No more fashion shows at COP29. Here’s what we need to see.

Last year, I spent COP28 in Dubai pulling my hair out, asking why the fashion industry was organizing runway shows in the middle of the conference. At the same time, its global supply chains still account for as much as 8% of global emissions and rising. Stand.earth’s latest fashion report, the Clean Energy Close Up showed that even the brands doing the most on climate are still not doing enough to decarbonize rapidly and reasonably. While more weighty discussions were had, and a few brands announced new supply chain investments, for an industry that claims to want to be taken seriously for its sustainability, it sure isn’t acting like it. Will COP29 be different?

When we talk about the fashion industry, it sounds fun and creative and distant from global climate goals. Let’s name it: there’s an in-built misogyny about an industry which feels “feminine” and therefore unserious. But we are doing every single person on this planet a deadly disservice by not treating it like the global fossil fuel supply chain that it is.

Fashion’s emissions are still rising because the vast majority of products are made from fossil fuels (plastic, e.g., polyester), produced in coal-powered factories and with fossil-fuel-made electricity, and the industry has failed to change that. It is also built off the labour of underpaid, mostly female workers in some of the world’s most climate-vulnerable countries, such as Bangladesh and Vietnam, in conditions only made more challenging by the impacts of climate breakdown.

What we need to see at COP29

In the six years since the UN Fashion Charter launched at COP24, we’ve seen plenty of commitments, promises and panel discussions. With just a short runway left to 2030, here’s what we need to see at COP29.

Money

Brands that set targets for their supply chains to reduce emissions without providing real, accessible financial support to the manufacturers that have to make changes like replacing coal-fired boilers or installing solar panels are essentially just wishing on a star. The Apparel Impact Institute estimates that it will take as much $1 trillion (that’s 12 zeros) to finance the industry’s decarbonization, but details from brands on their financial commitments to the fossil fuel phase-out remain few and far between.

Without financial support that helps manufacturers decarbonize, such as paying higher prices for goods or even direct financing, the financial burden of climate action is simply pushed down from the brands onto manufacturers and ultimately onto workers in the form of squeezed wages or lost work.

At COP29, brands need to provide concrete details on how they will FUND and ENABLE an energy transition in their supply chains, how much money is on the table, and where it will go.

“Brands that set targets for their supply chains to reduce emissions without providing real, accessible financial support to the manufacturers that have to make changes like replacing coal-fired boilers or installing solar panels, are essentially just wishing on a star.”

Climate action that includes workers and their immediate needs

Mitigation initiatives have long overshadowed climate adaptation, but the impacts of climate breakdown are here now and are already harming workers and communities across fashion’s biggest manufacturing regions. Fashion brands must be proactive about ensuring workers’ needs are supported, their livelihoods are protected during climate disasters, and their health and well-being are safeguarded.

Without worker inclusion, it’s not a just transition. Climate plans must address climate adaptation and the needs of workers, such as keeping factories cool during heat waves, ensuring communities benefit from new renewable energy, and avoiding pushing more harm onto marginalized people.

In addition, workers and their communities must be represented in the panels, discussions and negotiations that will affect them. Right now, the voices of workers and frontline communities are missing from groups such as the UN Fashion Charter and other industry sustainability initiatives despite being the most vulnerable to the impacts of the industry’s failure to cut emissions. It’s long overdue that fundamental human rights and workers’ interests should be actively incorporated into the UN Fashion Charter and integrated into brands’ climate transition plans, ending the top-down decision-making system that has maintained colonial power dynamics.

No more false solutions

False solutions are climate solutions that promise a quick fix but ultimately don’t deliver or open up harmful new avenues, and the fashion industry has tripped over a few of them. Carbon offsetting and environmental attribute certificates, which turn climate action into a tradeable commodity, are a big red flag. While globally, some big companies try to undermine the integrity of sustainability standards and weasel out of absolute emissions reductions, fashion brands serious about sustainability must step up to defend climate integrity and accept carbon markets as a false solution.

Another concerning development in the last couple of years has been a notable and dangerous push towards biomass burning as an alternative to coal in fashion manufacturing processes, which require a lot of heat. Last year, Stand released a report showing how fashion brands and the UN Fashion Charter are driving towards more burning instead of electrification. At COP29, the industry must say no to harmful and polluting biomass.

Making ‘circularity’ into more than a buzzword

Ultimately, the sheer volume of production of new garments is an existential threat to the fashion industry’s ability to meet its climate goals. As brands continue to prioritize growth, it undermines the gains made by manufacturers in energy efficiency or renewables. But while the industry loves to talk about circularity, unless brands are investing in textile-textile recycling to reduce garment waste, reducing the number of new collections released each year and committing meaningfully to growing resale and repair over the sale of new items, circularity will just be a buzzword and has no place at COP.

Money

(again, in case you missed it the first time).

In the phrase “fashion industry,” the keyword isn’t fashion.

With five years left to more than halve the industry’s emissions, we need to demand more than runway shows and “sustainable collections” at COP29, we need progress.