Fashion’s Nature Debt: COP16 and the Call for Biodiversity Action
The Bergstrand Team look at why fashion can no longer ignore its biodiversity impact
“Every element of what we wear comes from nature.” — Professor Dilys Williams
As leaders, scientists, and industry stakeholders gathered over two weeks in Cali, Colombia, for the 16th UN Conference of the Parties on Biodiversity (COP16), the fashion industry was confronted with an urgent call to address biodiversity loss with the same intensity as climate action. Unlike the upcoming COP29 on climate change, COP16 exclusively addresses the biodiversity crisis, calling for industries, including fashion, to align with goals for habitat protection and ecosystem restoration.
This year’s COP16 took place amid alarming events across the globe: devastating floods in Spain, severe fires in the Amazon, and shrinking carbon sinks across northern forests. Together, these crises highlight a key outcome from COP16: climate and biodiversity are interconnected challenges that must be addressed in unison to prevent further ecological collapse.
Understanding Biodiversity in Fashion
Biodiversity refers to the rich variety of living nature–from plants and animals to entire ecosystems, which form the essential framework that enables all production, including fashion. Fashion draws directly from nature, sourcing raw materials like cotton, linen, silk, leather, and wool, while oil-based synthetics indirectly impact biodiversity through extraction and pollution. Every fibre, dye, and material originates from or affects biodiversity in some way. And while fashion benefits from nature’s resources, its rapid extraction processes disrupt ecosystems, degrade land, pollute waterways, and contribute to species declines.
The relationship between fashion and nature has created a complex ‘debt’ where biodiversity is taken from faster than it’s replenished. Today, biodiversity is declining at rates estimated to be a thousand times the natural background rate, destabilising ecosystems that sustain life, economies, and industries globally.
Nature and Climate: Two Sides of the Same Coin
Climate action and biodiversity conservation have been seen as separate issues. COP16 challenged this division, with ministers from around the world emphasising the need for a unified approach to these twin crises. As COP16 president Susana Muhamad has repeatedly stated, nature and climate are “two sides of the same coin.” Without tackling biodiversity loss, climate resilience cannot be achieved.
To reinforce this shift, the 2023 Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework—often compared to the Paris Agreement for nature—outlines a target to protect and restore 30% of the world’s land and oceans by 2030. For fashion, this means engaging in biodiversity goals with the same rigour applied to carbon targets. After all, protecting biodiversity-rich resources is in the fashion industry’s keen interest because of its high dependency upon these materials. Despite this dependency, industry attendance at COP biodiversity summits is still less pronounced than at climate COPs. A change here could bring substantial, long-term benefits to the fashion industry by fostering a stable and regenerative resource base.
A Growing Sense of Accountability in Fashion
Encouragingly, some brands are taking strides to support biodiversity, though these steps are still dwarfed by the industry’s overall scale. Companies such as Kering, LVMH, and Inditex are now making significant financial commitments to restore ecosystems affected by their supply chains. Gucci-owner Kering has set science-based biodiversity targets focused on reducing water use and land impact, while brands like VF Corp (The North Face), Allbirds, and Citizens of Humanity are supporting regenerative farming programs which hope to reduce carbon footprints and enhance biodiversity.
“At Kering, our Houses’ products begin their lives in farms, fields, forests and other ecosystems around the world. The careful stewardship of these landscapes is fundamental to our continued success, and also linked to our responsibility on a broader global scale. With Kering’s biodiversity strategy, we are proud to put forth concrete targets to play our part in bending the curve on biodiversity loss, and helping to chart a course for our industry.” — François-Henri Pinault, CEO at Kering
Meanwhile, new frameworks are emerging to guide brands’ efforts in biodiversity conservation:
Textile Exchange has updated its standards to ensure low-impact materials are produced in environmentally sound ways.
The Science-Based Targets for Nature (SBTN) recently launched guidelines to set actionable targets around water and land impacts in supply chains. Kering, H&M, and LVMH are among 17 companies piloting this initiative, which includes plans to prevent habitat conversion and restore degraded ecosystems.
Finance for Biodiversity Foundation’s new initiative, FABRIC (Fostering Action for Biodiversity through Responsible Investment in Clothing), encourages transparency, regular monitoring, and accountability in biodiversity actions, aligning the industry with global conservation goals.
Additionally, the upcoming Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) in the EU will soon require brands to report on their biodiversity impacts, driving greater transparency and accountability across the industry.
Such moves show that industry leaders are increasingly aware of the responsibility—and the challenge—of integrating biodiversity into sustainable practices. However, the road ahead requires a much broader commitment.
Pathways to Biodiversity Protection in Fashion
For brands seeking to improve their biodiversity impact, several actions can help integrate conservation into their operations:
Impact assessments and strategies: Regular assessments help brands pinpoint and mitigate biodiversity risks.
Supporting regenerative agriculture: Partnering with farmers who use soil-replenishing techniques can stabilise raw material sources, ensuring a brand’s supply continuity and quality.
Clean production practices: Reducing pollutants and water usage lowers environmental costs and promotes brand credibility.
Circularity in design: Incorporating recyclable or biodegradable materials reduces a brand’s waste and can draw in new customers.
Consumer education: Raising awareness about fashion’s biodiversity impact strengthens brand transparency, building trust and loyalty with consumers.
Ready to take meaningful action? Bergstrand Consultancy can support your journey with a comprehensive biodiversity impact audit, tailored strategies, ongoing guidance to help your brand drive its biodiversity efforts. Schedule a complimentary 45-minute consultation to discuss how we can help you achieve meaningful change sooner.
A Critical Perspective on Progress
While these actions are promising, COP16 also highlighted gaps in the industry’s biodiversity efforts. Just 40% of members in the Fashion Pact—a global coalition of brands committed to climate, biodiversity, and ocean protection—have set biodiversity targets, and only 21% have implemented specific biodiversity strategies. While global biodiversity data disclosure has increased, fewer than 10% of reporting companies fully assess their dependence on biodiversity.
Fashion’s supply chain complexity often obscures its impact on biodiversity. A deeper shift will require brands to connect more directly with their supply sources, learning from and supporting local farming and production communities. Transparent audits, partnerships with regenerative farmers, and an integrated approach to conservation are crucial steps toward understanding and reducing the industry’s footprint. By reconnecting with the origins of their materials, fashion brands can redefine their relationship with nature, not merely as a resource to be used but as an entity to respect and protect.
Conclusion: Fashion’s Call to Action on Biodiversity
The message from COP16 is clear: the fashion industry has a critical role to play in biodiversity conservation. Protecting and restoring ecosystems is no longer just a ‘nice-to-have’ for companies but an essential part of building a sustainable future. For too long, fashion has treated nature as a bank of resources. It is now time to repay the debt by supporting the ecosystems that sustain us.
What We’re Reading This Month
In a world run by women, maybe there is no polyester… by Lucianne Tonti — Lucianne reflects on the Textile Exchange conference, where sustainability experts discussed reducing fashion’s environmental impact but largely ignored polyester’s severe ecological and health harms. She argues that polyester fuels fast fashion’s overproduction crisis, underscoring the need for systemic change in the industry.
Regulations are weighing down Made in Italy (Vogue Business) — Italy’s luxury suppliers warn that new EU regulations, aimed at boosting transparency, are imposing costly burdens on them without brand support. The famed “Made in Italy” label now faces existential challenges as suppliers struggle with rising costs and trust issues. Experts say that without stronger partnerships, Italian craftsmanship could be at risk.
Does Oeko-Tex Certification Mean a Product Is Safe? (Ecocult) — Oeko-Tex certification aims to ensure safer textiles, but it has gaps. Factories test annually for harmful substances, yet suppliers may cut corners with cheaper chemicals between tests. This inconsistency raises questions about reliability.
UN names 2026 as the International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralists (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations) — This declaration reflects the important role healthy rangelands play in creating a sustainable environment, economic growth and resilient livelihoods for communities across the world.
Esquel Group restricted from exporting to US (EcoTextile News) — The Hong Kong-based Esquel Group, one of the world's biggest textile and apparel manufacturers, has been restricted from exporting to the US under the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA).