Built to Break: Making a Circular Economy Calls for Repair Economics

Photo by Bulat369

When your toaster breaks, you probably go out to buy a new one. It’s easier, cheaper, and usually the only option. Replacing your toaster contributes 18 kilograms of CO2 to the atmosphere. 

When your jeans develop a hole, you go and buy a new pair. You probably are not patching them yourself. According to a lifecycle assessment by the United Nations Environmental Programme, this single pair of denim contributes 33.4 kilograms of carbon equivalent to the atmosphere. Making this new pair of jeans uses 3,718 litres of water. 

Emma Rahmani (Corelens)

Looking beyond toasters, Australia generated 511,000 tonnes of e-waste in 2019, of which the majority is not recovered. Including all waste types, Australia generated an estimated 75.6 million tonnes (Mt) of waste in the 2022-2023 fiscal year.. In 2018, the United States sent 37,410,000 tonnes of durable goods, products with a lifetime of three years or more, to the landfill. 

These numbers are not to shame the urge to remain stylish or guilt for wanting toasted bread, but to show how things are and raise the question of how things could be. Instead of tossing and replacing these toasters and jeans, a circular economy with a focus on repair and reuse offers us the opportunity to extend the lifecycle of our items.  

The habit of throwing away and replacing our stuff represents our present linear economy. This capitalist model rewards companies building items designed to fail, leading to companies favoring profit over people, planet, and progress. This is a concept called planned obsolescence. These products with a designed and predetermined lifespan include electronic devices, cellphones, appliances, toys, books, furniture, clothing, and nearly every manufactured product. No matter how well you take care of an item, it is built with a limited lifespan and designed to fail. 

Shorter buy-again windows mean companies are selling the same product more frequently to repeat customers, increasing yearly profits. When products are cheaper to replace than they are to repair, it is a no-brainer why people choose to simply buy the product again. 

Apple is an example of a company that sees record sales as a result of its planned obsolescence in its iPad, iPhone, and Mac products. As highlighted in multiple lawsuits and federal hearings in the United States, Apple has acknowledged that it builds devices with deteriorating battery lives, meaning consumers will have to either struggle with their old model or pay to upgrade after just a few years. 

Not limited to Apple or even cellphones, the furniture giant Ikea has committed to reforming its entire value chain following a long history of environmental and quality complaints around products that uphold the definition of planned obsolescence. This intentional design failure is embedded in nearly all products, and it is catastrophic for the Earth.

Source: Amadori, F. B., Felta, L., Fernandez, A. R., Simeoni, F., & Vehanen, T. (2020, September 28). Planned Obsolescence and the Lifespan of Electronics. Infragraphy. https://blogs.aalto.fi/mediainfrastructures/2020/09/28/planned-obsolescence-and-the-lifespan-of-electronics/

The solution to this model is to bend the line into a circle, creating a circular economy. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation defines the circular economy as a system in which materials never become waste, and there is a greater emphasis placed on regenerating nature. In this circular system, products and materials are not sent to landfill, and instead remain in circulation through processes like maintenance, reuse, refurbishment, remanufacture, recycling, and composting. 

The circular economy’s core pillars are circular design, reuse of materials, and regeneration. Focusing on circular design means that products are built for repair, reuse, repurposing, and remanufacturing. Repair is the antidote to the waste crisis created by planned obsolescence. In challenging companies’ overproduction practices, we create better products, greatly reducing new manufacturing. In tandem, repair becomes cheaper, easier, and more accessible

Source: van Ewijk, S., & Stegemann, J. (2023). THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY. In An Introduction to Waste Management and Circular Economy (pp. 306–348). UCL Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.4350575.17

Repair is one of the most crucial aspects of the circular economy that receives the least amount of utilisation. A repair economy helps to bend the line by reducing new manufacturing and extending the lifespan of products. There is power in repurposing and repairing an item, and it also makes a consumer’s connection to their stuff more personal, further enhancing the desire to repair rather than replace. 

A focus on repair also means slower depletion of natural resources, less biodiversity loss, smaller quantities of pollution, and even the potential for natural areas to regenerate. When a landfill is filled, it contaminates nearby soil and water, leaches into the local environment, disrupts avian migration patterns, poses a significant threat to both physical and environmental health when toxic materials are not properly disposed of, and has a laundry list of other negative impacts. Slowing the rate of waste sent to landfills means fewer raw materials are taken from our natural world, and the negative impacts of landfills are reduced. 

The environmental benefits of repair quickly stack. If one-fifteenth of American households were to extend the expected 15-year lifespan of their refrigerators by only one year with stronger repair infrastructure, some 2.95 million tonnes of CO2 would be spared from entering the atmosphere. This is the amount of emissions released by the entire New York City urban area, 790 square km and over eight million people, in just about 6 days. The environmental cost to manufacture one refrigeration unit is around 350 kg of CO2. Reducing emissions is not controlled by an on or off switch, but we create wins by tackling small victories at once. 

The biggest struggle of the repair movement is cost and convenience. Currently, LG Electronics’ Flat-Rate Repair Program for a refrigerator starts at USD 399, while a new 420L bottom freezer and fridge costs USD 891. When a product needs repair, consumers begin to see the end of its life. With the repair cost being just under half the cost of a new refrigerator unit, it often makes replacing more appealing or logical than repairing the unit. Additionally, it is simply easier and more convenient to replace a product than to find a qualified and available repairperson. 

Repair has monumental potential, but policy failure challenges its success. In many places, a personal or professional attempt at repair often voids a product's warranty, if it has one. In response to corporate hostility against repairs, the right to repair movement has emerged across the world, aiming to pass legislation that protects consumers as they seek out repairs and enforces cooperation from firms in making these repairs successful. 

Photo by KC Shum

Many nations, like the United States, do not have a nationwide right to repair law. The United Kingdom and Australia have selective right-to-repair legislation, largely limited to motor vehicles, failing to include household electronics or clothing. Australia’s restrictive right to repair legislation is limited to the automotive industry and requires vehicle service and repair information to be available for purchase at a fair market price. Although not progressive enough, if it can be done for automobiles, the same legislation can be used as a model in other repairable industries. 

In 2024, the European Union finally passed a largely encompassing Right to Repair legislation, providing increased protection and resources for consumers to opt to repair instead of being forced to replace. The legislation requires manufacturers to provide repair information, supply spare parts at reasonable cost, and repair products, even if a company’s warranty has lapsed for the product.

France was the first country to pass Extended Producer Responsibility legislation applicable to clothes and textiles. This legislation requires companies subject to the law to finance the management and prevention of the end-of-life of products that they put on the market. Made possible through an “eco-tax,” France’s partner in EPR uses this tax for collection, sorting, treatment management, eco-modulations, a repair fund, and a reuse fund. This tax and legislation limit the landfill impact of textiles and clothing. This repair fund sets aside €154 million between 2023 and 2028, allowing consumers who visit a participating repair shop to claim back between €6 and €25 towards the cost of their repairs. France’s progressive repair legislation sets the standard for other national repair laws and demonstrates that advocacy for repair legislation works.

With intensifying climate regulations coupled with right-to-repair movements, companies must take accountability for their role in creating waste while finding ways of making profits as they transition to circular business. By designing quality products with repair in mind, businesses can offer services for their products and diversify revenue streams. Additionally, companies can begin to design platforms and spaces where consumers can resell their products. 

In 2012, Patagonia began solving this repair puzzle through its Worn Wear program, and also powers iFixit to educate consumers on at-home repairs and product care. A commitment to repair and high-quality products has given Patagonia a committed consumer base who are willing to pay more for this service and their products.  

Photo by Luba Glazunova

Nudie Jeans is another company that wins consumers with a lifetime guarantee of free repairs. The denim company understands its products will not last forever, regardless of how well its jeans are made. They meet consumers' needs and offer free repairs, so the life of the garment is extended by years. 

It will take some time to create a system that’s more circular. It is challenging to know where to begin with such an enormous issue; however, we can start by supporting local craftspeople. Find a local seamstress to patch your jeans, discover a local repairsperson to take a crack at your toaster. Save the atmosphere from the carbon emissions and minimise waste to landfill by repairing products when possible instead of replacing them. 

Make circular actions a regular part of your lifestyle. Swap or trade items with your friends. When possible, purchase the variety of products you use from second-hand stores. Visit repair cafes, repair shops, join or host mending circles, and host and attend swaps. These choices are not just environmental: they are community and financial investments. Each of these solutions bring us a little closer to a more circular society. 

To more fully bend the linear economy into a circle, we need systems change via policy and legislation. This means, for example, campaigning for laws that eliminate planned obsolescence, right-to-repair policies, product repair schemes and rebates. Similar legislation can be created for other circular solutions. We can bring this system into effect by contacting our local and federal representatives to push these issues forward and request change. Share information about these issues to your groups, communities and neighbourhoods while encouraging advocacy actions to support systems change. This way, we will have as many people as possible coming together to form a circle. 

Article by Tyler Branigan. Tyler has a passion for sustainable solutions and circular economics.

The EU’s Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) law that may force the fashion industry to become more sustainable

Image credit: Fernand De Canne

The European Union has struck textile companies with intensive laws dedicated to reducing the impact of fast fashion on the planet. The union has been at the forefront of rooting out the exploitative business practices of fast fashion giants such as Shein, H&M, and Inditex Group (which includes companies like Berksha, Zara, and Massimo Dutti). The EU is implementing laws that will reduce textile waste and promote recycling of fashion items. 

