the real work begins.