Amidst a shifting political backdrop, the discourse surrounding corporate sustainability initiatives has become increasingly complex, particularly in the United States. Following an internal directive from the second Trump administration that subtly discouraged the use of terms associated with 'woke initiatives'—including environmental and social justice vocabulary—companies across various sectors, notably fashion, are re-evaluating how they articulate their commitments to a sustainable future. This evolving environment has prompted some entities to retract from their eco-conscious pledges, while others are steadfastly embracing more precise and genuine communication strategies to circumvent accusations of superficial engagement and political backlash.
Sustainability in the Spotlight: Reshaping Corporate Communication Amidst Political Headwinds
Earlier this year, two months into the second Trump administration, US federal agencies began to internally circulate a list of nearly 200 terms, such as \"climate crisis,\" \"clean energy,\" \"diversity,\" and \"gender,\" that were to be restricted or avoided in official communications. This move, reported by The New York Times, sent ripples across various industries, signaling a more challenging environment for companies advocating for sustainability and social equity.
The impact was immediate and widespread. Major financial institutions withdrew from the Net Zero Banking Alliance, leading to its eventual disbandment. The US Plastics Pact experienced a significant exodus, with 25% of food and beverage members and 12.5% of consumer retail members departing, as documented by the Harvard Business Review. Furthermore, substantial reductions in USAID funding curtailed numerous non-profit initiatives, including those supporting garment workers and refugee aid.
At a recent Textile Exchange conference in Lisbon, Jonathan Hall, a managing partner at Kantar, revealed that approximately 12% of companies had deprioritized climate action over the past year, while 73% maintained their previous stance, and 12% intensified their efforts. New York-based designer Maria McManus observed a growing cynicism, yet she remains resolute, stating, \"The sustainability movement is moving ahead with or without them.\"
Erin Allweiss, co-founder of No.29, a PR and brand consultancy, echoed this sentiment. She suggested that the current political climate might be weeding out companies engaged in greenwashing, making way for those with genuine commitments. This normalization could lead to more authentic and impactful brand communications, moving away from broad claims towards specific, verifiable actions.
The debate surrounding the political backlash against sustainability and the subsequent corporate retraction from related communications was a prominent topic at New York Climate Week. One perspective proposed that brands should frame sustainability as an added benefit rather than a primary selling point, thereby bridging the "say-do" gap and fostering greater trust.
The European Union's Green Claims Directive, designed to combat greenwashing, further underscores the need for transparency. Although the European Commission is currently re-evaluating its scope, the directive is expected to pass, with consumer watchdogs already imposing fines, such as the €1 million penalty levied against Shein by Italy's AGCM.
Carrie Ellen Phillips, co-founder of BPCM, highlighted the evolution of sustainability in the fashion industry. Initial ad-hoc efforts, like micro-collections of organic cotton T-shirts, often masked increasing overall consumption. Today, successful brands integrate sustainability as an intrinsic aspect of their products, leveraging it as an additional incentive for consumers. Eileen Fisher, for example, has embedded sustainability into its brand identity for 15 years, using it to complement product narratives rather than as a standalone marketing tool.
To navigate the current climate, brands are focusing on specificity. Amy Williams, CEO of Citizens of Humanity Group, noted that consumers respond better to precise, science-backed language—such as \"regeneratively grown cotton\" or \"petroleum-free dye\"—over generic terms like \"sustainability.\" Elizabeth Richman, Eileen Fisher's general counsel, emphasized the delicate balance between being truthful and informative without diluting terms through overuse. Eileen Fisher's choice to use \"organic cotton jeans\" over \"organic jeans\" illustrates this commitment to accuracy, a decision facilitated by the brand's majority shareholder structure that prioritizes long-term sustainability over short-term shareholder pressures.
In the past, many brands adopted an activist stance, making their sustainability communications overtly political. However, in the prevailing political environment, this approach may be less effective. Kristi Cameron of Eileen Fisher stated, \"Sustainability is not a political issue for us... We don’t do it to be provocative or to get attention, which might be our saving grace.\" Allweiss observed a decline in overt political activism within the fashion industry, with brands now preferring to focus on traceable origins and ethical manufacturing practices to avoid becoming political targets.
Despite brands' intentions, the political climate can render sustainability a contentious issue among investors, politicians, and consumers. Allweiss recounted how one client briefly hesitated to announce a major sustainability initiative due to fears of political retaliation. Ultimately, they proceeded, but the apprehension highlighted the precarious position businesses find themselves in when striving to operate ethically in a polarized world.
This evolving landscape underscores the imperative for brands to communicate their sustainability efforts with integrity, precision, and an awareness of the broader socio-political context. The challenge lies in fostering genuine impact while effectively conveying these efforts to a diverse audience, without succumbing to the pressures of a politicized environment.
The current political environment presents a unique crucible for the fashion industry's commitment to sustainability. It forces brands to move beyond mere rhetoric and embrace tangible, transparent actions. This shift, while initially driven by external pressures, may ultimately lead to a more robust, authentic, and impactful approach to sustainability that benefits both businesses and the planet. The brands that successfully navigate this complex terrain will be those that prioritize genuine change, communicate with clarity, and remain steadfast in their long-term vision, regardless of political tides.