According to The Fashion Law, the EU has introduced an “Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)” mandate on 9 September 2025 for textile producers, which ensures that fast fashion companies shoulder the responsibility of “collecting, sorting, and recycling the clothing and household textiles” instead of individual consumers. The EPR is an addition to the existing Waste Framework Directive which calls for the development of sustainable waste management practices. Fortunately, these rules are also applicable to traditional European labels, promoting sustainability in the textile industry regardless of their business model. The EU is adamant about each member state adopting the necessary technology and infrastructure and setting protracted policy goals for the future. 

In the Waste Framework Directive, the EU highlights the complex composition of municipal waste which makes efficient sorting and recycling difficult for existing waste management infrastructures. The active participation of citizens is also a major factor in waste management to ensure each category of waste is discarded and recycled correctly. The Waste Framework Directive also stated that in order to combat the level of municipal waste in the world, a sophisticated system and public awareness is necessary. However, EPR rightfully places the responsibility of recycling on one of the world’s largest polluters themselves, forcing these companies to comply with sustainable business practices moving forward. 

If fast fashion companies continue to operate within the non-stop, trend-focused business model, the fashion industry is projected to generate 26% of the world’s carbon emissions by 2050. The only beneficiaries of this horrible statistic are the companies that earn billions of dollars from exploiting human labor and destroying the planet. This huge achievement toward legislative change in fashion serves as a framework for the rest of the world to reject unnecessary textile waste. However, the issue has not been abolished completely. Unless the rest of the world creates similar programs for its fashion markets, fast fashion giants will continue to switch their marketing practices and entice you to buy that new shirt for your “first” events forever. 

Australia is a leading consumer of fast fashion, ahead of many EU nations and the US. In a 2024 research paper by Nina Gbor and Olivia Chollet from the Australia Institute emphasized that the sheer quantity of Australian textile waste is 200,000 tonnes, equivalent to a weight of four Sydney Harbor Bridges. The Australian government needs to establish concrete laws similar to the EU to curb its textile waste crisis. Nina Gbor, founder of Eco Styles, has launched a petition to revive the Australian textile industry with a focus on circular economy practices. Here is a brief summary of some of the policies this petition is advocating for: 

•  Reviving the Australian textile industry, which can help create a $38 billion industry for onshore production jobs for women 

• Significant industry reform under the Labor Government’s Progressive productivity agenda and its commitment to the net-zero agenda by 2050 as well as strengthen the economic resilience of the country

• Taxing ultra fast-fashion brands and investing the returns into the Australian fashion industry 

• Phasing out virgin plastics and synthetic materials as well as banning toxic chemicals in line with the Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals foundation

• Public awareness about the health and environmental complications of buying fast fashion items

• Pushing for ethical business and fair trade practices under the Modern Slavery Act of 2018 to ensure there are no human rights violations within the industry. 

Sign the petition to create impactful change in legislation and consumer behavior in Australia. Self-expression through fashion should not have such a heavy cost. When you buy your next piece of clothing, think about the social and environmental impact of the item you are purchasing. Prioritize brands practice sustainability, quality, and fair trade. Opt for methods such as thrifting, mending, repairing, and swapping to elongate the lifecycle of clothing items and prevent their early demise into landfills already brimming to their maximum capacity. 

Article by Samya Dawadi for Eco Styles. Samya’s focus is on environmental and sustainability consulting in business and art. 

Italy fines Shein €1 million for greenwashing

Ultra-fast fashion conglomerate Shein, is being fined for the second time in two months. Italy’s antitrust agency, AGCM recently issued a €1M fine (approximately $1.7 million AUD / $1.15M USD) for greenwashing practices i.e. “misleading customers about the environmental impact of its products.”

Similarly, the first fine for Shein came from France in July this year through the country’s antitrust agency responsible for consumer protection and competition. They hit Shein with the first greenwashing fine to the tune of €40 million (approx. $72 million AUD) for fake discounts and misleading environmental claims.

The brand allegedly used “vague, generic, and/or overly emphatic,” claims that were considered “misleading or omissive” in connection to its “evoluSHEIN by design” collection. It promoted sustainable practices, with claims like using “fabrics left over by other fashion brands that were destined for landfill or incineration.”

The company’s touts of a circular system design and product recyclability "were found to be false or at the very least confusing", and the green credentials of its 'evoluSHEIN by design' collection were overstated, the regulator said.

Italy has fined the Chinese fast fashion online retailer Shien over $1.7 million for greenwashing. Nina Gbor from the Australia Institute says the e-commerce giant was giving “false and misleading” information to customers that they were doing something good for the environment.

The agency said the recyclability claims “were found to be either false or at least confusing,” warning consumers might think Shein products are fully recyclable and made only from sustainable materials which “does not reflect reality.” It’s also "a fact that, considering the fibres used and currently existing recycling systems, is untrue".

Italy’s AGCM also accused the brand of using a “misleading communication strategy” about its environmental impact, like Shein’s commitments to cut greenhouse emissions by 25% by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050, noting that Shein's emissions increased in 2023 and 2024.

Shein responded by saying they have “strengthened internal review processes” and cleaned up its website to make sure all environmental claims are now “clear, verifiable, and compliant with regulations.”

Shein’s Impact

Shein made $32.5 billion sales in 2023. Their sales were forecasted to reach $50 billion in 2024. The average price of an item from Shein is between $10 - $20. It ships ultra-cheap clothing from thousands of suppliers to tens of millions of customer mailboxes in around 150 countries. 

These are factors that make Shein one of the biggest polluters of fast fashion. It has about 600,000 items for sale on average on its website and adds around 10,000 items each day. The company was shipping about one million products a day as of last year. In 2024, the company made over one billion dollars in revenue in Australia.  

There were concerns were from Shein’s third annual sustainability report published in 2023 which showed the company nearly doubled its carbon dioxide emissions between 2022 and 2023. Shein emitted 16.7 million total metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2023 which falls far below its Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) validated reduction targets to reduce absolute Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions by 42% by 2030.

Can fining fast fashion companies be effective in Australia and other countries?

There’s nothing that corporations and most businesses hate more than losing profits in any way. So, the answer to whether fining greenwashing can work in my opinion is yes. Provided the fines are substantial amounts and not just a slap on the wrist. I think each time a company fails to comply with environmental regulations they should be fined. And the fines can potentially increase each time the offence is committed again. And if the fines are proving ineffective in general, it might be a sign that the amounts are too small to have an impact, therefore they should be increased.  

Isn’t it the consumers’ responsibility not to purchase fast fashion?

Every individual is responsible for their actions, including their own consumption and overconsumption habits. However, I believe the onus lies more on the brands/corporations to do the right thing by being honest and transparent with their claims. Clothing companies with access to multi-million- or billion-dollar funds have the resources and power to run operations and access materials that are genuinely better for the environment while still being profitable in many cases. Whereas, some consumers are experiencing cost-of-living crises, are time-poor because of life commitments and experience other issues that make it challenging for them to patronise non-fast fashion items.

 What can consumers people do instead of fast fashion?

Instead of buying fast fashion, consumers can:

• purchase secondhand items

• host or attend clothes swaps

• rent / hire and borrow clothing

• repair, mend or repurpose existing garments

• use free clothing services such as Thread Together who get left over clothes from retail brands and give to people who need them.

Moreover, some fast fashion items are have been found to have toxic chemicals from the materials used and dyes. Secondhand clothes might have less toxic chemicals than brand new ones. In addition to this, about 85% of clothes end up in landfill or incinerated each year. Reusing garments diverts clothes from landfill and it’s healthier for the environment in several ways.

*Article by Nina Gbor

Policies and initiatives to help save the Australian fashion industry for future generations

We recently had Joanna visit our office. Joanna received the Young Creator of the Year Award for demonstrating strong creativity and leadership through her self-initiated school club, Passion for Fashion Fridays. She mentors younger students in upcycling textiles into functional and stylish art pieces. Her commitment to sustainability and community engagement underpins her long-term goal of opening a business that teaches others to repurpose clothing into meaningful, eco-friendly creations.

Joanna brought an terrific upcycled art piece she made with fishes made from a mix of discarded textiles. It’s inspiring to see Joanna’s hard work, talent and her dreams for the future. She could potentially make a real impact in textiles circularity. She is currently deciding which tertiary institution to further develop her skills in hope of a successful career in her future.

I had to caution her about the lack of sufficient jobs in Australian textiles industry. Every week I mentor a couple of people who is either a young person or adult wanting to have a career in the sustainable fashion space. Fashion is one of the top career choices for teenagers and young people in general. Sadly, the lack of sufficient and varied career opportunities is a real bug bear.

Many Australian clothing brands have had to close their doors in the last few years. I’m still in the process of ascertaining a more precise number but it’s a lot. Ultra-fast fashion and conventional fast fashion have played a big role in some of this but they’re not the only reason. We need This is one of the reasons I’ve been strongly advocating for reform in the industry. It’s the protection of Australian textiles businesses and also incubating the talent and dreams of young people.

The industry is currently worth $28 billion to the national economy and can potentially escalate to $38 billion dollars within a decade with the right reform and support from the federal government. This progress would mean not only more jobs but a broader array in the nature of jobs in the industry to accommodate young people like Joanna and others.

With over 300,000 tonnes of textiles discarded each year, we can invest in scaling reuse, repairs, mending, upcycling, repurposing, renting and recycling. As one of the wealthiest countries in the world, an investment into research and development towards recycling textiles could see all existing and innovations and scaling of all textile recycling capabilities in Australia. This would be a boost to the economy, even more jobs and keeping all the materials in the circularity loop which is important for the environment. Ultimately this will be a triple win for us.

Here are some of the existing government programs that can boost the textiles industry:

• The $900 million investment of the Albanese Labor Government into the new National Productivity Fund is part of an initial step towards “delivering broader ‘right to repair’ reforms – driving down repair costs, increasing business opportunities and reducing wastage by removing barriers to competition for repairs….”

• With Australia being one of the biggest consumers of clothing in the world per capita and one of the most wasteful, it’s fortunate that we also have the Recycling Modernisation Fund (RMF). This is a $200 million national initiative for the expansion of Australia’s capacity to sort, process and remanufacture glass, plastic, tyres, paper and cardboard. Textiles can be added to the RMF. The Albanese government is looking towards new and upgraded recycling infrastructure through the RMF.

• Other government programs that can support a textiles industry include the Future Made in Australia, which has $22.7 billion private sector investment over a 10-year period to help Australia build a stronger and more resilient economy.

• There’s also an Advanced Manufacturing program which is a $1.6 billion accelerator fund for to enable development of more complex domestic manufacturing industries using cutting-edge technologies and innovative processes to improve existing manufacturing operations and create new products. This could potentially suit 3-D printing initiatives, blockchain, textile software operations, chemical textile recycling and other areas.

• A new program designed to cater to the development of an Australian textiles industry with necessary investments and nuanced support can also be created by the government. However, we need to advocate for it, loudly and persistently. Think of all the young people like Joanna whose dreams depend on it.

Article by Nina Gbor

Behind the Seams: Weaving Circularity into the Fashion Industry through RFID threads

Image source: Global Circular Network 

Only 1% of clothing is recycled into new garments per year—a shockingly low figure given the fashion industry's bold sustainability promises. This leads to over 300,000 tonnes of clothing being sent to landfill or exported from Australia every year. Even more troubling is that 86% of fashion brands still lack clear, measurable targets to phase out coal, while 95% of major fashion companies remain silent on the types of fuel powering their supply chains. 

This lack of transparency is not necessarily deliberate deception, as current legislation, particularly in Australia, does not require disclosure of such information. However, it highlights a critical gap in accountability, especially when compared to the European Union’s progressive legislative frameworks, such as the Eco-design for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR), which mandates that brands take responsibility for emissions across their manufacturing and transportation processes.

Instead of addressing these issues, the Australian government is giving Seamless Industry Awards, which, when compared to the ESPR, highlight a failure to implement meaningful change. Seamless must also require brands to set targets and deadlines to mitigate emissions from manufacturing and transport, as well as offset through sequestration. These are crucial questions, given that emissions from these areas, along with manufacturing and transport, are the two biggest hotspots for pollution. Without enforcing such measures, the Minister for the Environment will struggle to meet government targets. This situation shows that real change is urgently needed to stop the fashion industry from continually exploiting the planet unchecked. But how can we achieve this?

Alison Jose, founder and CEO of the Global Circular Network, believes that the future of transparency in fashion hinges on brands pivoting to circular economy business models using smart tools to connect all stakeholders. 

The one tool that can achieve this is the world's first washable RFID that’s housed in a single thread. This cutting-edge technology integrates a single 15 centimetre thin metallic thread embedded with a chip into garments during the labelling process, or slipped into quality recovered products to also engage the second hand and rental markets now. Washable, discreet, and flexible, RFiD THREADS® are connected to a cloud app to hold vital information about material specifications and can be updated in real-time. 

They are washable - up to 200 degrees and this includes carpets. The RFiD THREADS® is a digital passport that stays with products throughout their entire lifecycle to gather comprehensive circular product data in real-time. Using long-lasting DPPs means we can collect unprecedented full circular product data which is the key to creating financially sustainable local and global circular economies.

Their main function is to connect businesses to enhance the identification, sorting, and categorisation of both desirable and undesirable products, facilitating product life extension and reuse all before recycling simply by reading one or bulk products simultaneously with RFiD handheld or fixed system readers. With RFiD THREADS®, the fashion industry will finally have a smart tool to unlock a fully interconnected circular economy at scale.

To delve deeper into this promising solution, insights from a recent interview with Alison Jose reveal how RFiD Threads can not only transform the fashion industry but also address the pressing challenges of transparency and sustainability. We spoke with her and captured her thoughts on the potential of RFiD Threads to reshape the industry’s future while highlighting the hurdles that may lie ahead.

Daphne: “What sparked your passion for making a difference in the fashion industry?”

Alison: “I came to the circular economy from being a sustainable textile wholesaler, manufacturer, and developer working with mills in India, Indonesia, and China. In 2020, I developed CircStretch, a new bio-stretch textile aimed at reducing plastic in performance stretch garments like activewear using specialty yarns from Lenzing Group and Asahi Kasei, who developed the world’s first Cradle to Cradle Gold Standard elastane. 

