Circular fashion is already here. Europe can help it grow faster

Last June, at the European Parliament in Brussels, together with some of the most forward-thinking companies in the fashion system and with the support of CNA Federmoda, we presented concrete proposals to help European policymakers draft fairer regulations for the sector—regulations that truly match the environmental and social ambitions the EU has set for itself. These proposals are part of a joint position paper by the Monitor for Circular Fashion (M4CF) at SDA Bocconi.

At M4CF, we’ve been working for years with companies that treat circularity not just as a mission statement but as an industrial strategy. And the message we brought to European institutions is very simple: those investing in circular innovation today risk being held back by rules designed for yesterday’s linear economy.

Take waste management, for instance. Companies have long called for clear criteria to distinguish between waste and by-products, or to determine when a recycled material can officially stop being classified as waste (the so-called “End of Waste”). Without these definitions, many otherwise virtuous initiatives remain stuck in regulatory ambiguity. What’s more, the current framework often treats recycling and incineration as equals, which disincentivizes the most sustainable options along the EU’s waste hierarchy.

When it comes to ecodesign, we need rules that promote durability, repairability, and recyclability without falling into the trap of overly generic standards. Fashion products and materials vary widely, and setting uniform thresholds can end up penalizing those who experiment with new solutions. What’s needed instead are specific technical parameters, validated in collaboration with businesses, that reflect the real characteristics of materials and usage contexts.

The Digital Product Passport (DPP) is another major opportunity, if designed well. But there’s a risk it could become an opaque and fragmented system, adding bureaucratic burdens without delivering real transparency. That’s why companies are calling for common standards and alignment with new labeling rules: if consumers are bombarded with inconsistent messages, trust fades.

Then there’s the social impact. Many fashion companies have already adopted international standards (such as SA8000, SLCP, or OECD guidelines) to protect workers across their supply chains, which, in the TCLF (Textile, Clothing, Leather, and Footwear) sector, are especially complex and fragmented. But new EU obligations risk ignoring these efforts, imposing checks only on the first tier of the supply chain. Yet the most serious risks, such as forced labor or exploitation, often lie beyond that first tier. What’s needed is deeper due diligence, rewarding those investing in traceability rather than relying on superficial box-ticking.

None of this is a plea for leniency. It’s a call for more effective regulation. The companies we represent aren’t asking for less ambition; they’re asking for more consistency. Good rules aren’t just about prohibiting bad practices: they’re about removing barriers, supporting best practices, and ensuring fair competition, especially with imported goods that often escape the EU’s environmental and social standards.

The fashion industry has already changed. It’s time for European regulation to catch up. With input from the most committed companies and an open dialogue, Brussels now has the chance to write rules that don’t hold back, but instead enable, the circular transformation of fashion. The shift is already happening, and it can make Europe a global benchmark for a fairer, more transparent, and truly sustainable industry.