Textile Materials Information for Digital Product Passport Implementation in the Textile and Clothing Ecosystem: A Review on the Role of Raw Fibers in a Substantial Transition

Abstract

The Textiles and Clothing sector is increasingly focused on transitioning towards circular production, with industrial companies striving to integrate sustainable practices. Achieving this goal can involve the rapid adoption of innovative raw fibers (e.g., biodegradable and biobased materials) and maximizing the use of recycled and recyclable fibers. This implicitly demands acting on the total transparency of information along the complex supply chains in this sector to guarantee the correct adoption of these innovative fibers. It is precisely this complexity that hinders efforts to track and accurately disclose material usage. To address this issue, this paper presents a systematic literature review to explore the main challenges in adopting technologies like digital product passports, which can help track materials information along supply chains to support sustainable transitions. The analyzed articles were selected by excluding student thesis works, non-retrievable articles, papers that had a different focus, and literature published before 2020 or in non-institutional journals. The 53 resulting contributions are analyzed through a thematic analysis and discussed, focusing on identifying key material-related data that should be monitored to ensure responsible material use and strengthen sustainable production practices in the Textiles and Clothing sector, thereby guaranteeing control over material use and preventing premature disposal.

1. Introduction

The Textiles and Clothing (T&C) ecosystem is in the spotlight for the transitional transformation of industrial companies towards circular production, and this is a consolidated reality. The T&C ecosystem, by definition, “encompass[es] all activities that help transform natural and manmade fibers into yarns and fabrics and use these to produce a range of final products—from clothes, carpets, home textiles to industrial filters and medical textiles” [1].

This production-oriented configuration highlights the environmental consequences of manufacturing goods in this sector [2]. The fashion industry is estimated to be responsible for 10% of global carbon emissions [3,4]. Approximately 80% of all clothing produced worldwide is landfilled or incinerated [5], with the figure rising to 87% for clothing produced solely in the EU [4]. Moreover, only 1% of used clothes are recycled into new garments [4], as the technologies needed to recycle clothing into virgin fibers are slowly emerging (e.g., Renewcell and Infinited Fiber). Microplastic pollution is another major issue: the microplastics found in oceans come in consistent percentages from microfibers released by synthetic fabrics, most of which are shed during the first few washes [4,6]. Additionally, textile production is estimated to account for about 20% of global clean water pollution, mainly due to dyeing and finishing processes [4].

At the social level, studies and news events underlined the industry’s negative impacts (i.e., poor working conditions, health and safety issues, and human rights abuses) [7], and it has been estimated that legal minimum wages represent only 20% to 50% of a living wage [8].

At the economic level, the rapid rise in recent years of “fast fashion” businesses and their uncontrolled production methods increased both the negative environmental and social sustainability measures [9].

This profile made the fashion industry one of the most polluting [10] and problematic; therefore, solid governmental intervention has been planned. Regulations and directives in the EU (Figure 1) aim to address key themes, including Respectful and Secure Work Environments, Better Wage Systems, Resource Stewardship, Smart Material Choices, and Circular Systems.

In European jurisdictions, different actions have been promoted over the years and are constantly being updated.

Starting from ratifying the Paris Agreement and subsequent Fashion Industry Charter for Climate Action [12], the European Union converged its efforts in defining a set of sustainability strategies, policies, and action plans [13]. In 2015, the European Commission adopted the first circular economy action plan [14]. Still, in 2020, with the New Circular Economy Action Plan (CEAP) [15], a more operational version of the first document, the T&C sector started to gain particular attention. With the premise that textiles are one of the most polluting production categories, this document highlights actions that need to be taken to change assets in T&C production modes. The proposed strategy focused on the sustainability and circularity of textiles, centering on this topic from the perspectives of industrial competitiveness and innovation.

In particular, actions to boost the adoption of textile reuse and recycling practices can be categorized into four precise actions:

• New textile products must be conceived according to eco-design measures (i.e., fit for circularity, ensuring the uptake of secondary raw materials, boosting the market for sustainable and circular textiles, tackling the use of hazardous chemicals and materials, and facilitating access to reuse and repair by users);
• Provide incentives and support product-as-service models, circular materials, and production processes, and increase transparency through international cooperation;
• Achieve high levels of separate collection of textile waste;
• Increase the sorting, reuse, and recycling of textiles through innovation and encourage industrial applications and regulatory measures (e.g., extended producer responsibility).

To get even narrower, in 2022, the European Commission adopted a sector-oriented package of measures (proposed in the CEAP), named the “EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles” [16]: a document that underlines the significant impact of the production and consumption of textile products on the environment and precisely addresses sectorial production and consumption, due to the considerable footprints of the T&C ecosystem in the environmental, social, and economic perspective. Stressing the importance of durability, repairability, recyclability, and the recycling of fibers, the strategy also emphasizes the urgency of avoiding the use of hazardous materials, minimizing incineration and landfilling, as well as increasing respect for the environment and social rights in the productive chain. In fact, this document dedicates a consistent space to producers’ responsibility for their activities and products throughout the value chain, underlining the necessity of significant control in the journey from fiber production to the final product’s end-of-life management. This document also outlines specific actions and introduces the Digital Product Passport (DPP) as a tool in the T&C sector (

Table 1. Actions of the EU strategy for sustainable and circular textiles.

Objectives [The Strategy aims to create a greener, more competitive sector that is more resistant to global shocks.]	Actions [The Strategy lays out a forward-looking set of actions.]	Implementation
All textile products placed on the EU market are durable, repairable and recyclable, to a great extent made of recycled fibres, free of hazardous substances, produced in respect of social rights and the environment	Set design requirements for textiles to make them last longer, easier to repair and recycle, as well as requirements on minimum recycled content	The Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation, proposed in 2022, creates a framework to set ecodesign requirements for products, including textiles.
”fast fashion is out of fashion” and consumers benefit longer from high quality affordable textiles	Introduce clearer information and a Digital Product Passport	The Empowering Consumers in the Green Transition Directive and Green Claims Directive, proposed in 2022 and 2023, aim to tackle greenwashing.
profitable re-use and repair services are widely available	Reverse overproduction and overconsumption, and discourage the destruction of unsold or returned textiles	The “Reset the Trend” campaign (#ReFashionNow) was launched in 2023 to raise awareness about sustainable fashion.
the textiles sector is competitive, resilient and innovative with producers taking responsibility for their products along the value chain with sufficient capacities for recycling and minimal incineration and landfilling	Address the unintentional release of microplastics from synthetic textiles	The Waste Shipment Regulation, proposed in 2021, will help restrict the export of textile waste.
	Tackle greenwashing to empower consumers and raise awareness about sustainable fashion	Transition Pathway for the Textiles Ecosystem, published in 2023,and the European Circular Economy Stakeholder Platform (since 2018) promote and foster cooperation between industry, public authorities, social partners and other stakeholders.
	Introduce mandatory and harmonised Extender Producer Responsibility rules for textiles in all Member States and incentivise producers to design products that are more sustainable	Calls have been launched under Horizon Europe to further develop technologies and processes increasing the circularity and sustainability of the textiles sector.
	Restrict the export of textile waste and promote sustainable textiles globally	In 2023 the Commission proposed a revision to the Waste Framework Directive to introduce mandatory and harmonised Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes for textiles in all EU Member States.
	Incentivise circular business models, including reuse and repair sectors	In 2023 the Commission launched a plan to update and revise the Textile Labelling Regulation.
	Encourage companies and Member States to support the objectives of the Strategy

).

Lastly, in 2023, the European Commission published the “Transition Pathway for the Textiles Ecosystem”, co-created by the Commission and relevant actors in the sector [17], and adopted a proposal for a targeted revision of the Waste Framework Directive [18], introducing mandatory and harmonized extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes for textiles in all EU Member States. In these two documents, the Commission outlines a roadmap to support the transformation of the T&C sector, taking into account the needs of stakeholders, economic resilience, and sustainable requirements in its plan. The Transition Pathway, in particular, defines a framework to facilitate the transition of the textile ecosystem towards greater circularity and sustainability by 2030. To this end, it announces actions along the textile value chain, including fifty actions divided into eight building blocks. In the document, competitive strengths and challenges are declared, and a focus on different topics is provided.

Among others, guaranteeing a high-quality and valuable production is the starting requirement. Companies can achieve this peformance objective, it is asserted, through the rapid integration of innovative raw materials (integrating, e.g., biodegradable or biobased fibers, as well as optimizin the use of recyclable and recycled fibers), enhancing business practices centered on reuse, repair, recycling and circularity (e.g., maintaining strong leadership value chain segments, tackling overproduction or premature disposal of final products, and adopting product-as-service practices), while leveraging design and creativity to synthesize these objectives into economic resilience.

The plan is ambitious but efficient; however, one of the major concerns still uncovered relies on the difficulty in mapping all the information on the material origin and end-of-life because of the T&C supply chains: the high level of complexity and interconnectedness in supply chains affects the control and the information disclosure concerning materials usage in the T&C. Therefore, a systematic literature review is proposed to understand and define what the main difficulties in the adoption of the digital product passport as a tool for the T&C ecosystem are and, specifically, how the materials must be monitored all along the T&C supply chain to guarantee sustainable transition objectives. This analysis can provide an essential baseline for homogenizing information already adopted in T&C DPP research activities and case studies, with a focus on material-related information for transforming T&C production.

2. Methodology

A systematic procedure for the literature review [19] was adopted to ensure rigor and repeatability in analyzing the literature, providing a critical assessment of the existing literature [20].

Systematic reviews aim to collect and analyze all research addressing a specific topic. Therefore, a variation in the PRISMA statement [21] was adopted (Figure 2): the PRISMA methodology was, in fact, enriched with additional literature derived from the reading activity, as outlined below and in the Supplementary Material.

Two different queries were explored in principal literature databases (i.e., Scopus, Web of Knowledge, and Google Scholar; Google Scholar was included due to the limited number of articles available in other repositories). We retained the same nomenclature (i.e., query 1: “Digital Product Passport” AND “fashion”, yielding 53 records; query 2: “Digital Product Passport” AND “textiles”, yielding 52 records). The searches were filtered as needed, excluding irrelevant records (i.e., in Google Scholar, only scientific articles in English have been filtered to be displayed, excluding citations, while no filters have been applied to Scopus or Web of Knowledge).

The authors compared the results to remove duplicates from the count: of the 105 retrieved records from the different databases, only 58 were further considered for the review.

According to the PRISMA method, eligibility criteria were defined and applied to the selection process to limit the literature to the relevant studies. Respectively, the selection was refined by the following a priori criteria:

• Exclusion of student thesis works.
• Exclusion of non-retrievable articles.
• Exclusion of papers describing case studies that are too narrow or have a different focus from the T&C ecosystem (e.g., articles focused solely on fashion trends).
• Exclusion of literature published before 2020 or published in non-institutional journals.

There were 37 eligible contributions included in the analysis; however, upon reviewing the collected literature, some gaps emerged. Relevant articles were cited in the works, but were not retrieved through the queries. Therefore, it was deemed necessary to introduce additional literature to complete the analysis through a snowballing activity [22], resulting in the inclusion of a total of 15 articles in the initial analysis.

The resulting number of studies was then analyzed by the authors according to thematic analysis [23] to understand and delve into three main topics:

• Supply chain transparency and product traceability in the T&C sector;
• Limitations to the implementation of the DPP as a tool in the T&C sector;
• Materials’ role in the T&C ecosystem and the DPP implementation.

A total of 53 articles and reports were analyzed, and the complete list is available in Appendix A.

The number of contributions collected comprises 31 journal articles, 9 proceeding papers, 3 books or book chapters, and 10 reports, primarily retrieved through snowballing activity. The thematic analysis was conducted through a reading and highlighting of elements in the articles.

The bibliography reflects an interdisciplinary approach, drawing insights from environmental science, business management, technology, and policy studies. This broad perspective allows for a comprehensive understanding of the implementation of Digital Product Passports (DPPs) in the T&C sector and encourages collaborative solutions.

Following the initial reading, an in-depth examination of the role of material-related information in the analyzed literature was conducted to focus on the primary matter’s role in the Digital Product Passport (DPP).

