Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2025

The report finds that while some fashion companies have improved their GHG emission reduction targets, these commitments often lack credibility due to a failure to implement systemic transitions. Key issues include a reliance on 'false solutions' like biomass and fossil gas instead of electrification, limited transparency regarding supply chain energy, and a persistent adherence to fast fashion business models that prioritise volume over value. While H&M Group is noted for its transparency in disclosing supply chain energy balances, the sector generally lacks the prescriptive guidance and regulatory interventions needed to curb overproduction and scale low-GHG fibres.

• Several fashion companies have strengthened their GHG emission reduction targets to align with 1.5°C-compatible pathways, specifically adidas, H&M Group, and Inditex.
• The credibility of GHG targets is undermined by the use of profit-based emissions intensity metrics, as seen with lululemon, which can mask absolute emission increases.
• Shein's 2030 emission reduction targets are critically misaligned with global benchmarks, potentially allowing its emissions to more than double compared to 2021 levels.
• Companies are frequently replacing coal boilers with fossil gas and biomass, which the report identifies as 'false solutions' that risk locking in carbon-intensive infrastructure.
• H&M Group is highlighted as a positive example of transparency for disclosing detailed supply chain energy balances, though it still lacks a specific target for the electrification of manufacturing processes.
• The fashion industry's reliance on recycled polyester from PET bottles is described as 'downcycling' and not a credible long-term climate solution; textile-to-textile recycling is the necessary but underdeveloped alternative.
• The 'fast fashion' business model, characterized by high production volumes and low prices, remains a fundamental barrier to deep decarbonisation.
• The report argues that voluntary initiatives are insufficient and calls for regulatory interventions, such as mandatory production volume reporting and the prohibition of destroying unsold inventory.

APA

Day, T., Fraser, E., Mooldijk, S., Salsabila, N. P., Bammel, L., & Hans, F. (2025). Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2025. Carbon Market Watch. https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/cmw-publication-ccrm2025-fashion-Jun25.pdf

Chicago

Day, Thomas, Eve Fraser, Silke Mooldijk, Nabila Putri Salsabila, Louise Bammel, and Frederic Hans. Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2025. Carbon Market Watch, 2025. https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/cmw-publication-ccrm2025-fashion-Jun25.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Day |first1=Thomas |last2=Fraser |first2=Eve |last3=Mooldijk |first3=Silke |last4=Salsabila |first4=Nabila Putri |last5=Bammel |first5=Louise |last6=Hans |first6=Frederic |title=Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2025 |publisher=Carbon Market Watch |date=June 2025 |url=https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/cmw-publication-ccrm2025-fashion-Jun25.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{day2025corporate, author = {Day, Thomas and Fraser, Eve and Mooldijk, Silke and Salsabila, Nabila Putri and Bammel, Louise and Hans, Frederic}, title = {{Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor 2025}}, institution = {Carbon Market Watch}, year = {2025}, month = jun, url = {https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/cmw-publication-ccrm2025-fashion-Jun25.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }