Assessing the Social and Environmental Impact of a Clothing Reuse Business Model: The Case of Circular Thrift—An Innovative, Community-Based Startup

Abstract

To contribute to the emerging knowledge on the sustainability impacts of small, circular clothing reuse businesses in the US, we employed a case study research methodology to empirically test the case of Circular Thrift, an innovative, community-based startup business model with potential to create a circular fashion ecosystem on the firm level. Primary data on circular activities were collected on site within the first year of business operation. The Life Cycle Assessment methodology was conducted to assess environmental impact avoidance. The social impact of reused products was assessed to contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the benefits of born circular business models. Tangible environmental benefits accounted for the collection of 10,772 apparel units and resulted in the diversion of 2311.05 kg (approximately 5095 pounds) of clothing from the local landfill. Social impact accounted for 45.86% of the collected items that were given back to the local community. Empirical testing of the environmental benefits of a Circular Thrift business model makes a strong case for scaling up reusable efforts as a means to address post-consumer textile waste at the local community level within the US, where formal and government-regulated resource collection and recovery systems still do not exist.

1. Introduction

In recent years, the textile and apparel (T&A) industries are facing multiple challenges. Such challenges include overproduction and underutilization of garments because fast fashion trends pressure brands to produce more clothes quickly and cheaply [1]. Since clothing is often treated as ‘disposable’ [2], 15.42 billion kg of textile items are generated annually in US landfills, which, divided across the US population, accounts for more than 45.36 kg of clothing that is discarded per person each year [3]. Nevertheless, in light of clothing overconsumption trends in the US, textile waste streams are expected to grow. A concerning fact is that unlike the European Union Waste Directive, where member states are now required to have established system for textile waste collection within cities and municipalities, textile waste streams remain under regulated in the US at a national level.

This means that all discarded textiles are directed to landfill, and from all textiles disposed of in the US, approximately 14.7% of textiles are annually recovered for reuse and recycling [4]. Hence, another major challenge to fashion circularity in the US includes actual limits to textile reuse and recycling which prevents materials to be reused (for their primary purpose) and/or recycled (converted to new resources) [5].

Research shows that a significant barrier to increasing T&A reuse in the US is the lack of formal resource collection and recovery systems because charitable and not-for-profit organizations act as the primary textile waste diversion networks [6]. Additionally, scalable and empirically tested technologies to address the volumes of post-consumer textile waste are lacking [5]. As a result, most of the discarded textiles have been incinerated, which contributes to environmental pollution [4]. Consequently, due to increased textile production and consumption rates [7], the World Resource Institute has estimated that greenhouse gas emissions from this sector consisted of 1.025 gigatons (Gt) of carbon dioxide (approximately 2% of the 49.4 Gt full-term of global emissions) in 2019, and as emissions increase annually, it is urgent for the fashion sector to stay within a 1.5 °C trajectory and to reduce emissions by over 1 Gt by 2030 [8]. For this reason, the T&A industry needs to move to a circular economy, of which clothing reuse is a component, to meet sustainability goals and ensure that businesses operate within the planet’s boundaries.

Researchers recognize that there is considerable hope that reuse and other sharing economy business models (e.g., resell and swap) have the potential to transform society and reduce environmental impacts [9,10,11]. Guided by the concept of circular economy, the sharing economy business models in fashion industry has seen significant growth in recent years as a method of preserving already-produced sources and diverting potential textile waste from the landfills. Moreover, they are expected to thrive in the future, as the current value of global recommerce market is USD 100 billion, while it is experiencing growth at a rate that is 5 times faster than the rate of broader retail market [12]. It is also scientifically proven that extending the life of already-produced clothing through reuse can help maximize the embodied resources (e.g., water, energy, and raw materials) invested in garment production [13,14]. Nevertheless, extending the life of already-produced clothing reduces the negative environmental impacts, as consumers of second-hand clothes may purchase fewer new garments [15,16].

Industry practitioners support such viewpoints which may provide additional data. For example, ThredUp’s reuse business report claims that “if everyone bought one used item instead of new this year, we would save 5.7 billion pounds of carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions, 11 billion kilowatt hours (kWh) of energy, 25 billion gallons of water, and 449 million pounds of waste” [17]. Hence, transitioning from traditional manufacturing and linear retail business models to clothing reuse business models (RBM) is desirable due to its potential to prolong the life cycle of already-produced clothing and increase clothing utilization while decoupling the business success from natural resource use and the associated environmental impacts [18,19]. Yet, empirical research into clothing RBM is still in its early stages [5]. Specifically, little is known about the efficiency of circularity efforts in the context of “born-circular” clothing RBM located in the US [20], especially in the cases of startups that are committed to collecting, redistributing, and valorizing post-consumer textile waste [21]. Since these businesses are seen as driving forces behind a transition from a linear to a CE [22], practical assessments of RBM impacts are urgent to uncover their potential of creating a circular fashion ecosystem on a micro level [11]. To contribute to the emerging knowledge on sustainability impacts of clothing RBM, we employed a case study research methodology to empirically test the case of Circular Thrift, an innovative, US-based startup that utilizes the clothing RBM’s potential to create a more sustainable and circular fashion ecosystem on the firm level.

