Can regenerative action achieve circular apparel?

The notion of a fully circular economy is an appealing yet often vague ambition for fashion brands. Circularity has become the industry’s buzzword, but it has yet to deliver any meaningful mitigation of the environmental damage caused by fashion. How can the sector reset understanding of circularity and build resilience for when achieving it isn’t possible yet?

The urgency to shift away from the “take-make-waste” model is clear. Yet, despite countless reports urging the need for circularity, progress has been elusive. According to the Circularity Gap Report 2024, mentions of “circularity” have tripled over five years, but global circularity in materials has fallen by 21% and the latest Circle Gap Report Textiles highlights that of all the materials the global textile industry uses, just 0.3% comes from recycled sources in the

While some companies have piloted circular business models, the gap between ambition and implementation persists. A core issue lies in the current siloed approach. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation outlines a three-pronged framework for circularity: eliminate waste, circulate materials and regenerate systems. Yet the notion of a perfectly closed system remains a distant goal. True circularity must also regenerate ecosystems to be effective and sustainable.

Regeneration is not simply about doing less harm but actively improving the health of natural systems. It means restoring biodiversity, enriching soil health, and creating conditions that help ecosystems and communities thrive. The concept of being “nature-positive” – halting and reversing biodiversity loss by 2030 – is central to this shift.

Crucially, regeneration addresses an often-overlooked reality: circular systems cannot eliminate all environmental impacts. Current technical limitations mean circularity alone is insufficient; we must also build resilience and enhance natural ecosystems to mitigate the harm already done. Yet, according to Nature4Climate, only one-third of nature-related policies since the Paris Agreement have received financial backing.

Transparency and monitoring are essential to regenerative progress, but the fashion industry has struggled to establish consistent metrics for biodiversity. Unlike carbon accounting, which is widely standardised, measuring impacts on ecosystems often seems intangible. 

The John Lewis Partnership has taken a bold step, becoming the first retailer to set net-zero targets for forest, land, and agriculture under the Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi). Its WWF-backed Partnership Plan embeds nature goals into its business model and promotes transparency by sharing findings. H&M has also joined pilot programmes for SBTi targets, focusing on regenerating natural systems while reducing overproduction and unsustainable sourcing.

Another key area is regenerative agriculture, where brands are working to improve practices at the raw material stage. For fashion brand The North Face, this is particularly significant—raw materials account for 70% of its environmental impact. In 2021, the company partnered with Indigo Ag to implement long-term regenerative farming projects, enhancing both ecological and community resilience. Similarly, Eileen Fisher has achieved 100% organic cotton, it is moving towards made regenerative organic certified cotton its “north star.” to improve soil health and land resilience holistically.

While cotton has been the initial focus for many companies, others are expanding regenerative principles to other materials. New Balance, for example, has committed to regenerative leather and aims to use 80% bio-based materials for midsoles and 90% for outsoles by 2030. Meanwhile, next-generation innovations such as Pangaia’s FLWRDWN (patented down material created from wildflowers) demonstrate how new materials can eliminate excess waste. This patented thermal fill uses wildflowers grown without pesticides or artificial irrigation, supporting habitat conservation while reducing water usage.

Finally, brands are moving beyond materials to broader rewilding and ecosystem restoration efforts. Burberry, building on its commitment to be climate-positive by 2040, established a Regeneration Fund in 2020. This initiative supports Australian wool producers and funds climate resilience projects that restore ecosystems. 

Similarly, Mud Jeans, known for circular design and recycling, has integrated reforestation into its business model. By October 2024, the brand had planted over 100,000 trees in sub-Saharan Africa, partnering with Justdiggit to help reforest previously degraded areas. These efforts improve local water security and promote climate resilience.

A truly circular textile economy cannot exist without regenerative action. Fashion can move from being a major polluter to becoming a force for ecological restoration. Nature-positive principles could also deliver significant economic benefits. Circularity, according to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, could recapture $500bn lost annually due to underutilised clothing and lack of recycling.

Regeneration, however, requires long-term thinking. It is not a one-off action but a continuous process, designed to adapt as environmental challenges evolve. Amid political and economic turbulence, tangible examples of success can inspire industry-wide adoption and course correction.

The potential for fashion to lead in ecological restoration is within reach. It’s time to move beyond circularity as a buzzword and integrate regenerative action into the industry’s fabric.

For more insights into the apparel Industry, check out the Innovation Forum podcast here.