Biodiversity is fashion’s next frontier
As the fashion industry deepens its commitments on climate and circularity, a new challenge is gaining ground: nature. From cotton fields to grazing lands, from dyeing processes to deforestation-linked leather, fashion’s relationship with biodiversity runs deep. Yet most brands remain unaware of how dependent they are on healthy ecosystems and how their sourcing choices drive biodiversity loss worldwide.
Fashion’s relationship with Nature: dependencies & impacts
From the raw materials it sources to the ecosystems it affects, fashion both depends on biodiversity and contributes to its erosion.
Fashion’s dependencies on Nature
Fashion brands are highly dependent on ecosystem services to function, particularly:
Provisioning services: these are the materials and natural inputs directly sourced from ecosystems. Over a third of fashion’s materials (e.g., cotton, wool, leather, cashmere, viscose, etc.) originate from land-based ecosystems, relying on agricultural land, forests, and livestock systems (The Fashion Pact; 2022). The production of these materials drives land conversion, soil degradation, and water use at a global scale. Fashion also depends heavily on water resources for fiber cultivation, dyeing, finishing, and other wet processes throughout the supply chain.
Regulating & maintenance services: fashion indirectly relies on services that regulate ecosystems and support the conditions for raw material production. For instance, climate regulation, water filtration, and pollination all support the resilience of supply chains. Without stable ecosystem functions, productivity and resource availability become highly vulnerable.
Cultural services: fashion draws cultural and aesthetic value from nature, whether through inspiration, craftsmanship, or the branding of "natural" and "sustainable" products.
Fashion’s impacts on Nature
Using the IPBES “Five Pressures” framework, we can map how fashion contributes to biodiversity loss.
Land use change: fiber production (for cotton, hemp), grazing (for wool, leather), and forestry (for viscose) all contribute to deforestation, habitat loss, and land degradation. As global demand rises, fashion continues to drive expansion into natural ecosystems.
Pollution: fashion is a major source of water, soil, and air pollution. Textile dyeing and treatment, leather tanning, and synthetic fiber production contribute to heavy chemical discharge. The industry accounts for up to 25% of global industrial water pollution (UNEP).
Climate change (GHG Emissions): fashion contributes 2-8% of global GHG emissions depending on the estimate (McKinsey, UNEP). Emissions stem from energy-intensive processes across the supply chain, including textile processing, transport, and retail.
Overexploitation of resources: excessive water withdrawal for cotton farming in arid regions is a major driver of local ecosystem collapse (e.g., the Aral Sea). Overgrazing for wool, leather, and cashmere also threatens fragile landscapes.
Invasive Alien Species (IAS): less commonly addressed in fashion, but global trade can contribute to IAS introduction via contaminated raw material shipments, packaging, and transportation flows.
Dummy Impacts dashboard - Darwin Platform
Why is biodiversity a material issue for fashion brands? Related risks & opportunities
As a result, biodiversity loss creates multiple interconnected risks for the fashion sector:
Physical risks: fashion supply chains are highly exposed to ecosystem degradation. Declining soil fertility, loss of pollinators, and reduced water availability can lower yields of key fibers such as cotton, rubber, and cashmere. 39% of global fashion sourcing is exposed to high water stress (McKinsey).
Market risks: biodiversity is quickly becoming a differentiator in B2C & B2B markets. ****Retail buyers are integrating nature-related KPIs into procurement criteria beyond carbon. Brands unable to provide traceability or prove “nature-positive” sourcing will risk losing shelf space or premium placement.
Reputational risks: NGOs and watchdog groups increasingly scrutinize sourcing practices, especially in high-risk regions. Campaigns like Clean Clothes or Earthsight have directly targeted major brands over unsustainable sourcing of leather (linked to Amazon deforestation), viscose (linked to illegal logging), and cotton (linked to water exploitation and forced labour).
Regulatory risks: nature-related regulation is ramping up fast, and fashion is in the spotlight.
The EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) will require full traceability of key commodities, including leather, rubber, and wood-derived materials like viscose, by 2025. This will require knowing exact sourcing locations and proving they are not linked to recent deforestation or ecosystem conversion.
France’s “affichage environnemental” (environmental labeling) will become compulsory for fashion brands by 2026 and is expected to include land use, biodiversity impact, and water consumption alongside carbon.
While biodiversity loss presents real risks for the fashion industry, it also opens up powerful opportunities for innovation, differentiation, and resilience. Brands that take early action can gain competitive advantage across several dimensions:
Brand differentiation & consumer demand: as consumer expectations (and more generally market expectations) evolve, biodiversity is becoming the new frontier of “sustainable fashion.” Brands that demonstrate genuine efforts to restore ecosystems, source regeneratively, or design for nature can tap into a growing market segment looking beyond carbon.
Regenerative sourcing & supply chain resilience: investing in regenerative agriculture for key raw materials (e.g., cotton, wool, leather) can improve soil health, water retention, and long-term yields — making supply chains more climate- and nature-resilient. These approaches also help diversify sourcing regions and reduce dependency on at-risk suppliers.
Investor readiness & ESG leadership: Biodiversity is increasingly viewed as material by investors, especially under emerging frameworks (e.g. CSRD, SFDR, and TNFD). Brands that can report on biodiversity impacts and set credible nature targets will be better positioned to attract capital and meet ESG expectations.
