![“The scope of what’s being covered really matters; even though it appears to be measuring the same thing, oftentimes, it's not,” said Bluesign’s Kevin Myette continued. “I wish there was a silver bullet … [but] you have to do the work. You have to actually understand.”](https://martav.shop/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/FunctionalFabricsFair2024.jpg?w=910&h=511&crop=1)
Certifications play a crucial role in the textile industry. From Oeko-Tex and B Corp to Worldly and the ZDHC, companies in pursuit of green-cred have a lot of options.
Independent think tank International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) compiled more than 400 voluntary sustainability standards across the global market. In turn, many find that navigating certifications is rocky, riddled with queries. What’s the difference between ESG and CSR? Are they accredited? Where? Which one is better?
Related Stories
A keynote session held during Functional Fabric Fair this week emphasized the same concern.
The Performance Days-powered tradeshow returned to New York City July 21-23 at the Jacob K. Javits Center in Manhattan to bring together more than 150 sustainability-certified suppliers showcasing materials and technologies for the summer 2026-27 seasons.
“Functional Fabric Fair is committed to providing the foundation the industry needs to thrive—through education, sourcing and meaningful connections,” said Steve McCullough, Functional Fabric Fair’s event vice president. “This year’s program is more relevant than ever, offering real solutions at the intersection of performance, responsibility, innovation and community.”
Of those relevant, real solutions were expert and educational sessions. Such as the “Certifications: Which Ones Matter?” panel, which comprised six crucial concepts. The first, naturally, recognized the importance of baselining environmental compliance.
Moderator Charles Ross defined a certificate as an “official classification where the standard is a level of quality.” Their primary purpose, he said, arises from the acknowledgment that “certain parts of the fashion and textile industry have taken shortcuts around acceptable standards.”
“Acceptable is my choice of word for what I consider decent or respectable behavior,” Ross, a lecturer at the Royal College of Art, said. “If we all acted honestly and paid living wages and used chemicals responsibly, there would be no need for such standards or certifications.”
Certifications, then, essentially serve as mechanisms ensuring adherence to decency when self-regulation has proven insufficient. Which means the plan of attack is of equal importance. Panelist Kevin Myette highlighted that effective certifications should focus on proactive problem-solving methodologies rather than merely identifying issues.
“It’s critically important to understand how you arrive at solving the problem,” said Myette, director of global brand services at Bluesign, which acts as a third-party partner to assist companies in achieving sustainable progress. “The best analogy is, like, do you best protect your castle with a guard at the entrance or the exit?”
What “truly matters” is how a certification can make an organization better, Myette continued; thus, the best practices not only find problems but also offer solutions and support corrective actions within the supply chain. The initial vision for tools like the Higg Index, per Myette, was to serve as a process for continuous organizational improvement, not just judgment. The inability to reach that original destination is disappointing, he said, but not a dealbreaker—it could simply be a communication breakdown.
Another issue? Option overload. For companies (see: brands), determining which certification(s) to choose is a common challenge simply due to the sheer number of possibilities (see: price points). Consultants like Patagonia alumnus Todd Copeland, then, can help by gathering the macros—compiling a company’s options on costs, benefits and requirements.
“I’ll usually give [companies] sort of a white paper on all of those different-but-relevant things,” the owner and founder of Copeland Consultancy said. “That gives an organization a chance to decide where they want to spend their money; some of these things, it’s more than just paying to get involved. You have to put effort. Some are more money, less effort. Some are more effort, less money. Some are more money and more effort; it really depends on what they’re looking for and what resources they found.”
Those specific details are then weighted against factors like a certification’s scope, methodology and geographical applicability. It’s why Copeland tries to dig in and give a summary of how these things are different.
“Some things are different in their geography; you can only apply them in certain places and not others,” he continued. “When you look at a global supply chain: What’s the scope of this standard? Is it narrow? How deep does it go? All of these things are relevant to look at. It doesn’t make it easy, but it’ll make me knowledgeable about making the right choice.”
Those choices span various dimensions of sustainability beyond environmental impact—covering supply chain complexities and human rights violations as well as chemical responsibility and traceability advances. Panelist Jan Beringer emphasized what all arenas of certification schemes have in common: Testing.
“Testing is usually trying to take care of the worst-case scenario so that product is treated in the worst possible way to increase the safety of the consumer the highest possible way,” said Beringer, senior scientific expert at Hohenstein. He noted that the process “evolves constantly” to address new substances and legal requirements, ensuring product safety.
“Basically, it all goes back to responsibility,” Beringer said. “The brand, in the end, is responsible for putting products on the market.”
