With London fashion week approaching, it’s a good time to freshen up and ensure your environmental messaging is on point! From claims about the composition of materials, to wider statements about your brand’s emissions or environmental initiatives, the green credentials of clothing and fashion must not be exaggerated in ads.
Sashay away, unqualified ‘green’ claims!
Here are a couple of key tips on tailoring your fashion claims perfectly to avoid making unqualified statements that could be problematic:
- Clarify the basis of environmental claims clearly in ads so they do not mislead due to omitting material information. Make sure to also explain in ads what any technical terms mean, such as ‘sustainable’. More context may be needed when a claim is ambiguous and could be understood in different ways.
- Limit the scope of claims that could be interpreted broadly. The ASA is likely to expect that broad environmental claims which are absolute in nature, such as ‘planet friendly’, are supported by a high level of evidence. Unless an ad is appropriately qualified, broad claims are likely to be seen as applying to the full life cycle of a product. So, where relevant, the scope of such claims should be narrowed with qualifying information to the specific stage or aspect of the product.
CAP’s shiny new guidance on Greenspeaking with confidence – Environmental claims in advertising, with an accompanying quick checklist, goes into further detail.
Thread carefully on ‘recycled’ claims…
In June, the ASA ruled against ads for Adidas, Uniqlo and Calvin Klein as they made unqualified ‘recycled’ claims. We’ll take a closer look at Adidas’ ad, which included the claim “Recycled Running Shoes […] Check Out Our Recycled Shoe Range Today”. The marketer explained that the extent to which products across their collections incorporated recycled materials varied.
Given the context of Adidas’ ad and the reference to a “range”, the ASA considered the “recycled” claims were likely to imply that all shoes in that range were made from 100% recycled materials. The ad did not include any qualifying information setting out the basis of the ‘recycled’ claims, and the ASA had not seen evidence to support the claims as they would likely be understood. So, the basis of the claim was unclear, and the ad was ruled misleading.
It’s important to note that the ASA takes into account the Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) guidance on environmental claims in fashion retail, which states that ads should not imply a product is entirely made of a single fabric if that is not the case.
Conscious couture? Explain any ‘sustainable’ claims
Other fashion retail marketers have fallen foul of the CAP Code’s Section 11 rules when using ‘sustainable’ claims (Lacoste, Nike and Superdry in 2025). Again, for ‘model’ marketing, it’s important to explain fully the meaning of any ‘sustainable’ fashion claim in an ad.
For example, Superdry’s ad stated, “Superdry: Sustainable Style. Unlock a wardrobe that combines style and sustainability […]”. The ASA considered that without qualification, the term “sustainable” in the ad was ambiguous, and likely to be understood as meaning that all Superdry’s clothing products across their entire lifecycle would at the very least not have any detrimental impact on the environment. Although the ASA understood 64% of Superdry’s products in 2024 contained sustainably sourced materials, Superdry had not provided evidence to demonstrate that their products had no such detrimental effect across their full lifecycle. As the meaning of ‘sustainable’ was also not clear enough in the ad, it was considered misleading.
Don’t offset the rhythm… with ‘carbon neutral’ claims
Special care should be taken with explaining the basis of ‘carbon neutral’ and ‘net zero’ claims (or similar), to avoid a fashion faux pas! CAP’s recently updated guidance on environmental claims sets out that accurate information about whether (and the degree to which) such claims are based on an active reduction of carbon emissions, or on offsetting, should be included in ads. Information about any offsetting scheme used should also be provided in ads (see further guidance here).
In 2023, the ASA investigated the claim “We’re proud to be a Carbon Neutral business” by Charles Tyrwhitt. The ASA considered that consumers would understand from the claim that the business was a carbon neutral company, and they balanced the amount of carbon emitted into the atmosphere by an equivalent amount removed.
The claim had been based on a report by a sustainability consultancy which said the brand had demonstrated their carbon neutrality. However, the ASA said there wasn’t any qualifying information within the ad outlining the basis of the “carbon neutral” claim, and concluded the ad was misleading.
Hold made-to-measure evidence
For a ‘seamless’ campaign, all environmental claims must be supported with robust evidence that is relevant, current and specific to the exact claim being made.
Calvin Klein’s recent ad stated “Calvin Klein tops for women. Responsibly sourced collections – Recycled, Organic & More”.
The marketer said that a significant proportion of the women’s tops range incorporated some form of recognised third-party certified material, namely a recycled, organic and/or otherwise certified material. However, as no tops in the range were entirely made from recycled, organic or otherwise certified materials, the ASA considered the ad’s claim had not been adequately substantiated. In this case, the evidence about certified materials did not support the broad nature of the claim made.
If you just need someone to help tie your fashion (or environmental) campaign all together, our high-fashion Copy Advice team provides tailored advice.
More on
-
Keep up to date
Sign up to our rulings, newsletters and emargoed access for Press. Subscribe now.
