Circularity has become the buzzword in fashion circles today. But it’s usually an abbreviated definition of circularity that is going around. A more comprehensive circularity would look at the amount of clothing produced and the full life-cycle costs of a garment, from eliminating the industry’s reliance on petroleum-based plastics and coal-powered plants to toxic dyes, sweatshop assemblies, and massive shipping footprint required to make our clothing.

The circularity conversation in the fashion industry tends to focus primarily on reducing waste and, more specifically, recycling clothing. The global fashion industry’s circularity focus is on reusing and recirculating clothing, not a retooling of the industry. And while recycling is important, it misses the mark when it comes to meaningfully reducing emissions. Even if the fashion industry reaches the ambitious target of recycling 40 per cent of fibers by 2030, it would reduce emissions by only three or six per cent. At best, that’s a reduction rate of a paltry half of one per cent a year. To seriously address climate change and the industry’s environmental impact more broadly, it must do better.

A genuinely circular agenda would focus on slowing down the cycle of fashion production and consumption and getting these fossil fuels out of every aspect of our clothing.