1.1. Circular Economy and Clothing RBM

The circular economy (CE) has received increased attention since 2010 due to the urgency of sustainable development and CE’s aspirations to remove valuable materials from waste streams by prioritizing product reuse and repair [23]. CE has also become a growingly explored phenomenon in the academic literature where it is often described as an “economic system that is based on business models which replace the ‘end-of-life’ concept with reducing, alternatively reusing, recycling and recovering materials in production/distribution and consumption processes, thus operating at the micro level (products, companies, consumers), meso level (eco-industrial parks) and macro level (city, region, nation and beyond)” ([24], p. 224).

Circular business models (CBM) are perceived to be the driving forces behind a transition from a linear to a CE on a micro-level [23]. Linder and Williander [25] define CBM as those that create value based on utilizing the economic value retained in products after use in the production of new offerings. CBM are also described as closed loop systems where materials are shared, leased, reused, repaired, refurbished, and recycled as long as possible [16]. CBM are explored in the fashion industry context as well (e.g., [26,27,28]), yet due to the relative novelty of businesses operating in this sector, existing academic knowledge on circular-born startups is still in a nascent stage [29]. At a firm level, fashion businesses identified as “born circular” are guided by Cradle to Cradle (CTC) principles since their conception [28] which distinguish them from conventional, linear fashion businesses that often struggle to transition to CBM [29]. At its basis, CTC principles require a circular approach to material flows in terms of specific waste management strategies, commonly recognized as R frameworks [6]. Each R represents a possible value retention strategy for a business to close the loop (e.g., R1—refuse, R2—reduce, R3—reuse, R4—repair, R5—recycle, and R6—repurpose); however, not all R strategies are relevant for all the waste flows. For example, when it comes to post-consumer textile waste, the most relevant and easiest strategies are to prolong garment life cycle and enhance reuse. Yet, other R strategies might be more relevant for manufacturing, and retail businesses that do not directly deal with textile waste flows. From that standpoint, CTC principles in the fashion industry are explored through the cases of businesses that promote sustainable innovation and waste reduction [26,27], low consumerism [30] product-service systems and digitalization and sharing platforms [4].

To fill the gaps in knowledge on CTC principles application left by the available literature, scientists agree that more empirical research cases are needed to showcase how material reuse firms transform their businesses using circular innovation [26,27]. This is especially true for small, born circular clothing reuse businesses in the US that are still empirically underexamined [31]. Conceptually, however, business approaches for clothing reuse business models are well-rounded [32,33]. Four methods of circular clothing reuse business models are highlighted in the literature [33]. They are: (1) clothing maintenance and repair models; (2) collaborative consumption models where clothes are shared, swapped, rented, and leased for as long as possible; (3) second-hand clothing trade and resale models; and (4) recycling models [15]. Scientists argue that some fashion businesses combine CTC strategies (reuse, repair, reduce, recover, recycle, repurpose, and remanufacture) to maximize the circularity of their operations [28], and to utilize the economic value retained in products as long as possible. Empirical assessments of such business models are essential for evaluating their impacts and effectiveness to provide tested and replicable solutions to address sustainability challenges [33,34]. Likewise, research on the successfulness of circular strategies among startups in the textile waste sector is necessary to shed light on their economic viability, market competitiveness, and overall business performance [19]. Research on circular startups in the textile waste sector is also necessary to inform policy advocacy efforts and drive supportive regulatory frameworks essential to address post-consumer textile waste at local, national, and international levels [19].

1.2. Assessment Practices Used to Evaluate Environmental and Social Impacts of Circular Clothing RBM

Clothing RBM, although commonly recognized as micro businesses, are often praised for having significant environmental and social benefits [26,27,29]. Zamani et al. [10] examined collaborative consumption models, such as clothing libraries, and demonstrated that such systems can significantly reduce environmental impact compared to fast fashion models. Similarly, Mahbub et al. [35] proposed conceptual Eco-thrift RBM (digital shop with reused items) as a business solution which helps generate wealth, and social benefits in a local community. Researchers argue that the optimal way to scale RBM impacts is to “scale out” business operations through either the model replication or the diffusion of its practices [36] which would help business expanding its geographical coverage, and increase financial turnover. Literature recognizes three complementary methods used by RBM to calculate the environmental and social impacts of their operations. The first method is the “impact avoidance approach” which focuses on decoupling RBM from resource use [18,19]. From an impact avoidance perspective, reused businesses sell already-produced garments, meaning that they decouple their operations from manufacturing and the negative impacts associated with the production (e.g., the extraction of raw materials, water, energy, the emission of greenhouse gases) [37]. Perceived from that lens, when a product life cycle is extended through the RBM to its full life cycle potential, impacts associated with producing a new garment are avoided or displaced [17].

Scientists frequently use the term “displacement rate” to assess the estimated portion of new product impact avoided by following a reuse business model [18,38]. In reality, however, it is hard to assume a 100% displacement rate as there is no scientific evidence that one reused garment fully displaces the purchase of a new garment [18]. For this reason, scientists recommend more conservative assessment rates which are ideally backed up with consumer data [39]. For example, Stevenson and Gmitrowicz [40] estimated a 30 percent displacement rate for reused clothing based on customer surveys conducted across clothing second-hand shops in the UK. Similar studies conducted in different European countries showcased higher displacement rates indicating that displacement rates differ among consumers in different geographical regions [37,41]. Precisely, Castellani’s [38], second-hand store surveys in Italy pointed to a 47 percent displacement rate for clothing, while similar surveys in Denmark and Sweden pointed to 60 and 75 percent displacement rates, respectively [42]. Paras and Pal [43], used a Markov chain approach to model clothing reuse flows in Nordic countries and found that system-based modeling can improve LCA accuracy in assessing reuse scenarios. Sohn et al. [41] compared environmental impacts of clothing in the U.S. and Europe and found notable differences in consumer behavior and production energy sources, reinforcing the need for localized reuse studies.

Researchers agree that additional research on displacement rates is needed across regions, as well in the US, to support scientific assessments of actual consumer behavior for reuse [44]. The second method used to calculate the environmental impacts of reuse business operations is known as Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of reuse models versus traditional linear business models [14]. LCA assessment accounts for all the environmental impacts starting from the initial extraction of raw materials, production, retail, use, and landfilling. Preferably, businesses should use primary data to account for impacts for all operations they control, and additionally, they may request data from their suppliers [18]. However, in cases where there are no primary data available, businesses should use available methodologies that are created for LCA purposes [18]. For example, publicly shared LCA assessment tool is ThredUp’s comparative LCA which aims to quantify the environmental savings when consumers switch from buying newly manufactured clothes to buying second-hand clothes from ThredUp [17]. LCA is the commonly applied methodology among scientific publications which focus on estimating the potential environmental impacts of circular products and processes [11]. A systematic review conducted by Abagnato et al. [1] confirmed that among recently published academic papers that are focused on LCA of circular fashion businesses, business cases under investigation were most frequently located in Europe (25 papers), Asia (9), Australia (3), North America (3) and South America (3). This trend indicates that the interest in the environmental impact of circular businesses is indeed greater in Northern Europe than elsewhere. Within identified studies, more studies explored recycling than reuse [11], whereas studies based on comparisons between reuse and recycling business benefits showcased that reuse is more beneficial than recycling [11,44].

Lastly, the literature recognizes Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) as a third method used to complement LCA environmental impact calculations by adding predictions about the social benefits of RBM [45]. S-LCA’s methodology follows the same steps as indicated for environmental LCA in the ISO series 14040 [46,47]. This method accounts for the social aspects of products, their actual and potential positive as well as negative impacts along the life cycle [47]. Commonly, S-LCA refers to stakeholder categories that are expected to have shared interests with investigated circular systems, including workers, consumers, local community, society and the value chain [48]. In recent years, the S-LCA methodology has caught the interest of many sustainability practitioners, where again, most of the investigations were conducted in Europe followed by Asia [48]. In contrast, the US-based case studies are scarce, possibly due to fewer circular reuse initiatives in the region [48]. Researchers argue that the S-LCA methodology is still under development [49] due to the complexity of social systems and the subjective nature of social factors included in the S-LCA. Therefore, it is suggested to conduct this approach in combination with the environmental assessment of the life cycle of a product (LCA) [45].

