This year is the International Year of Natural Fibers, according to the United Nations. This means 2009 is a good year for organics.
The Organic Exchange (OE), a business-supported certifier of organic fiber agriculture (most often cotton), is using the occasion to host the 2009 Sustainable Textiles Conference in Seattle next month, which will focus on the key issues related to sustainable textiles in the 21st century. This very week, Organic Exchange’s Helvetas (The Swiss Association for International Cooperation) and other international partners are holding the World Congress on Organic Cotton in Interlaken, Switzerland, entitled “From Fashion to Sustainability.”
Left: Gypsy 05's organic cotton maxi dress. Right: Fitness model Diana Chaloux in synthetic workout clothes.
Thanks to all these initiatives, consumers are seeing more organic, green, and sustainability labels popping up on clothing than ever before. But how does an item of clothing get labeled as such?
The international regulatory framework for certifying organic materials is not centralized and comprises a number of organizations that oversee setting the standards. The International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements (IFOAM) published the Organic Textile Standards in 1998 in an effort to bring together all the disparate directives, but they remain disjointed around the globe. The International Organic Accreditation Service is responsible for certifying groups that, in turn, certify many of the companies.
In the United States, cotton fibers can be labeled USDA organic if they contain 95% organic fiber grown without conventional pesticides and using environmentally friendly agricultural practices. No matter where it is produced, in order to be certified, it must be inspected by the USDA. The label does not indicate anything about the dyes or chemicals in the fabric.
Among the non-governmental regulatory bodies, the Organic Trade Association (OTA) is the main certifier in the United States, and they use different labels: “Organic,” “100% Organic,” “Made with organic (specified fiber products),” and “Less than 70% organically produced constituents.” It has yet to be determined what would be labeled with “Less than 70% organically produced constituents.” Their labels, beyond the USDA’s labels do include standards created to regulate chemicals, dyes, detergents, “green”-ness, non-organic elements like zippers and elastic. However, they do not evaluate fair trade practices.
As is evident in the OTA’s regulations, beyond the straight forward “X leads to Y” certification by the U.S. federal government, the reality is that companies often incorporate other mores into their own certification and labeling processes. Depending on the company or organization, organic might say something about fair-trade practices, low-impact dyes, sustainable or biodegradable fabrics, and fewer chemicals in the final product—practices that go beyond the simple “organic” label.
In fact, defining “sustainable textiles,” a phrase that incorporates and analyzes much more than agricultural practices, is the next big thing. It seeks to marry the organic, fair-trade, and green concepts, with a holistic assessment of the long-term impact of the item — that is, access the total impact of the creation, use, and disposal of an item, and every person that the item affects along the way. It is a high-minded goal with, as of yet, no single certifying body to label items that fit into this category.
A word about synthetics: I prefer a silk blouse over a polyester blouse any day. And I want cotton dresses just like everyone, but I want my running clothes to be synthetic and high-tech. Synthetics serve a purpose. Rayon, a hybrid cellulose semi-synthetic fabric, has been found to biodegrade faster than even cotton. And thank goodness for nylon for giving us stockings without seams down the back.
In a world with no synthetics, there would be no elastic. Even strict certifiers allow elements (notions, as we seamstresses call them) that have no “natural” alternative: buttons, zippers, elastic. We forget that synthetic items can be also fair trade, like organics. I would argue that the role of synthetics in the future of sustainable, ethical fashion is has yet to be defined sufficiently. As we, the consumers, define “sustainable fashion,” it is my hope that synthetics will have a roll.
It remains up to consumers to be vigilant in their purchases and do their background research if clothes that fit into this category are important to them. In truth, that level of vigilance is always important on the part of consumers, and transparency is so important on the part of companies. Companies who open up their sourcing, production, and labeling methods create confidence with their customers. Regardless of the fact that there are a dozen or so labeling systems granted oversight, companies can take the lead on defining their own products.
At the end of the day, labels are a shorthand way of telling us what we are getting. They don’t—nor can they—tell us the whole story. We should know that all around the world they mean different things. But it is certainly a comfort to discover, upon researching a line of clothing, that their labels mean exactly what they say.
![[flourish]](http://ethicalstyle.com/wp-content/themes/es/images/topFlourish.png)
![[flourish]](http://ethicalstyle.com/wp-content/themes/es/images/leftFlourish.png)
We might get in trouble for calling ethical fashionistas 
Actress Emma Watson, who plays Hermione in the Harry Potter movie franchise, is ![[flourish]](http://ethicalstyle.com/wp-content/themes/es/images/botFlourish.png)
