Barometre transparence chaine approvisionnement textile

Supply chain transparency means a brand publicly discloses information about its suppliers, manufacturing processes and social/environmental impacts. This includes publishing factory names and addresses (Tier 1 to 4), wage data, working conditions, water/energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Transparency is not an end in itself but a prerequisite for accountability: without knowing who makes what, it is impossible to verify brand commitments. The Fashion Transparency Index evaluates 250 major brands annually since 2016. In 2025 the average score was 24/100, showing the industry remains largely opaque.

The Rana Plaza collapse in Dhaka (Bangladesh) on April 24, 2013 killed 1,134 garment workers and was the deadliest accident in garment industry history. It revealed that major Western brands did not even know their own suppliers. Direct consequences: creation of the Bangladesh Accord (now International Accord, covering 1,600+ factories), launch of Fashion Revolution ("Who Made My Clothes?"), creation of the Fashion Transparency Index, and acceleration of EU due diligence legislation. April 24 became Fashion Revolution Week, where millions of consumers question brands about their supply chains.

The Fashion Transparency Index (FTI), published annually by Fashion Revolution since 2016, evaluates the transparency of 250 of the world's largest fashion brands. It measures what brands publicly disclose (not what they actually do) across five categories: policy and commitments, governance, supply chain traceability, results and progress, and spotlight issues (living wages, climate, circularity). Scores range 0-100. In 2024 scores ranged from 0 to 83 (OVS leading), with a median of 21. The FTI is the global benchmark for measuring fashion industry transparency.

The textile supply chain is structured in tiers. Tier 1: garment factories (cut, sew, finish) making the final product. Tier 2: weaving, knitting, dyeing and finishing mills. Tier 3: spinning mills, yarn and processed fiber producers. Tier 4: raw materials (raw cotton, petroleum for polyester, wool, silk). Most brands publish only Tier 1 suppliers (47% in 2024), and fewer than 5% disclose beyond Tier 2. Yet most social impacts (forced labor, child labor) and environmental impacts (chemical pollution, water use) occur at Tiers 2-4.

Minimum wage is set by law in each country. A living wage is the amount needed for a worker and their family to cover basic needs: food, housing, healthcare, education, transport and savings. The gap is enormous: in Bangladesh, the textile minimum wage (12,500 BDT/month in 2024) represents only 40-50% of the living wage estimated by the Anker Research Network. In India the gap is 50-70%. Only 4% of major brands publish actual wage data from their factories. The Good Clothes Fair Pay campaign collected 240,000 signatures demanding EU living wage legislation.

Greenwashing means communicating environmental commitments without evidence or transparency. Red flags: vague terms ("eco-friendly", "conscious", "sustainable") without definitions or data. "Green" capsule representing less than 1% of total production. Climate pledges without Scope 3 emissions disclosure. Self-declared labels (no independent verification). No supplier list. Volume growth incompatible with climate targets. The EU Green Claims Directive (2024) bans unsubstantiated environmental claims. Look for third-party certifications (GOTS, bluesign, SA8000) and verifiable published data.

Blockchain records each supply chain step immutably and transparently: from raw material to final consumer sale. Solutions like TextileGenesis (used by Lenzing for Tencel), FibreTrace (physical tracer embedded in fiber) and Retraced enable real-time origin verification. Limitations: blockchain guarantees data integrity once recorded but not initial data accuracy (garbage in, garbage out). Blockchain + physical audit + third-party certification is the most reliable approach. The EU Digital Product Passport (DPP, mandatory for textiles from 2027) will integrate traceability technologies.

Consumers are a major lever for change. Concrete actions: question brands on social media (#WhoMadeMyClothes, created by Fashion Revolution), check brand scores on the Fashion Transparency Index, favor brands publishing supplier lists, demand information at point of purchase (origin, manufacturing conditions), sign petitions for due diligence laws. Consumer pressure helped increase the number of brands publishing Tier 1 lists from 12% (2017) to 48% (2024). Educating consumers about the true cost of fast fashion remains a key challenge.

The CSDDD, adopted by the EU in 2024, requires large companies (500+ employees, EUR 150M+ turnover) to identify, prevent and mitigate negative human rights and environmental impacts throughout their value chain, including indirect suppliers. Key obligations: risk mapping, action plan, grievance mechanism, annual reporting. Directors bear personal liability. Penalties up to 5% of global turnover. Timeline: phased implementation 2027-2029 by company size. This directive transforms transparency from voluntary exercise to legal obligation.

Transparency and sustainability are related but distinct. Transparency concerns information disclosure: a transparent brand publishes its data even if it reveals problems. Sustainability concerns actual outcomes: emission reduction, wage improvement, circularity. A brand can be transparent without being sustainable (it publishes data but practices are poor). Conversely, a brand can claim sustainability without transparency (greenwashing). Transparency is the prerequisite for sustainability: without public data, no verification is possible. Fashion Revolution summarizes: "You cannot manage what you do not measure, and you cannot measure what you do not disclose." The goal is an industry that is both transparent AND sustainable.