Thematic analysis was employed by the authors to analyze the collected sources, as it provides a flexible approach to interpreting textual content. Methodological biases related to the methodology rely mainly on the inherently subjective nature of the approach and are shaped by the analyst’s assumptions, working methodology, theoretical orientation, and prior knowledge. Therefore, three main topics were used as lenses to explore the collected literature: (a) supply chain transparency and product traceability related elements; (b) limitations of the introduction of DPP technology in T&C ecosystems; and (c) materials’ role in the implementation of DPP technology in T&C ecosystems. The relevance of the collected information was evaluated by scouting information about the collected bibliography, giving priority to contributions made by experts in the field.

Therefore, case studies were retrieved to highlight the state of the art.

3. Results

From the thematic analysis, three main themes are recurring:

• It is necessary to increase transparency in information disclosure to implement technologies such as the DPP and share information along textile supply chains.
• There are some important limitations to the introduction of DPP technologies that have been analyzed in the provided literature.
• The role of materials in T&C ecosystems and DPP implementation is crucial from the perspective of a sustainable transition; therefore, it has been analyzed as a topic to highlight minimum material-related information that should be considered in design and production.

3.1. Supply Chain Transparency and Materials Traceability: The Challenge

The T&C transition presents specific problems linked to the “shape” and the “nature” of the ecosystems themselves. First, one of the critical discussions in this transition concerns the long and globalized supply chains characterizing the fashion sector, which usually involves relationships between companies at opposite ends of the planet, with a high level of intercrossing [24]. Due to the wideness and capillarity of the T&C ecosystem worldwide, coping with the T&C’s current activities in conjunction with Circular Economy and Sustainable Development strategies opens an intricate environment of work [25]. According to Stridsland et al., “[T&C ecosystem] is characterized by […] short product life cycles (especially in fast fashion segment), tremendous product variety and complex as well as fragmented supply chains.” T&C supply chains are usually defined as “a complex multi-actors buyer-driven production chain.” For example, retailers sell apparel but rarely produce goods; manufacturers have different functional capabilities, but every company adopts methods and tools that are not standardized, hence difficult to track [26]. Since traceability is crucial for sustainability and material use monitoring, allowing companies to assess their products’ environmental and social impact is essential for aligning with circular economy principles, emphasizing the lifecycle of products and the importance of reclaiming and recycling materials [27]. Objectives, scopes, and actions to implement traceability in T&C supply chains have recently been explored and systematized [28]. However, the disclosure of information in this production ecosystem is still generally limited, particularly among SMEs and in fast fashion sectors.

Supply chain transparency is crucial since every previously mentioned action by the European Union, and the implementation of technologies (such as the DPP), is based on the assumption that data availability is easy and accessible. Traceability practices allow companies to “follow” products from their origin to the end consumer, which can help in verifying sustainability claims and reducing fraud [2,29,30]. Increased transparency can lead to improved sustainability practices because when companies disclose their supply chain processes, they are more likely to adopt innovative materials and practices that are sustainability-oriented, as they are held accountable by consumers and regulators [13,31]. Companies that adopt transparency measures, such as traceability, can leverage these initiatives as a competitive advantage, e.g., by enhancing brand reputation and consumer trust, and reducing the risk of greenwashing—mainly unintended [7]—especially as sustainability and transparency become increasingly important to consumers [26,27,32,33].

In real life, data sharing is not yet a common practice for several profit-related reasons, and the implementation of the DPP, in general, is somewhat threatened. Despite the benefits, several challenges hinder the implementation of transparency initiatives, including data fragmentation (which is further exacerbated by the lack of transparency throughout the supply chain), a lack of standardization, and high costs associated with tracking and reporting [24]. This is true at all levels, including material-related information. While technology can facilitate and support transparency, there are challenges related to the cultural aspects of data sharing among different stakeholders in the supply chain. Companies may be reluctant to share sensitive information due to competitive concerns or fear of liability [34,35]. Moreover, ensuring data quality and accuracy remains a critical challenge [36,37]. Joint initiatives can help to standardize practices and enhance the overall transparency of the supply chain [38,39]. Diverse attempts from non-governmental organizations emerged over the last few years, engaging a considerable number of enterprises in the T&C sector and demonstrating the importance of monitoring and traceability in the transition of T&Cs [40].

In the last version of the Fashion4Good report (2023) [40], the authors declared that from the beginning of their monitoring activity, there was still a need to be more transparent regarding transparency in the T&C sector, and this indirectly means that information disclosure is the first mandatory step to guarantee material recirculation.

