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

Are ecocide laws an antidote for offset and carbon markets?

We need to talk about the travesty that is the carbon credit and offset market. Perhaps ecocide laws might be an antidote to this fallacy.

The irreversible damage done to ecosystems, pollution and biodiversity loss should not be commercialised and traded in a capitalistic way on a market.

It's been reported that the earth is facing its 6th mass extinction driven by human activity, primarily (though not limited to) the unsustainable use of land, water and energy use, and climate change.

In the pursuit of extreme extraction of virgin materials for manufacturing and extreme capitalism that doesn't care about the impact that it has on the earth, whether directly or indirectly, the notion of taking another action that cancels the damage the company has done should not even exist.

Meanwhile, because of the harm done in the name of overproduction and growth, there are animal and plant species that we will never get back. Ever. And their habitats are in too many cases polluted, poisoned or destroyed. Same goes for the human lives, communities, their land and environments that have been destroyed and will continue to be ravaged unless we end deceptive concepts like carbon credit markets.

The EU has voted to introduce crimes that can be 'comparable to ecocide' in its revised Environmental Crime Directive. Ecocide as a standalone crime would mean the most senior board members or policy makers would be held legally accountable for decisions that lead to mass environmental harm, regardless of how that harm is caused!

Jojo Mehta, Co-founder and CEO of Stop Ecocide International, said:

“The historic vote from the EU to include ecocide-level crimes in its revised crime directive shows leadership and compassion, and will strongly reinforce existing environmental laws across the region. It will establish a clear moral as well as legal “red line”, creating an essential steer for European industry leaders and policy-makers going forward.”

Take action by signing a petition here.

We need this type of reform in countries across the globe.