Any meaningful study of the textile sector needs to take full account of how water travels through interconnected global trade systems. Where water is managed unsustainably, each stage of the value chain can have distinct, adverse impacts on water, creating risks for companies, investors, governing bodies and, most critically, the local communities that are central to the industry. Along with clear evidence of rising demand and mounting water risks, several uncertainties remain that will shape the evolution of the textile sector.
Where water is managed unsustainably, each stage of the textile value chain can have distinct, adverse impacts on water, creating risks for companies, investors, governing bodies and, most critically, the local communities that are central to the industry.
Long-term forecasts indicate a rapidly expanding fibre market, yet the path of future demand remains uncertain. Current projections suggest that global fibre production will reach 169 million tonnes by 2030, from 109 million tonnes in 2020. But future consumption will be sensitive to factors such as economic growth, income distribution and consumer preferences. The rapid growth of middle-class consumers in Asia and Africa could push demand even higher than current estimates. Conversely, policy measures or shifting social norms may accelerate demand for reuse, rental or second-hand markets, meaning that growth in virgin textile demand may be lower than currently anticipated. Even so, demand for second-hand and used textiles varies, and can sometimes reinforce unsustainable or even illicit practices such as textile dumping that externalize the costs of managing textile waste to other – often poorer – countries.
Given the volumes of water needed to produce, use and recycle textiles, together with the needs of the farmers, textile workers and communities living near production sites, the textile industry is particularly vulnerable to future climate and water stress impacts. While climate models indicate greater drought, flood and heat risks in South and Southeast Asia, for instance, the exact timing and severity of such risks remain uncertain. This creates unpredictability for both local water availability and supply-chain resilience. Localized hydrological changes, such as groundwater depletion rates or shifts in monsoon rainfall, could magnify risks faster than industry or policymakers anticipate.
The dynamics of economic and trade policy, demand and environmental characteristics together create a shifting landscape of producers, exporters and importers. For clothing brands, the impacts of tariffs and trade disruptions in globally fragmented, cost- and labour-intensive supply chains have highlighted the vulnerabilities of the sector’s reliance on low-cost labour in distant sourcing countries. Some US brands have increasingly looked to regionalize, or ‘nearshore’, their supply chains via manufacturing in Latin America, while their European counterparts are turning their focus to suppliers in Eastern Europe, Turkey, Morocco and other North African countries.
However, moving towards more regionalized supply chains often overlooks the opportunity to embed genuinely sustainable practices, labour standards and regulatory leadership into core operations. Relocating production closer to a country or region where textiles are marketed and consumed may continue to exploit weak labour protections and shortcomings in regulatory frameworks and capacity. Some nearshoring hubs notably face significant water stress. For example, Mexico – leveraging its geographic proximity, existing trade agreements and competitive labour market – is increasingly important as a nearshoring location for US textile and finished garment production. But Mexico is also facing serious water stress, with many northern states projected to suffer deepening scarcity between now and 2050. The regulatory capacity of such hubs remains highly uncertain, bringing significant risks that water stress will shift to new geographies with impacts that are difficult to mitigate.
Among the most promising policy options to address the detrimental environmental impacts of global demand for textiles is the scaling of circular economy measures. The EU has been notably active in this area, including through the EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles (see also Table 6), but the timeline for effective implementation and enforcement is not always clear. EPR schemes may take years to operationalize, and are expensive to establish and operate. Outside the EU, circularity policies are patchier, and enforcement of measures to counter illegal waste exports or uncontrolled dumping remains weak. As a result, the global-scale water benefits from circularity remain speculative.
Growers of fibre crops such as cotton need to investigate regenerative agriculture and sustainable production practices. Early results from regenerative cotton pilots in India and Pakistan, for instance, show encouraging reductions in water use and chemical inputs. However, questions remain about scalability across diverse geographies, economic viability for smallholder farmers, and whether yields can be maintained without additional subsidies or premium pricing from brands.
Adoption of water-efficient production technologies can potentially reduce the water-related impacts in key water-scarce producer regions.
Adoption of water-efficient production technologies can potentially reduce the water-related impacts in key water-scarce producer regions. Case studies from Bangladesh demonstrate the technical feasibility of large-scale water reuse, recovery and recycling. However, widespread uptake is constrained by capital costs, weak regulatory enforcement and low margins across much of the garment sector. Whether such technologies can be rolled out more widely across the industry, rather than being concentrated in flagship facilities serving premium buyers, will determine their long-term impact.
The factors outlined above highlight the degree of uncertainty surrounding how quickly the global textile sector can adopt sustainable production practices. While technological and agricultural innovations show real potential, their effectiveness ultimately depends on a mix of policy incentives and rigour, financial investment, sector-wide adoption of best-practice standards, and changing consumer behaviours.