2. Materials and Methods

We employed a case study research methodology to empirically test the case of Circular Thrift, an innovative, community-based startup that utilized the circular clothing RBM’s potential to create a more sustainable and circular fashion ecosystem on the firm level. Since there is a fundamental need to scientifically measure the circularity efforts of RBM [18], especially ones located in the US, where the empirical evidence is particularly scarce [11,48], we opted for a single case study and primary data collection. Two researchers spent one year collecting on-site quantitative CT data using an Excel sheet. Itemized clothing data for all circular operations was recorded (including the number of collected clothing units, clothing item specifics, number of items diverted through swap, donations, online and offline resale) since business inception (1 November 2022) through the end of the first calendar year of the business life cycle (31 October 2023).

This study was grounded on two main research objectives. The first was to empirically test the CT’s social and environmental benefits accounting for only tangible impacts achieved within the first year of business operations within the local community. CT’s tangible social impact calculations accounted for all of the items that were collected and given back to the local community members based on their needs and wants. CT’s environmental benefits accounted for the number of total apparel units diverted from the local field considering percentage of adoption rates for all garments kept in use for primary purposes. The second research objective was to estimate the environmental impact avoidance by product category under the assumption that secondhand products fully or partially replaced the purchase of the new product [17]. To achieve the given research objectives, we opted to use a comprehensive LCA methodology developed by Green Story as the method for assessing ThredUP, an online resale business [17]. Additionally, we followed the best practices to calculate the environmental impact avoidance by product category in a more conservative manner [18]. Social impacts of reused products were assessed in addition to the environmental impact calculations to contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the benefits and potentials of born circular clothing RBM [47]. We hope that this empirical research case study of the US-based clothing reuse business model will provide scientifically proven, scalable, and applicable solutions to address post-consumer textile waste challenges in a local community, and on a micro level.

2.1. Circular Thrift Activities

Circular Thrift (CT) is a female-owned sole proprietorship established in 2022 in Bexley, Ohio with the mission to facilitate post-consumer waste collection and reuse in this demographically affluent local neighborhood (average income: USD 138,929, “Explore Census Data”, [50]). The company’s operations are built upon CTC principles, as it takes a multifaceted approach to circularity through organized clothing collection, resale, and community swaps. The goal of CT activities is to establish a localized ecosystem dedicated to clothing reuse which greatly helps prolong the lifespan of clothing while reducing the need for new garment production. CT operates without engaging in any external or paid marketing strategies, focusing instead on grassroots initiatives and community engagement to promote its mission and values. CT’s circular activities are divided into three domains consisting of: post-consumer waste collection and valorization processes, clothing redistribution using donation, resale, and community swap channels, and repairs and upcycling. CT collects used clothing, footwear, and accessories through various channels. Public drop bins are placed in locations such as the public library, city hall, and the student union at a local university. Each week, all collected items undergo a meticulous sorting process, with the assistance of volunteers. Once they are categorized, each item is labeled as suitable for donation, community resale, online resale, and/or repair/upcycle. To minimize operational costs, and environmental emissions associated with warehousing, all sorted items are stored in a dry storage place within the founder’s garage. Local clothing collection is handled using a bike trailer instead of a car (see Appendix A, Figure A1). This method is carbon neutral [51] and draws consumer attention to the project. Items designated for donation are bagged, weighed, labeled, and transported weekly by volunteers to designated local community organizations.

2.2. Measures and Approach

Primary data for reused clothing collected through CT circular activities were collected onsite in a CT storage facility owned by the CT founder. Two researchers have spent one year collecting on-site data using an Excel sheet accounting for all circular operations. Researchers recorded the total number of clothing units collected, sorted, donated, sold, swapped and trashed within the investigated timeframe. Each garment was recorded in the data including information on the brand, fabric composition, condition (e.g., new with or without label and wearable or not wearable), approximate retail value, and diversion method (donation, sale, swap, etc.). We grouped items into five product categories including “bottoms”, “dresses”, “jackets and outerwear”, “tops”, and “other” (e.g., shoes and accessories). Researchers weighed items in each product category to calculate diverted weights per item and per product category. An industrial weighting scale was used for that purpose. Additionally, apparel units managed and redistribution outlets and outcomes considering each activity were recorded in Excel.

SLAC measurements. S-LCA’s approach was used to account for all social benefits of CT activities considering the local community and stakeholders [47]. Stakeholders were identified as local entities (e.g., shelters, homeless shelters, schools, organizations, and individuals) in need of clothing donations. CT founder contacted directly all identified local entities first to ask if they are interested in receiving a donation (and they were also asked to specify the type of donations they needed). Only entities that expressed interest in receiving available donations were recognized as donation recipients. Other stakeholders are also consumers who participated in clothing swaps, resale, and repair and upcycle events [48]. Given the fact that stakeholders and clothing recipients included both disadvantage individuals in need of new clothing, but also fashion consumers interested in refreshing their wardrobes in a sustainable and cost-effective way researchers argue that stakeholder sampling is representative of broader community. CT’s tangible social impact calculations accounted for all of the items that were collected and given back to the local community members based on their needs and wants.