Once I understood the complexity of textile fibers and the production limitations at the beginning of the supply chain, I shifted my focus to how we can recover these resources and support what's called the reverse logistics value chain to make products more circular. I also recognized the need for shared responsibility across the entire fashion waste ecosystem, rather than placing the burden solely on the resource recovery sector to solve the ‘waste’ crisis. Additionally, we need to actively integrate the incredible reuse creative sector, which is at the heart of circularity.

Additionally, my background as an art curator and PR consultant has always influenced my approach to sustainability. When people ask how we can transition to more sustainable textiles, my answer is simple: through beauty. By harnessing creativity and aesthetic appeal, we can engage consumers emotionally, helping to shift them away from the take-make-waste model and towards more conscious choices. Combining smart technology with creativity, human-centered design, and strong regulations can make sustainable options both attractive and accessible. This approach encourages consumers to make informed and easy choices that are better for the planet.

It is especially important to connect people with local communities to create jobs and boost local economies, while also making it easy for them to experience that 'warm, gooey feeling' that helps change habits of overconsumption, wish-cycling, or simply throwing things away. By providing easier access to circular options and educating people on how to use the planet's resources wisely—from transport to textiles—and incorporating reward systems, we can unlock significant opportunities to redirect the revenue that currently ends up in landfills."

Daphne: “Can you share the origin story behind the idea of establishing the Global Circular Network and using RFiD technology along with QR codes?”

Alison: "In 2020, I received a grant from the NSW EPA to create Australia’s first Circular Textile Waste Service, and I began collaborating with a disability enterprise to sort and dismantle textile waste. During this sorting process, I realized that almost 99% of the products were untraceable, highlighting the urgent need to reconnect them with their originators to encourage their engagement. Additionally, at least 80% of the textiles were technically unidentifiable. Currently, the responsibility for managing fashion waste primarily falls on local councils and recyclers, which isn’t fair. Both brands and consumers must share this responsibility. To address this issue, I reached out to a colleague at Deakin University, who connected me with Dr. Anura Rathnayake, an expert in RFiD thread technology. Our collaboration began in 2022, and I have since built the cloud app and circular solution from there.

Daphne: “What specific information can this thread store and transmit?”

Alison: “The threads themselves do not store data; instead, they are connected to a cloud app that allows us to store infinite product data and delete this data when the product is recycled, helping to prevent unnecessary data storage and energy waste.

By integrating RFiD THREADS® into garments, businesses can effectively communicate and report on their circular design strategies, especially regarding material types and traceability. For instance, current recycling technologies face significant challenges with blended materials. It is crucial for recyclers to know which chemicals were used during textile manufacturing. Activewear and uniforms often contain 'forever chemicals,' which can complicate recycling. By identifying and diverting these harmful substances during the sorting stage, we can support a cleaner recycling process, improve product safety, and tackle the issue at scale.

Embedding an RFID thread from the outset simplifies the recycling process, allowing recyclers to efficiently identify, recycle, remanufacture, or repurpose materials, ultimately creating safer feedstocks. Additionally, it employs smart technology to engage and support the R-cyclers, who are vital for extending a product's life through repair, resale, rental, redesign, and remaking. This approach puts the “economy into circularity," keeping products in circulation longer before recycling and redirecting valuable resources to the second creative heart of circularity.”

Daphne: “What are the biggest challenges that the Global Circular Network is facing, and how are you planning to overcome them?”

Alison: “Well the answer to both questions is: collaboration; it's the biggest challenge and it's the solution. Thankfully, the EU Commission is stepping up, leading the global shift toward a circular economy with groundbreaking legislation. Through Cirpass-2, the commission has mandated the use of Digital Product Passports (DPPs) to enforce the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR). This will guide all industry stakeholders toward circularity and it’s profoundly exciting to be part of the teams who are driving circularity through collaboration and inclusivity but understand that smart tech and regulations are the only way to pivot this industry and reduce emissions at-scale.

Yes, the scope of this transition is vast and daunting, but it also presents an extraordinary opportunity for positive change. This shift has the potential to impact local and global supply chains, encouraging brands to work more closely with their suppliers but also employ EPR strategies and engage with the resource recovery sector. With this collaboration and direction, brands can opt for better materials, increase revenue, uphold the Modern Slavery Act, pay Living Wages, and leverage real-world data to identify environmental hotspots, creating a more immediate and meaningful impact that is reportable.

A critical part is that our RFID thread technology can withstand wear and tear, enable unprecedented data collection for Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) plus instant unfakeable product authentication which is an enormous bonus to customers, brands and resellers. Combined with a connected QR code and/or NFC ring, brands can use this technology not just to track the product’s journey but to reveal their circular journey to customers, fostering brand loyalty and consumer education.

Consumers today are hungry for information on how and where to repair, resell, rent, or donate products. Brands have the opportunity to connect customers with local networks, encouraging them to donate, swap, or connect with creative redesigners who upcycle items. This extends the product's life and builds emotional attachment to possessions, while guiding consumers to proper recycling options, reducing the issue of “wishcycling”  that ultimately goes to landfill or simply throwing things away.

By supporting their customers, brands can increase profits and redirect resources. Our washable RFID DPPs can also turn “resource recovery” businesses into network partners, as each scan provides verifiable data on a product’s circular journey. This data will assist in compliance reporting and potentially reduce taxes or levies for proving circularity.

The EU’s crackdown on greenwashing and offshore dumping is another significant step forward. For R-cycler stakeholders, this legislation opens doors for using RFID readers to access our open-source app for free which in turn offers brands solutions that help capture their required circularity data. All businesses can unlock untapped revenue currently being lost to landfills in addition to brands meeting their reporting requirements.

In September the USA state of California passed legislation on a Responsible Textile Recovery Act, also known as SB 707, requiring manufacturers and distributors to participate in an extended producer responsibility (EPR) program for apparel and certain textile products. The hope is that EPR legislation will spread to other countries including Australia as we know that government intervention is the only way to push brands toward implementing full circularity required to meet our local and global environmental targets. 

While we need to start with "circular-ish" efforts, the goal must be a faster transition to a fully circular economy, where brands adopt circular business models plus include a financial shared responsibility alongside a socioeconomic lens such as the Doughnut Economics framework. Simple measures like using second-hand or recycled textiles or offering take-backs and repairs are a basic start but full systems need to be integrated at scale as they aren’t enough to meet our collaborative environmental goals.

Unfortunately, Australia has yet to take regulatory action. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation has warned against diluted versions of circular economy models that won’t deliver the needed results. After years of trying, I’ve received no feedback from Australian industry or government, and brands are unlikely to be able to pivot to full circularity voluntarily. 

The industry won’t change without government regulations as they help determine best-case metrics and Standards, utilise bulk manufacturing initiatives to lower costs and increase equitable participation, plus to avoid the imbalance that is straining the resource recovery sector trying to ‘solve the waste problem’ on behalf of brands and consumers but without their participation. 

The Global Circular Network helps create shared responsibility. After all, we all wear clothes, and their negative environmental impact affects us all. As a member of several Cirpass-2 Expert Working Groups under the EU Commission, I’ve seen the incredible support for micro-businesses and Small to Medium Enterprises (SMEs) which is why we’ve also launched the 100 MILLION THREADS PROJECT. 

Collaboration and regulation are essential to create inclusive, equitable solutions and ensure all businesses transition to circularity in time to meet climate targets.

While QR codes and NFC rings are useful for customer engagement they aren’t full digital passports and won’t solve business-to-business communication and data needs at scale. QR codes and NFC are more like smart swing tags but they also raise concerns about personal data collection which is why we’ve separated them to use RFiD THREADS® to only capture product data through a commercial reader, without involving consumer information.

By adopting these tools, brands can foster greater transparency, which today’s consumers increasingly demand. And by mimicking the strategies of fast fashion—leveraging smart tech and social media—brands can build a more circular industry. This approach offers consumers an eco-friendly “dopamine hit” while advancing holistic goals to reduce landfill, emissions, and pollution, creating a cleaner plus fairer, more supportive industry for all.

Daphne: “What is your long-term vision for the Global Circular Network?”

Alison: "My long-term vision aligns with our short-term goal: to engage as many stakeholders in the circular economy as possible and to connect them all. 

Offering equitable accessibility is crucial for SMEs in the EU, where 99.8% of fashion brands fall into this category. It’s been said that approximately 40% of these businesses may struggle to add DPPs and meet ESPR compliance requirements. 

By launching the 100 MILLION THREADS PROJECT, we aim to include SMEs, Not for Profit Enterprises, charities etc and offer them an efficient DPP at the same equitable price as the big brands who can access via low-cost bulk manufacturing orders.

We want to add RFiD THREADS® into 100 million pieces of clothing. Just imagine if we added 100 million threads to both new and recovered jeans, we then take immediate action to stop emissions being added to the environment the equivalent of 300,000 cars or 2 million hours of domestic flights, 5 million refrigerators, or 70 million smartphones. This is just a start as there's some 15.3 billion pairs of jeans causing emissions as they rot in landfill globally each year.

A key focus is ensuring equitable access for SMEs, especially in the EU, where 99.8% of fashion brands fall under this category. It's estimated that around 40% of these businesses could face challenges in implementing DPPs and meeting the compliance standards to be outlined in the ESPR.

To address this, the 100 MILLION THREADS PROJECT aims to include not only SMEs but also nonprofits, charities, and other organisations. Our goal is to provide them with an affordable DPP solution, on par with what larger brands can access through low-cost bulk manufacturing.

The plan is to manufacture 100 million RFiD THREADS® to add to 100 million pieces of clothing. Now imagine the impact if we added these threads to both new and recovered denim jeans: we could prevent emissions equivalent to 300,000 cars, 2 million hours of domestic flights, 5 million refrigerators, or 70 million smartphones. And that’s just the beginning because we’ve not even calculated their EPR—each year, 15.3 billion pairs of jeans rot in landfills, contributing significantly to global emissions.

Any sized brand can join by pre-ordering via an Expression of Interest and jump onto a bulk manufacturing order to purchase affordable, efficient DPPs at the same low bulk buying price as the big brands. 

We need to support these businesses so that we don’t forever change the landscape into one that’s dominated by fast fashion and large global brands. SMEs are the backbone of our society; they are where creativity flourishes, which is at the core of why I started this project. By supporting these smaller businesses, we can ensure that innovation and creativity helps to drive a circular economy."

Daphne: “What message would you like to share with young people and sustainability advocates?”

Alison:  “My message to young eco-entrepreneurs striving to pivot to circularity is to stay connected to your purpose. For me, that purpose centers around the environment and ensuring a better future for my son and the generations to come. It breaks my heart to see the urgency of our climate crisis and realize that we can't afford to wait as the 2030 targets are now obsolete.

Also to learn more about the people who are connected to both your supply chain and the resource recovery providers. This is where the gold is, the storytelling that connects us all, seeing the differences and the similarities but especially the gifted ‘makers’ who create, decommission and then recreate our products and materials.

Together, we can transform this industry into one that prioritises the planet and future generations."

Daphne: “Is there anything you believe every fashion consumer should be aware of when purchasing clothing?”

Alison: “Manufacturing and transport are the two biggest contributors to emissions in an industry ranked among the top three driving the climate crisis.

By learning more, every fashion consumer can consider the full impact of their purchasing decisions and acknowledge the true cost of producing their clothes and our role in over consumption. Just recently, the Australian Institute reported that Australia has the highest fashion consumption rate in the world, which is alarming. On the same day, temperatures soared to 52.2 degrees in Delhi, where one of my recyclers operates. There, women wearing saris made with 5 metres of plastic polyester sit amidst piles of wool garmentsunder metal roofs without air conditioning in that heat, as they decommission our discarded clothes for recycling.

It’s the people in the Global South who bear the brunt of our waste crisis, and it's crucial that we engage them as active participants in a circular economy. With RFiD THREADS® this is now possible and easy. 

Daphne: “What are some real-world impacts we can see by using RFiD THREADS®?”

Alison: “I’m excited to divert funds from the 100 Million Thread Project, which aims to make a significant difference in these communities. Funds will go towards renewable energy solutions aligned with Project Drawdown’s Distributed Solar Photovoltaics energy initiative, benefiting both garment production factories and decommissioning businesses in the Global South. 

Our goal is to support factories that lack the financial resources to transition to renewable energy, improving working conditions while providing brands with a dual advantage. Not only will this reduce energy consumption in key production areas, but it will also enhance their ESPR reporting by addressing critical energy hotspots.

We can also use our data to build LLM AI to determine the best-case choices based on geography plus which materials and solutions to choose to help brands shift faster to better solutions based on real-world LCA metrics.

Brands can choose to connect their Supply Chain Management and LCA software platforms with ours via a “digital bridge”. Connectivity to SCM is disconnected at Point-of-Sale or by request and is then open-source to be all-inclusive and offered for free to the resource recovery sector.

SCM connectivity automatically solves one of the industries biggest waste problems; returns. Implementing RFiD THREADS® means returns can be bulk scanned and put ‘back onto the shelves” instantly to fix the enormous problems caused by manual re-entry leading to out-dated clothing being dumped. Many brands build these financial losses into their linear models so this loss of revenue is now an easy fix . 

The concept of shared responsibility extends to encouraging brands to help consumers take accountability for their choices. By educating customers that even the transport involved in online shopping returns carries a “cost” to the planet, we can foster a deeper awareness. Encouraging consumers to pay a small fee to ‘draw down’ the associated emissions will lead to meaningful habit changes and phenomenal sequestration opportunities as awareness grows.

These small financial contributions add up, helping to infuse the ‘economy’ into circularity. Brands stand to benefit by increasing profits, offsetting eco-related expenses, and supporting essential waste management efforts, as well as driving advancements in textile technology. This approach helps brands, consumers and the resource recovery sector to collaborate in creating a more circular future.”

Article by Daphne Vryghem is passionate about the circular economy and dedicated to advancing innovative strategies for sustainable environmental preservation.