Innovation & product storytelling: new materials (from plant-based dyes to low-impact leather alternatives) offer not only environmental benefits but also fresh storytelling potential. Integrating biodiversity into product design creates opportunities for eco-innovation and brand narrative rooted in place, tradition, or ecosystem regeneration.
Licenses to operate & market access: anticipating nature regulations like the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) or national eco-labelling schemes will ensure continued access to EU markets. Taking a proactive stance can avoid disruptions and offer brands a seat at the table in shaping future rules.
And so on…
Why are biodiversity impacts so hard to assess in fashion?
Despite rising awareness, most fashion brands struggle to integrate biodiversity into decision-making. Some underlying reasons include the fact that:
Textile supply chains are long, opaque, and fragmented, with hundreds of suppliers across tiers.
Raw material traceability is typically poor: many brands lack visibility into farm or forest-level production. Indeed data gaps are common: brands often know what material they used (e.g., cotton), but not where or how it was produced, which is key to assessing biodiversity impacts.
Regulatory and market requirements are fragmented: fashion brands now face a patchwork of frameworks —EUDR (which mandates full traceability of commodities like leather), CSRD (which introduces mandatory biodiversity disclosure under ESRS E4), and upcoming environmental labelling schemes (incl. some biodiversity-related indicators such as land-use) in France and beyond. These regulations typically rely on different indicators, scopes, and expectations, making it difficult for companies to align efforts or streamline data collection across markets.
How can fashion brands measure their biodiversity footprint?
The key to taking action is to first quantitatively measure biodiversity impacts, dependencies, and risks.
What’s needed
Focus on pressures: measuring biodiversity requires tracking physical pressures (e.g. land use, water use, emissions) rather than general aggregated scores (which could be useful in materiality assessments though). Pressures remains the most actionable indicators for businesses.
Use quantitative, science-based methods: a strong biodiversity baseline is essential to set meaningful targets. Qualitative assessments can help but should not replace footprinting.
Adopt a holistic view: avoid siloed climate/water/biodiversity assessments. A credible strategy considers all environmental pressures and trade-offs together.
Localise biodiversity hotspots: the same material (e.g., cotton or leather) can have radically different impacts depending on where and how it is produced. Brands need to go beyond global averages and identify sourcing from ecologically sensitive areas (e.g. biodiversity hotspots, water-stressed regions, or areas with high deforestation risk).
There are many tools, frameworks, and industry initiatives at disposal for fashion brands including our platform.
What can fashion brands do about it? What’s the point of doing this?
Once a biodiversity baseline is in place, companies can design meaningful strategies and set Science-Based Targets for Nature (SBTNs). At Darwin, we recommend following the AR3T action hierarchy:
Avoid: stop sourcing from high-risk areas or suppliers. Redesign products to reduce high-impact materials (e.g., switch from conventional leather to low-impact alternatives).
Reduce: improve sourcing via certifications like Better Cotton Initiative, GOTS, ZQ wool, etc. Optimize production processes to reduce pollution and land intensity.
Restore & Regenerate: fund or participate in on-the-ground restoration projects (e.g., grasslands, wetlands, degraded cotton lands). Support regenerative agriculture in cotton, wool, or viscose supply chains.
Transform: support supplier transition plans, helping them shift toward regenerative or agroecological models. Engage with policy and industry initiatives to transform systemic incentives around biodiversity and land use.
While challenges remain, an increasing number of fashion brands are beginning to recognize biodiversity as a critical part of their sustainability strategy and are actively experimenting with nature-positive approaches:
Burberry’s: they have launched a regeneration fund in 2020 as part of their broader biodiversity strategy. The fund will invest in nature-based solutions (NbS) to restore and protect ecosystems within and beyond the brand’s supply chain. This includes regenerative agriculture projects that improve soil health and promote carbon sequestration in raw material sourcing regions.
Kering: one of the most advanced tools in corporate environmental accounting, Kering’s environmental Profit & Loss EP&L, includes detailed land use and biodiversity impact valuations, monetized to inform internal decision-making. It enables sourcing teams to compare environmental impacts across suppliers and regions, driving smarter procurement choices.
GANNI: the Danish brand has successfully phase out of virgin leather in less than 4 years from all products; they have experimented with traceable, low-impact materials like recycled leather and also lab-grown alternatives (Oleatex).
… and many more examples !
****
All in all, it seems the fashion industry stands at a crossroads. While it has made visible progress on climate and circularity, biodiversity is emerging as the next major sustainability frontier, one that is deeply tied to brand resilience, regulatory compliance, and long-term business viability.
To act meaningfully, fashion brands must go beyond slogans and certifications. They need science-based, quantitative assessments of their biodiversity footprint, understanding how their materials, sourcing choices, and operations drive pressures on nature.
At Darwin, we help fashion brands assess their biodiversity footprint across the value chain, identify key dependencies and risks, set credible, location-specific targets aligned with frameworks like SBTN, and take meaningful action—from supplier engagement to sourcing transformation.
🌱 Nature isn’t just a backdrop to fashion—it’s the infrastructure that makes it possible. Let’s make it visible, measurable, and actionable.
