The Paris Agreement...without America

“Putting America First in International Environmental Agreements”

During President Trump’s inauguration event, he signed several executive orders, one of which specifically directed the United States to withdraw from any agreements, pacts, accords, or similar commitments made under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The President instructed the US Ambassador to the UN to promptly submit a formal written notification of withdrawal from the Paris Agreement under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.

What is the Paris Agreement??

The Paris Agreement is an international climate pact between 196 nations aiming to decrease global warming to 2.7˚F (1.5˚C) long term. The nations agree to work together to keep global warming below levels that could lead to an environmental catastrophe. Iran, Libya and Yemen are the only countries not part of the agreement.

[Timeline]

2015

• In 2015 at the inception of the agreement, countries made individual commitments to do their part in combating harmful environmental woes.  

2017

• Upon taking office, President Trump proclaimed that he would pull the US from the agreement as it “didn’t reflect US values”.  Trump instead pleaded to “…steer American taxpayer dollars to countries that don’t require, or merit financial assistance in the interest of the American people.” 

2020

• President Trump’s efforts were formalized November 4, 2020, however, this was the day after President Joe Biden won the presidential election. 

2021 - Present

• When Biden took office, he immediate reentered the US into the agreement.  Throughout his entire term, President Biden supported the pact pledging to provide targets to cut emissions of greenhouse gases by reduction of burning of coal, oil and natural gases.  Specifically, Biden most recently submitted a plan, the US International Climate Finance Plan, to cut US greenhouse gas emissions by more than 60% by 2035. President Trump’s executive order proposes the immediate revocation and rescission of Biden’s plan

Ultimately Trump believes that the United States could be a model for other countries in regard to environmental and economic objectives and therefore doesn’t have to be a part of the large international pact.  He is prioritizing US economic efficiency and consumer choice.  The Order boasts of how over decades, the US has increased energy production, reduced air and water pollution, and reduced greenhouse gas emissions on its own accord with the help of “sensible policies”. 

However many would argue that the US should join forces with those leading the charge against the climate crisis.  The US is the second largest annual carbon-polluting country (behind China) and is responsible for 22% of CO2 in our air since 1950.  

European Climate Committee members view the withdrawal as unfortunate, and reductive even.  They believe the efforts to slow climate change are much “stronger than any single country’s politics and policies”.  Climate disasters such as droughts, wildfires, and superstorms are undeniably becoming worse and much more frequent. 

Those assertions will not divert Trump’s agenda to – Put America First, Make America Great Again 

Fashion Forward - Paris Agreement

The global apparel industry is a major contributor to the climate and ecological crisis, accounting for approximately 2-8% of global carbon emissions, as well as consuming around 215 trillion liters of water each year. Adopting sustainability and circularity within the textile value chain has the potential to significantly shift cultural norms and practices, leading to reductions in environmental impact and positive climate outcomes.  Through aligned ambition with the Paris Agreement, key stakeholders in the fashion industry (many American companies/brands) have pledge renewed commitment efforts to the Fashion Industry Charter for Climate Action.  Signatories to the Fashion Charter (130 companies and 41 supporting organizations) agreed to set science-based emission reduction targets and to create a decarbonization plan to limit the global temperature rise to 1.5˚C above pre-industrial levels.

---

Sources:

The White House. (2025). Putting America First in International Environment Agreements (Executive Order, Jan. 20, 2025) https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/putting-america-first-in-international-environmental-agreements/

Global Carbon Project. https://www.globalcarbonproject.org/index.htm

United Nations Climate Change. Global Change Action. Fashion Charter - Participants. https://unfccc.int/climate-action/sectoral-engagement-for-climate-action/fashion-charter/participants#eq-1

Taking a Global Look at EPR

Fashion, fashion, fashion…the industry that impacts our environment more than we actually realize. As we navigate through our daily lives, buying the things we need, many may not want to acknowledge how much we consume and dispose of. Approximately 9.5 million tons of clothing are disposed of in North American landfills every year, and 85% of the world's textiles are burned or disposed of in landfills.

