How is the durability of a fashion product assessed?

This is the third article in a series about regulations and directives that are part of the European strategy for sustainable and circular textiles and that are radically changing the regulatory landscape for the fashion supply chain.

 

The European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) has published the preparatory study to support the development of implementing measures of the European Regulation on Ecodesign Requirements for Sustainable Products (ESPR - Regulation (EU) 2024/1781) for the textile sector. The study is available at the following link: Third Milestone JRC Study

One of the most interesting, yet most complex, aspects of the study concerns the definition of a textile product’s “durability.”

 

A Controversial Definition of Durability

The practical definition of garment durability, carried out by a group of industry experts coordinated by the JRC, immediately has proven difficult in light of inherent characteristics of the fashion market.

The useful life of a garment is rarely determined by a lack of physical durability; rather, it is determined by extrinsic factors: aesthetic obsolescence, changes in fit or in the wearer’s lifestyle, or simply the need for new fashion items when the consumer “loses interest” in the old ones.

Physical “robustness” can serve as a primary functional factor only for “basic clothing” or essential wardrobe items. For “fashion-first” garments, technical durability often exceeds “cultural” durability, making it difficult to frame durability as a standardised Ecodesign requirement.

The JRC document clearly acknowledges the unique characteristics of fashion products and the difficulties in defining and measuring “emotional” or “extrinsic” durability and focuses exclusively on requirements related to physical robustness or “intrinsic durability.”

 

The logic of the JRC’s evaluation system and the risks for high-quality materials

The JRC has proposed a 1-to-10 rating scale for product robustness, based on laboratory tests compliant with standards such as ISO 12947-2 for abrasion resistance (Martindale method), ISO 13934-1 for tensile strength, and ISO 3759 and 15487 for dimensional stability and appearance after washing.

This method, however, can lead to contradictions. To elevate a trendy garment from a “Score 4” to an “8” on the JRC scale, manufacturers might be incentivized to use specific fibre blends or chemical coatings simply to pass ISO stress tests.

Producing physically ‘long-lasting or durable’ garments that lack charm reduces consumer satisfaction. The risk is that greater “mechanical” durability will overshadow “emotional” durability: the pleasure of wearing garments made of fine, delicate materials—such as silk or cashmere—often and keeping them, which, while lacking the strength of synthetic fibres, creates a deeper connection. Creating products that withstand fifty washes but are worn only five times paradoxically results in resource waste.

 

The debate on durability in the fashion market must therefore remain open. The issue is highly complex and requires consideration of the many characteristics of materials and fabrics that ensure the longest possible “useful life” on the market.