LCA measurements. To empirically assess the impacts of the CT business model, a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) was conducted according to the Green Story [17] methodology relying on the ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 guidelines [46,52]. As the Green Story [17] developed, to calculate the environmental impacts of reuse business operations, this LCA method for ThredUp [17], when compared to the traditional linear business models, researchers found this approach the most suitable given the similar nature of ThredUp and CT’s business operations. In our study, impact was analyzed for five product categories, “bottoms”, “dresses”, “jackets and outerwear”, “tops”, and “other” (e.g., shoes and accessories). The functional unit in this study represented an average reused clothing item taken from CT which replaced a similar new item of clothing bought by consumers in the US [6]. The average clothing item was calculated based on the weighted average garment type and fabric composition listed in ThredUp’s inventory [17]. The system boundaries in our study included all life cycle stages of new and reused clothing items except for consumer use. Precisely, new garment life cycle stages included raw material extraction, fiber and fabric manufacture, transport and end-of-life [17]. For reused clothing items, life cycle stages included collection and management of used clothing, sales, and end-of-life [17]. Impacts for fuel production, fertilizer production, and electricity generation were included across all considered life cycle stages [17].

Following Green Story [17] guidelines, some stages were excluded from the LCA assessment including packaging, distribution, use phase, human labor and clothing accessories and support materials (e.g., buttons and zippers). We also relied on ThredUp-provided data for the fabric types in each type of clothing and their weight in the inventory. They used GaBi 2018 [53] and Ecoinvent 3.4 [54] databases to collect data on fiber and fabrics sources, and data from Quantis International [55] consulting group was used for manufacturing and supply chain operations. The geographic boundaries of the study considered new and reused clothing items sold and reused in the US. Impact assessment was calculated in a conservative manner to provide more reliable results [18,38,42]. Researchers considered only a sub-sample of purchased or swapped items (n = 1803 or 16.74%) in the LCA assessments. Next, knowing that it is hard to assume a 100% displacement rate as there is no scientific evidence that one reused garment fully displaces the purchase of a new garment [18], environmental impact avoidance calculations in our analysis were further calibrated based on a 50% displacement rate, aligning with research recommendations [18,38,42].

3. Results

Considering that the first research objective of this study was to test the social and environmental benefits of the CT empirically, results reported here are based on calculations of all the activities that CT initiated since its inception through the end of the first calendar year of the business life cycle. As a result, of all these combined activities, within the given timeframe, a total of 10,772 units (n = 10,772) were collected and manually sorted by the business owner and volunteers from the community. Sorted items were categorized into product categories, based on their overall condition and reuse/redistribution potentials. The items collected included children’s and adult clothing, footwear, and accessories. Some of the items were unworn, while most of the collected items were in good condition and eligible for reuse. For example, some of the items found in a collection bin included new and still-tagged cashmere coats, Patagonia outerwear pieces (valued at USD 499), and Nordstrom’s vintage elbow-length suede gloves. From thousands of collected units, only 229 units, or 2.13% of items classified as ‘not reparable and not reusable’ (e.g., stained, significantly damaged items) were disposed of through local waste channels.

Table 1. Apparel Units Managed and Redistribution Outcomes of Each Activity.

Activity	Units Managed	Details
Targeted Donations	3137	Donated to local organizations such as schools with over 75% SNAP eligibility and local resource centers.
Goodwill	1755	Provided to Goodwill; selected primarily due to inappropriateness for schools or resource centers, not due to poor quality.
Targeted Swap	3060	Units circulated for swaps; 1265 of these were taken by attendees, directly replacing the need to purchase new items.
Resale	538	Units were resold through local online and offline events.
Discarded	229	Poor-quality items were disposed of through local waste channels.
Remaining Inventory	4077	Remained in inventory at year-end, eligible for future resale.

showcases that all the activities—collection, swap, donation, and resale—played significant roles in managing and redistributing the discarded apparel and maximizing its circulation (Table 1).

The distribution of CT activities and their contributions is displayed in Figure 1.

Inventory volumes at the time when we finalized analyses included 4077 units that were deemed eligible for future sales. Considering the inventory volume and the fact that the percentage of clothing offered at the swap (28.41%) was higher than the percentage of clothing participants adopted at the swap, (11.74%), it can be argued that the potential positive impact was not fully vetted during the first year of operations, although that impact could be higher.

3.1. Social Benefits

CT’s social impact within the first year of operation accounted for 45.86% of the collected items that were given back to the local community. The main recipient of donations was local a Resource Center that received 1519 units (14.1%) of clothing for recent immigrant families and men’s clothing, which they requested. The next recipient was a local elementary school, where more than 75 percent of children come from families that participate in SNAP (supplemental nutrition assistance plan). They received 622 units (5.8%) of children’s wear, footwear, and backpacks. a local nonprofit which serves women at risk for sexual exploitation also received 219 units (2%) of sports bras, leggings, fleece, and small sizes of denim. Local Goodwill was also one of the stakeholders that received 1755 (16.29%) good-quality items that were deemed inappropriate for schools or resource centers but eligible for resale. In addition to donations, CT also organized reused clothing swaps and clothing pop-up sales which created benefits for local community members who were willing to participate and buy or swap decently priced reused clothing. Overall, 4.99% of unites were sold through these events.

3.2. Environmental Benefits

Within the tested timeframe the collection of 10,772 apparel units resulted in the diversion of 2311.05 kg (approximately 5095 pounds) of clothing from the local landfill. Considering the total amount of units collected, 97.87% was kept in use for primary purposes. Specifically, 62.15% of units were adopted either by the individual or by the organization in need of new items, while 37.85% of units remained were included in the inventory of units suitable for new adoption. Next, researchers used Green Story’s Comparative LCA analytical tool to estimate the impact avoidance by product category under the assumption that purchased and/or swapped secondhand products fully or partially replaced the need for the new product purchase [17]. As explained in the method section, researchers considered a sub-sample of purchased or swapped items (n = 1803 or 16.74%) in the LCA assessments. First, Green Story’s impact avoidance calculations by product category listed in

Table 2. Green Story’s Impact Avoidance By Product Category.

ThredUp Categorization	Emissions (kgCO2e)	Energy (MJ)	Water (Liters)
Belts	30.8	180.4	103.7
Dresses	9.7	78.1	127
Fleece and Sweatshirts	11.4	88.4	395.5
Coats and Jackets	44	315.1	744.9
Jeans	16.9	139.9	1207.4
Leggings	8.4	63.5	246.8
Pants	18.3	142.7	537.1
Tees and Tanks—Polo	4.5	36.1	230.2
Tops, Blouses and Shirts—woven	6.9	56.9	103.1
Shorts—Denim	5.6	46.6	402.5
Shorts—Active	7.2	52.1	32.8
Shorts—Uniforms	4.9	40.5	309.4
Tops, Blouses and Shirts—Knit	6.9	56.9	103.1
Blazers	25.8	202.6	361.2
Skirts	9.5	76.6	175.7
Shoes	70.1	405.2	259.2
Scarves and Wraps	9.3	79.8	48.1
Swim	6.4	41.1	18.8
Sweaters	14.1	106.1	310
Tights and Hosiery	2.5	16.5	25.6
Headwear	3	22.9	67.1
Handbags	121.1	699.9	447.8
Tees and Tanks—Other Than Polo	4.5	36.1	230.2

Note. This table is adapted from Green Story (2019).

were used to predict impact avoidance under the assumption that purchased and/or swapped secondhand products fully replaced the purchase of the new product (this assumption is also known as 100% replacement rate) (Table 2).

To estimate the impact avoidance by product category, firstly we regrouped and recoded the product categories from Table 2 into five product categories, “bottoms”, “dresses”, “jackets and outerwear”, “tops”, and “other”.

A 100% replacement rate was achieved for 16.74% of the products (n = 1803 adopted items) under optimal conditions, where purchased and/or swapped secondhand products fully replaced the need to purchase a new product. LCA results for 1803 adopted items confirmed that product reuse has a lower impact contribution to blue water consumption than the new product purchase for all product categories. Our results showed that under an ideal scenario where CT’s secondhand products fully replaced the purchase of the new product, environmental impact avoidance by product category included 327,352.8 L of fresh water that were saved. Likewise, product reuse was confirmed to have a lower impact contribution to Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Primary Energy Demand (MJ) for all investigated products. Specifically, it was estimated that 12,002.15 kgCO₂eq of GHG were prevented, while 94,165.65 MJ were saved by diverting 1803 second-hand garments back into use (

Table 3. The Environmental Impact Avoidance by Product Category (100% Displacement Rate).

Category	Total Units (Percent)	Emission (kgCO2eq)	Energy (MJ)	Water (FWC-per l)
Bottoms	369 (20.48%)	2455.6	19,319.55	89,969.1
Dresses	222 (12.33%)	1208.85	11,921.85	21,334.7
Jackets and Outerwear	71 (3.94%)	2139.55	15,938.4	34,198.55
Tops	1037 (57.55%)	5081.85	40,124.55	176,499
Other	103 (5.72%)	1116.3	6861.3	5351.45
Total	1803	12,002.15	94,165.65	327,352.8

).

Finally, knowing that it is hard to assume a 100% displacement rate, as there is no scientific evidence that one reused garment fully displaces the purchase of a new garment [18], environmental impact avoidance calculations in our analysis were further calibrated based on a 50% displacement rate, aligning with research recommendations [38,42]. The adjustment demonstrates a significant reduction in avoided impacts compared to a 100% displacement rate (see

Table 4. The Environmental Impact Avoidance by Product Category (50% Displacement Rate).

Category	Total Units (n)	Emission (kgCO2eq)	Energy (MJ)	Water (FWC-per l)
Bottoms	369	1227.80	9659.78	44,984.55
Dresses	222	604.43	5960.93	10,667.35
Jackets and Outerwear	71	1069.78	7969.20	17,099.28
Tops	1037	2540.93	20,062.28	88,249.50
Other	103	558.15	3430.65	2675.73
Total	1803	6001.10	47,083.85	163,676.40

).

For instance, carbon emissions avoidance for bottoms is now 1227.8 kgCO₂eq instead of 2455.6 kgCO₂eq, and water savings are reduced from 89,969.1 L to 44,984.6 L. Yet, by adopting a 50% displacement rate, our analysis provides a realistic and evidence-informed estimate of environmental benefits while ensuring transparency and alignment with industry’s best practices.

Finally, our results reveal significant social and environmental outcomes achieved within the first year of CT business operation (

Table 5. CT’s Social and Environmental Benefits Within the First Year of Business Operation.

Environmental Outcomes	Social Outcomes
10,772 units collected and diverted from landfill	6695 units adopted within the first year
5095 pounds or 2311.05 kg of clothing diverted from the local landfill	1519 units donated to local a Resource Center for immigrant families
Considering solely a sub-sample of purchased or swapped items (N = 1803 or 16.74%) in the LCA it was estimated that 12,002.15 kgCO2eq of GHG were prevented, while 94,165.65 MJ and 327,352 L of water were saved by diverting 1803 second-hand garments back into use (100% replacement scenario) instead of producing ones.	622 units donated to local school for children in need
	219 units donated to local nonprofit which serves women at risk for sexual exploitation
	1755 units donated to Local Goodwill
	537 units diverted through swaps and second-hand events

Over the subsequent two years of business operations, the majority of units were removed from inventory (N = 4077), leaving only 1500 units as of June 2025.

).

4. Discussion and Conclusions

This study’s findings advance research on circular reuse clothing businesses in the US in several ways. First, our work broadly attests to the promising mainstream market opportunity for clothing RBM [19], which, according to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation [56], estimates could grow to occupy 23% of the global fashion market by 2030, valued at USD 700 billion. The quality of the collected items and the interest that local consumers showed in CT’s swaps and resale events reveal significant business opportunities to commercialize reuse and to valorize post-consumer textile waste in the future operations. Second, our empirical testing of the environmental benefits of CT clothing RBM within the first year of business operations makes a strong case for scaling up reuse efforts as a means to address post-consumer textile waste at the local community level within the US [6]. Researchers believe that CTs and similar clothing reuse businesses are paramount to divert textiles from local landfills, especially within the US where formal and government-regulated resource collection and recovery systems still do not exist [5,57].

The research team argues that post-consumer textile waste can and should be included in local waste management strategies, which can be successfully achieved through partnerships with reuse businesses, for example [57]. Some of the strategies may include incentivizing micro and meso businesses to engage in T&A reuse [24] and setting up targets for businesses in T&A waste reduction. Establishing meaningful partnerships in this sector would help facilitate and develop local reuse in line with circular economy strategies [6,30]. Third, perceived from the social standpoint, our findings indicate that CT and similar RBM have a strong potential to create social welfare and to support the community members in need of usable apparel and footwear [35]. Given that 45.86% of the collected items were given back to the local community, this suggests that under the right conditions, including a supporting policy framework, reuse can thrive in other localities within the US, helping create social welfare while reducing the environmental impacts related to premature clothing disposal through reuse.

Finally, our work reveals significant possibilities for the budding academic conversation on measuring the impact of the circularity efforts of RBM [10,14]. It is worth remembering that the impact rates resulting from LCA in this study were calculated in a conservative way capturing only 16.74% (n = 1803) of swapped and resold items during our year-long investigation. Since most of the items were reusable, and remaining inventory items (37.85%) have been identified as eligible for further reuse, the total estimated impact, in reality, would be much higher. Precisely, at the end of the 2023 reporting period, 4077 units remained in inventory and were therefore excluded from the annual benefit calculation. Over the subsequent two years, the majority of these items were removed from inventory, leaving only 1500 units as of June 2025. These remaining items are currently available for sale through multiple channels and are expected to be sold within a reasonable timeframe, preventing the creation of dead stock.

The disposition of the other items was as follows: approximately 620 units were used to support 12 community clothing swap events in 2024 and 2025; 230 units were sold through offline channels; 1127 units were donated to Goodwill; 100 units were incorporated into upcycling projects; and 600 units were donated to other organizations.

While excluded from the original calculation, the eventual redistribution, resale, and upcycling of this inventory contributed to long-term environmental benefits by extending product lifespans and diverting textiles from landfill. The steady improvements in inventory management during this period reflect a clear trajectory toward higher turnover efficiency and maximized environmental gains in future operational cycles. Therefore, it is worth noting that the described methodological challenges occurred due to measuring circularity efforts within designated timeframe which considered solely the first year of business operations [18,48]. Researchers argue that those difficulties can be remediated through diachronic assessments that would enhance more holistic perspective. Nevertheless, empirical testing of the CT presented in this study allowed us to argue without reservation that micro-level solutions, when used strategically, and systematically, have a serious, and often neglected potential to tackle and mitigate not only local, but also nationwide problems [18,36]. Those potentials deserve greater academic attention.

4.1. Research Implications

Due to methodological limitations, there is no common approach for measuring circularity efforts of circular-born RBM [18]. To our knowledge, and according to the recent literature acknowledgments [20], this research is amongst the first to empirically explore circularity outcomes in a micro business case in the US within the first year of its operations. It is our hope that our research might foster other reuse businesses in the US to scrutinize and report how their business models specifically benefit people and the planet. Investigation of the environmental benefits of the CT business case might have important implications for future research studies as this study emphasized the importance of collecting circularity data firsthand [19]. The research team argues that companies committed to circularity must collect and analyze their circular data to explore the impacts of clothing diversion and apparel reuse. In this study, consumer engagement in clothing reuse was out of this study’s scope. Researchers agree that a detailed exploration of consumer motivations for donating, swapping, and buying reused clothing in a local community would offer valuable insights into the factors that drive circular fashion practices in a specific context [6,19].

4.2. Implications for Local Communities and Business Practitioners

The significance of the CT case study is that it is repeatable across the country in roughly 4000 neighborhoods with similar population density and average household income bracket. Nevertheless, the CT business concept might apply to various geographic and demographic settings, under the condition that a business has adequate local and municipal permits to collect textile waste locally [36]. Researchers urge business practitioners and governing bodies (e.g., municipalities) in the local communities within the US to recognize the fundamental role that local partnerships (sustainable development goal 17) have to propel CE. Through the creation of local partnerships, businesses such as CT would be able to remove valuable materials from the local waste streams more efficiently while promoting product reuse and repair [29].Since most of the municipalities in the US do not engage in post-consumer textile waste management [5,6], it would be beneficial for the localities to incentivize micro and meso businesses to collect, redistribute and valorize post-consumer textile waste [19] to support CE and to facilitate circularity [24].

4.3. Limitations

This study’s findings offer context-specific views that may not fully extend to other demographic and socioeconomic conditions, subtly pointing to the enriching potential of exploring these initiatives in varied contexts to enhance the understanding of their impact and applicability [6]. Additionally, in CT’s case, the founder was mainly responsible for sorting and decision-making when determining the most adequate redistribution methods for collected goods. The decision to dispose of 229 units due to poor quality invites reflection on the criteria used for determining the lifespan and reusability of collected items [17]. Future research is needed to propose solutions for how to extend the lifespan of post-consumer goods to maximize their use, and ensure that every collected item is fulfilling its fullest physical potential [2,39]. Finally, but a critically important measure of RBM, is whether or not they reduce consumption of new garments [18,34]. Therefore, this assumption, to a certain (and currently unknown) degree, affects our findings. For example, a CT shopper may buy five secondhand items, but only three of them replace a new garment purchase, resulting in a 60% displacement rate (authors’ calculations based on Green Story formulas). Due to those realistic limitations, the research team reported both tangible environmental benefits and ideal and conservative displacement rates [17,18]. Nevertheless, the research team estimates that environmental savings, in the case of CT, might be even higher than those reported in the Green Story LCA. The reason for this is that Green Story LCA accounts for at least 20% of GHG and MJ in the distribution and redistribution phases. However, those impacts are avoided in the CT business case since the bicycle with the attached collection card was used as an optimal and carbon-neutral transport method, [51] although these reductions in GHG and MJ were not accounted for in this study.