The fashion and textile industry on the whole accounts for approximately 10% of global greenhouse-gas emissions, when so many of the materials can be recycled or repurposed in some manner. Hundreds of billions are lost annually due to the underuse and negligent discarding of what we buy. Consumer waste is reversible by us. We can simply buy less, or shop sustainably which in part requires a shift in our consumption patterns.

Fighting Production Waste at its Source

Fashion designers and big brands produce large quantities of merchandise primarily based on consumer demand. And although many of those brands have taken voluntary action and initiatives to remedy their environmental impacts those individual efforts are not powerful enough. Circularity programs, reduction of single-use packaging or even switching completely to non-biodegradable packaging are great strides in neutralizing greenhouse gases; however, these sustainability targets cannot offset the carbon emissions produced by the fashion and textile industry. 

Some stakeholders and legislators believe EPR, or Extended Producer Responsibility, is a viable and sustainable answer to the ultimate elimination of textile waste. EPR is a policy approach that governs the post-consumer lifecycle of a product. It ensures that producers, not just brands, designers nor consumers, are held both physically and financially responsible for the appropriate disposal of their products and packaging. The enforcement of this policy is designed to promote positive environmental diversion, and in some cases incentivize producers for costs associated with end-of-life management.

EPR Regulation by Country

image source: E. Watkins and S. Gionfra (2019) How to implement extended producer responsibility (EPR): A briefing for governments and businesses

Now I will give a small summary of how various countries have adopted EPR policies to shift responsibility to industry players (at all stages of the fashion value chain). This production waste, no matter the country, contributes to differing forms of environmental pollution including the degradation of water, air, and soil. Without significant improvement on operational and environmental shortcomings, systemic issues will continue, preventing the achievement of a net positive industry by 2050.

• Netherlands - adopted EPR for textile taken effect July 1, 2023

  In the Dutch market, EPR applies to all parties along the supply chain, as they are all co-responsible for managing product waste from the fashion industry.  Textile manufacturers and importers are responsible for collecting, recycling and overall waste management phase of clothing and occupational clothing brought into the market, as well as the costs of logistics of the system.  The municipalities are responsible for covering all acquired cost associated with collecting and recycling any discarded clothing from their residents.

  Source: https://business.gov.nl/amendment/fashion-chains-must-collect-discarded-clothing/

• Italy

  Italy’s Ministry of Environment and Energy Security (MASE), Ministry of Enterprise and “Made in Italy” (MIMIT) drafted a decree that obligates producers and key stakeholders in the textile industry to implement EPR provisions regarding design, production, disposal, and recycling of textiles.  Italy is aiming towards innovation in circular economy model within the textile supply chain, according to standards set by European Parliament for EU members.  

  Directive (EU) 2018/851 introduces provisions at improving the reuse and recycling of waste.  Moreover, Italy drafted a new decree stemming from this EPR directive which introduces important changes for textile manufacturers and producers:

1.    Producers will take responsibility for financing and organizing the collection, preparation for re-use, recycle and recovery of textile waste.

2.    Producers must use financial and organizational means to collaborate with relevant authorities using management systems to coordinate textile waste collection, as well as “selective collection systems to increase the quality of textile fractions”.

3. Pay environmental fee necessary to provide waste management service. 

4.    Manufacturers (especially of design phases of textile products) must ensure that they develop, produce and market products “suitable for reuse and repair”.  Products should contain recycled materials, have durability and is easily repairable.

5.    Meet specific eco-design measures such as: bio-compatible textile fibers and natural materials; eliminate hazardous components and substances (i.e. microplastics)

Source: https://www.twobirds.com/en/insights/2023/italy/2023-02-16-responsabilita-estesa-dei-produttori-nella-filiera-dei-prodotti-tessili

• South Korea

  In South Korea, there are mandatory packaging recyclability evaluations that are in place to ensure that all producers, manufacturers, and importers comply with Korean Packaging Recycling Cooperative.  This measure has been in place since 2020.  Korean packaging producers and importers also must comply with a recyclability grade labelling system.  All elements of certain types of packaging (paper cartons, glass & PET bottles, aluminum cans and composite material film sheet) must be assessed individually as excellent, good, average, or difficult to recycle before proper authorities will confirm and provide Certificate of Packaging Grade. 

  EPR contribution rates are set based on packaging grades, which could potentially promote the use of “excellent to recycle” packaging for all.  However, if manufacturers and importers are non-compliant with recyclability grading system, consequences may include a ban on manufacturing, importation, sales or a fine not exceeding 1 billion KRW.

  Source:https://www.loraxcompliance.com/blog/env/2020/01/31/Republic_of_Korea_changes_its_recycling_requirements.html

• Japan

  Since the early 2000s, Japan has been implementing EPR provisions.  Producers may utilize the national level scheme, registering with Japan Container and Packaging Recycling Association giving municipalities responsibility for waste collection, sortation, and transportation for a fee, or simply apply for approval to use an individual recycling system to handle the recycling on their own.

  Source:https://www.loraxcompliance.com/blog/env/2021/07/05/Existing_EPR_policies_in_Asia_Pacific.html

• France

  In French territories, marketplace sellers (e.g. Amazon) offering products and merchandise must comply with EPR regulations.  To avoid suspension, french authorities require merchants to register packaging material usage according to the total number of consumer sale units.  There are one of three packaging declarations schemes for sellers based on the number of CSUs placed in France throughout a calendar year.

  Global VAT Compliance suggest sellers license a smaller number of materials than the first filing of each year.  GVC offers one of three packaging declarations, according to the total number of consumer sale units sold in France.

• Germany

  Similar to France, by law, Germany requires all sellers introducing products to license or declare the materials that will be used for packaging.  This must be done in advance in the appropriate agencies. Failure to comply with EPR policy obligations will result in sellers on certain marketplaces being suspended.

  Source: https://www.globalvatcompliance.com/epr-extended-producer-responsibility/

The Fashion Act Bill Revised...what's new??

On November 18, 2022, an amendment and recommitment were entered into Consumer Protection for the Fashion Sustainability and Social Accountability Act ("The Fashion Act"). Previous actions included the bill being referred to Rules (Oct. 08, 2021) and to Consumer Protection (Jan. 05, 2022). The Supporters (including local industry leaders, union leaders, labor and justice organizations, academic institutions, advocacy organizations, and leading apparel industry brands and designers) of the Fashion Act have come together to strengthen the bill and offer even more clarity, which would ultimately increase the odds of the bill passing. Their overall goal is to comprehensively address social and environmental impacts, as well as achieve emission reductions and other supply chain improvements.

Several sections of the Fashion Act were revised. Specifications for water protection and chemical management were updated. Chemical mismanagement in the fashion industry's production is significant. Therefore, efforts to curb wastewater pollution from sites where textile mills are located are being implemented. Other updates will improve biodiversity and expand enforcement provisions. There is currently no binding and effective global accountability mechanism nor international law that holds corporations accountable for their involvement in human and environmental abuses.

Lastly, the updates to the Bill will offer more mandatory due diligence criteria and include brand liability for garment workers’ rights. Joint and several liabilities between fashion sellers and garment workers will be provided. The amendment will add labor protections, allowing garment workers to bring legal claims directly to brands for lost wages. The State of New York and the Attorney General will be tasked with developing regulations for companies to comply with. Companies found to be in noncompliance will have three months to remedy matters or face the possibility of being fined up to 2% of their annual revenue. The funds will be used to benefit the workers and the fashion community.

These provisions will provide further frameworks for the global fashion industry as well as place NYC at the forefront of corporate accountability. Although we have seen several brands and designers step up to the plate to do the right thing, brand self-regulation is not enough. Many businesses have found themselves at a competitive disadvantage, which has caused their costs to rise relatively.  Thus, the absence of legislation is wreaking havoc on the planet and enlarging the enormous environmental and social footprint of the $2.5 trillion apparel industry.

Because many companies are prioritizing their bottom line, wide-reaching legislation is necessary, and lawmakers are needed to prevent loopholes and misinterpretations. Hopefully, with this Bill and others that will follow, they will present stable expectations that will guide investment decisions, as well as offer ongoing incentives to industry players for cooperation and allowing companies to make long-term strategic plans.