Appendix 1: Method statement

Transcription

1 Appendix 1: Method statement Overview This report is intended to document up to date information on the water, carbon and waste impacts of UK clothing and provide detailed information on the resource and cost implications of consumers behaviour when purchasing, using and passing-on of clothes. It has been compiled following a literature search, discussions with leading authorities on this subject and following feedback from SCAP members. A full reference list is provided in this report. Information sources reviewed in the production of this report include: academic research; analysis from research institutes; media articles; national statistics online; third sector and campaign findings; and policy and research from international organisations. The report focuses on four aspects of clothing: 1. carbon footprint 2. water footprint 3. waste generation 4. consumer attitudes and behaviour in relation to UK clothing efficiency (see section below). The report provides technical details which can be used by retailers and other stakeholders to raise consumer and industry awareness on UK clothing resource efficiency issues. This appendix provides further details about the evidence base presented in this report, including definitions, the lifecycle assessment methodology, and the methods used for the consumer research. Definitions For the purposes of this report, clothing is defined as apparel, garments and attire designed with the purpose of covering the body, including textiles used for the manufacturing of clothing. Textiles more widely, such as carpets, footwear and accessories, are outside the scope of this report. Where evidence and facts refer to textiles as a whole, this has been made explicit. The in use stage encompasses all elements of clothing utilisation, including modifications, hiring/leasing, etc. Clothes cleaning is used to refer to all stages in the laundry process, including washing, drying, and ironing. Lifecycle Assessment (LCA) Importantly, this publication reports on studies on the carbon, water and waste footprint of clothing that were commissioned by WRAP in 2011 (further information is provided below). These studies provide analyses of the impact of clothing over the full life cycle. Appendices IV, V and VI provide copies of these reports in full.

2 Lifecycle assessment (LCA) is an established method for assessing the environmental impacts of products. LCA studies assess the potential environmental impacts throughout a product s life (i.e. from cradle to grave), from raw material acquisition through production, use and disposal. Life cycle stages include: raw materials (growth, acquisition and processing); fibre production (natural/non-man-made and man-made); clothing production and garment assembly; packaging; distribution; retail; use; and end of life management (re-use, recycling, remanufacture, energy recovery, treatment and disposal). (Defra, 2007 p8) The LCA method has been standardised by the International Standards Organisation (ISO). The lifecycle perspective ensures that any emerging policies or interventions do not simply shift the environmental burden or the social impacts 1 to another life cycle stage. (Defra, 2007 p8) Measuring the carbon footprint A carbon footprint is a measure of the impact our activities have on the environment, and in particular climate change. It relates to the amount of greenhouse gases produced in our day-to-day lives through burning fossil fuels for electricity, heating and transportation etc. The carbon footprint is a measurement of all greenhouse gases (GHG) individually produced and has units of tonnes (or kg) of carbon dioxide equivalent. A carbon footprint is made up of the sum of two parts, the primary footprint and the secondary footprint. The primary footprint is a measure of our direct emissions of CO 2 e from the burning of fossil fuels including domestic energy consumption and transportation (e.g. car and plane). We have direct control of these. The secondary footprint is a measure of the indirect CO 2 e emissions from the whole lifecycle of products we use - those associated with their manufacture and eventual breakdown. (WRAP, 2012a) Many previous studies have assessed the carbon impacts of various clothing types and modelled reduction initiatives. However, none have focused on measuring the carbon footprint of UK clothing as a whole and modelled the potential for reduction. To this end, WRAP commissioned Environmental Resources Management Limited (ERM) to undertake research on the life cycle carbon impact of clothing in the UK. This study required a strategic-level carbon footprint for UK clothing, based on published data and information. The results provided in the study relate to clothing produced for (and actively used in) the UK. The results are broken down by both lifecycle stage and fibre type to show their relative contributions to the total footprint. The footprint is expressed in a number of ways to show the contribution and scope for reduction. Furthermore, a scenario assessment was made for a number of different options for footprint reduction. Measuring the water footprint The water footprint of an individual, community or business is defined as the total volume of freshwater that is used to produce the goods and services consumed by the individual or community or produced by the business. It is an indicator of water use that looks at both direct and indirect water use of a consumer or producer. (Water Footprint Network, 2011) The interest in the water footprint is rooted in the recognition that human impacts on freshwater systems can ultimately be linked to human consumption, and that issues like water shortages and pollution can be better understood and addressed by considering production and supply chains as a whole. Water problems are often closely tied to the structure of the global economy. This puts pressure on the water resources in the exporting 1 Social impacts are more difficult to quantify than environmental impacts and have therefore not traditionally been included in LCA methods.

3 regions, where too often mechanisms for wise water governance and conservation are lacking. (Water Footprint Network, 2011) Unlike with carbon footprinting, the aim of a water footprint is not necessarily to reduce its size but to focus change in locations where water resource are already or are going to be scarce. (WRAP, 2012b p.2) Many countries have significantly externalised their water footprint, importing water-intensive goods from elsewhere. UK consumption of food and clothing has an impact on rivers and aquifers both globally and in the UK and is inextricably linked to the continuing security and good management of water resources in other parts of the world. (Water Footprint Network, 2011) WRAP commissioned URS Corporation Ltd (URS) to undertake a high level study to provide an overview of available evidence on the impact of UK clothing consumption on water use in the global supply chain, identify the most significant impacts in terms of embodied water / water footprint and water extracted in the UK, and to highlight the key opportunities for water savings. The study has made a number of assumptions in deriving its big picture results; the calculated values are not necessarily precise, but do reveal overall patterns of impact. (WRAP, 2012b) However, the study has shown that limited data is available to enable the full life cycle water footprint of UK clothing consumption to be calculated. The clothing supply chain is highly diverse and complex and detailed market information and country specific water footprint data is not available for all specific life cycle stages and process steps involved in the manufacture of clothing across the variety of fabric types. Measuring the waste footprint The waste footprint is expressed as the physical quantity of waste arising at each life cycle stage and divided into UK and non UK waste arising. The UK clothing waste footprint includes all clothing, both new (purchased in the last 12 months) and existing (based on the assumed useful lifetime of a clothing garment), in use in the UK over the period of one year. The analysis covers both clothing manufactured and used in the UK and clothing manufactured abroad and used in the UK. The datum is 2009 as the year for which the most recent data are available. The results provided in the study relate to the annual impacts associated with UK clothing. They include the impacts associated with the quantity of clothes that are produced for the UK and consumed and disposed of each year, but they also include the impacts associated with clothing that is actively worn and cleaned each year (approximately 1.1 million tonnes of new clothing is consumed in the UK each year, ~2.5 million tonnes is in active use - note that this is greater than the annual consumed clothing because clothes last for more than one year). The materials associated with the production of co-products (i.e. unavoidable by-products that are sold and beneficially used, such as lint from cotton production and lanolin from wool production) are not considered to be wastes. Data limitations The literature includes reports that quantify life cycle environmental impacts for specific materials, such as cotton, polyester, wool and rayon/viscose (see for example, Environmental Systems Analysis (2003), Marks and Spencer (2002), and Danish Environmental Protection Agency (1997)). However, there are issues with the evidence base that make analysis and comparisons problematic. Notably: Life cycle information is not available for all clothing materials (eg there are no complete LCAs on jute or flax clothing). Two LCAs of the same clothing product can have very different results, even if both LCAs are carried out according to the ISO standards. This can be caused by the different estimates and assumptions made in setting the system boundaries, the use of different databases, the inclusion/exclusion of life cycle stages and the interpretation of the results using different impact assessment methods.

4 Different definitions of clothing/textiles are used (e.g. some include carpet and/or footwear). Data and models used within studies are not always made clear, making conclusions not possible (Defra, 2007 p69) The table below shows a comparison of evidence on environmental impacts from the lifecycle of clothing, and illustrates challenges resulting from studies based on different assumptions and estimations. Table 1: Comparison of evidence on environmental impacts [Source: Defra, 2007 p70] There are discrepancies between the UK energy consumption and UK GHG emissions of the Defra study (2006b), the University of Cambridge (Allwood et al, 2006) and Environment Agency (2007) studies. For the reasons stated above, the validity of the information on clothing resource efficiency is limited. This ambiguity is discussed in more detail in Appendix II. Primary research on consumer behaviour Primary research was conducted to provide up to date and statistically valid information on the attitudes and behaviour of UK adults (16+) in relation to clothing. This is intended to advance our understanding of what changes in behaviour can be targeted, and what messages would motivate change. The research was conducted via an internet survey between 7 th December and 20 th December 2011 using the Ipsos online panels. The following numbers of interviews were achieved in each of the countries: Table 2: Number of survey respondents, per country ENGLAND 11,001 SCOTLAND 2,213 WALES 2,209 N IRELAND 477 Total 15,900 A questionnaire was developed, piloted and distributed throughout the UK using an online access panel. Each section of the survey was completed by 7,950 respondents. Data were weighted to match the population profile for region, age, gender and social profile and tested for statistically significant relationships. A calibration model was used to weight the survey to the offline population. The project was undertaken by the Ipsos MORI Environment team with specialist input from Professor Tim Cooper of Nottingham Trent University.

5 Qualitative work around this subject has already been carried out by others, including Defra 2, but these studies are based on small sample sizes so robust conclusions about the UK population cannot be drawn. This work informed the questions asked in our survey. The survey initially explored the regularity with which people purchase clothing, the importance that they attribute to particular purchasing criteria and their general attitudes and behaviour towards buying clothes. Other purchasing areas addressed included responsibility within households, whether items are checked for certain characteristics, and people s views on clothes made to last longer and specific fabric types. The survey next considered some alternatives to purchasing new clothes. Questions were asked about the preowned market, hiring and leasing, and the potential for a retailer buy back scheme through which consumers would be able to sell back clothing in good condition to retailers, who would then offer such items for sale at a discount. The survey then addressed the amount and value of people s wardrobe contents and, in the case of unworn items, why they were kept. People were asked to identify who they might approach if unworn items required repair or alteration and whether they could undertake such work personally. Questions also explored how clothing was discarded and what, if anything, might encourage people to reduce waste by selling unwanted items or by separating them for re-use or recycling. The final section of the survey asked what might encourage people to engage in practices such as sorting clothes more often prior to washing, washing clothes less often, washing at a low temperature, using more full loads, etc. Evidence suggests that data collection probability samples via the internet can yield results that are equally or more accurate than random digit dial telephone interviews or face-to-face interviewing with area probability samples (e.g., Chang and Krosnic, forthcoming; Smith, 2003), possibly as a result of more candid responses in the absence of the interviewer (Daylan, et.al, 2007). WRAP s own consumer research experience supports this finding. Importantly, this research has developed our understanding of what behaviours might be open to change, and what would motivate change. This has informed the recommendations presented in this report. 2 a summary of other research they have conducted on sustainable clothing can be found here: