Evaluating Circular Business Models in the Apparel Sector Through Life Cycle Assessment
The global apparel sector, long associated with linear production and rapid consumption cycles, has increasingly turned to circular models as a means of addressing environmental concerns. Among these are resale platforms, product take-back schemes, and material recycling initiatives. While such programs are often discussed in optimistic terms, their actual environmental efficacy remains variable. Life cycle assessment (LCA), as a methodical and comprehensive framework, allows for the systematic evaluation of these business models in a manner that is both quantitative and context-specific.
Circularity, in its most basic form, implies the extension of material utility across multiple cycles of use, recovery, and transformation. Within the apparel industry, this concept has materialized through several operational formats. Resale platforms encourage secondary use; recycling programs seek to recapture fibers for reintegration into supply chains; and take-back schemes aim to consolidate post-consumer goods for sorting and redirection. Although these interventions may suggest a move toward resource conservation, LCA often reveals a more intricate picture.
Resale and Secondhand Markets
In the case of resale, environmental performance is heavily influenced by what is referred to as the displacement rate – that is, the degree to which a secondhand purchase substitutes for the acquisition of a newly manufactured garment. Gray et al. (2025) have shown that the environmental benefit of resale declines significantly when it merely supplements, rather than replaces, new consumption. Furthermore, logistical requirements, such as packaging, warehousing, and transportation, introduce additional burdens that must be included in the system boundary of the analysis.
Take-Back Programs
Textile take-back programs, similarly, are contingent on a wide range of variables. While collection and sorting infrastructure exists in many regions, the effectiveness of these systems is undermined by fiber blends, poor labeling practices, and inconsistent garment construction standards. According to figures published by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2017), less than one percent of collected textiles are currently recycled into new clothing, with the majority either downcycled into insulation and rags or exported to secondary markets, often with little transparency regarding their ultimate destination.
Textile Recycling
The technical limitations of recycling processes, particularly in relation to fiber integrity and contamination, further complicate the environmental profile of such systems. Zamani et al. (2015) conducted a comparative assessment of virgin and chemically recycled polyester, finding that while recycled fibers can result in lower climate impacts under certain conditions, the advantages are contingent upon factors such as energy source, transportation distance, and processing efficiency. When these variables are not optimized, the environmental performance of recycling may approximate or even exceed that of conventional production.
The Role of Life Cycle Assessment: Clarifying Assumptions and Outcomes
The utility of LCA in these contexts lies in its capacity to identify and quantify trade-offs that are otherwise obscured by the narrative appeal of circularity. For example, Roos et al. (2016) documented how certain recycling techniques may achieve reductions in greenhouse gas emissions while simultaneously increasing water use or chemical exposure.
In addition to evaluating the direct impacts of business models, LCA provides insight into broader system-level concerns, such as scale effects, consumer behavior, and the actual rates of product recirculation. It also serves as a foundational tool for the development of regulatory frameworks. As Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programs gain traction in jurisdictions such as the European Union and several U.S. states, LCA data are being used to inform material fee structures, design criteria, and performance metrics.
In conclusion, while circular business models in the apparel sector present a set of potentially valuable interventions, their success must be assessed using robust environmental accounting methods. Life cycle assessment offers the precision and transparency necessary to evaluate these programs not in abstraction, but in operational reality. In doing so, it ensures that decisions regarding design, recovery, and reuse are informed not merely by intention, but by evidence.
References
Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2017). A New Textiles Economy: Redesigning Fashion’s Future. Retrieved from https://ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/a-new-textiles-economy
Gray, S., Sadhukhan, J., Druckman, A. et al. A comparison of circular business models using life cycle assessment, focusing on clothing retail, distribution and use. Int J Life Cycle Assess (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367...
Roos, S., Sandin, G., Peters, G. M., Spak, B., Schwarz Bour, L., Perzon, E., & Jönsson, C. (2019). Guidance for fashion companies on design for recycling. Mistra Future Fashion Report 2019:08.
Zamani, B., Sandin, G., Svanström, M., & Peters, G.?M. (2015). Environmental Assessment of Swedish Clothing Consumption: Six Garments – Sustainable Futures. Mistra Future Fashion Report.