Even though the transparency level of principal fashion brands worldwide could perform better, as the report says, the reason is not due to a lack of tools for monitoring and tracing supply chains in the sector [41]. Physical tracer technologies relevant to the textile industry, which can be used to create an open-source guide, are already available on the market. All interested parties can identify which tracer technologies are best suited for their specific traceability motivations, use cases, and scope (Figure 3).

The use of physical tracers, in conjunction with digital technologies such as blockchain and the DPP, can significantly enhance transparency by providing reliable records of transactions and product histories [30], serving as collectors of reliable and verifiable information, including that on materials and their origins. In principle, DPP technology enables all stakeholders to access reliable information about the supply chain [43,44], and advances in digital technologies allow for the real-time tracking of products throughout the supply chain, thereby enhancing traceability. This ability could provide advantages for companies in terms of monitoring and tracking [43]. Using technologies such as blockchain systems could help accurately track waste from its source through recycling, ensuring accountability, and reducing contamination. While in theory this is feasible, in practice it remains limited by technical, economic, and governance barriers.

In summary, achieving transparency for the T&C supply chain is a significant challenge: cultural changes within organizations are mandatory and required, as well as economic investments.

Companies must foster a culture of openness and accountability, which may require training and changes in internal processes [45]. Supply chain transparency requires collaboration among stakeholders, including suppliers, manufacturers, and retailers. Building a transparent T&C ecosystem must be seen as a collective effort demanding engagement across the entire supply chain [46,47]. Addressing these challenges through collaboration, regulatory frameworks, and cultural shifts is essential for creating more transparent and sustainable information management (including materials) with companies in the first line encompassing tangible actions.

3.2. Limitations to the Implementation of a DPP in the T&C

According to the thematic analysis of the literature, implementing DPP in the T&C ecosystem is a topic of growing interest [2] that faces several similar limitations. The DPP is a core component of the European Union’s Eco-design for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR) since the vision is to make it easier for consumers, businesses, and regulators “to access product-specific information related to sustainability, circularity, and legal compliance” [2].

Integrating the DPP into existing company systems is complex since many manufacturers and retailers need to update or replace their IT infrastructures to support the new system, which can incur significant costs and resistance to change [48], and staff need to be trained on the new practices associated with the DPP. The need for specific skills in digital and sustainable practices can hinder the adoption and effectiveness of the system [45]. Moreover, changing established habits in the fashion sector takes much work. There is a specific cultural resistance to adopting new practices, especially in an industry known for its traditional and often fast-paced approach [35]. Finally, managing and protecting data associated with the DPP are significant concerns. Companies must ensure that sensitive information is protected, further increasing the system’s complexity [47], even though the disclosure of production data may enhance sustainability and generate a significant reduction in environmental impacts [49]. This uncertain panorama can be summarized into three main concerns regarding the adoption of DPP in the T&C ecosystem.

3.2.1. Lack of Standardization

More standardization is needed for data formats and information sharing, especially in material-related data, an issue that can hinder interoperability among different stakeholders. Not having industry-wide standards for data formats and types to be included in DPPs results in different companies using different formats and criteria, making it challenging to create a unified system that works for all [44,50]. This inconsistency can lead to confusion and inefficiencies, hindering the adoption of DPPs across different companies and regions [47]. Different areas and countries may have varying regulations regarding sustainability reporting and product transparency. This regulatory variability can affect how data is collected and shared across the supply chain. If companies are required to comply with different standards in different jurisdictions, they may need help creating a cohesive DPP that meets all regulatory requirements. Currently, there is no universally accepted framework for what should be included in a DPP, leading to significant discrepancies in the information reported by different companies. Some companies prioritize environmental impact data, while others focus more on social responsibility metrics. A unified approach must be revised and shared to maintain the credibility of DPPs [31,39].

3.2.2. Data Fragmentation and Privacy

The T&C supply chain is often fragmented, stratified, and globalized, making it challenging to gather and maintain accurate data across all levels. It follows a tangible difficulty in consolidating and standardizing data necessary for effective DPP implementation [51]. This blurry environment immediately raises concerns over data privacy and security, which can deter companies from fully participating or sharing sensitive information, as mentioned in Section 3.1.

Implementing DPPs necessitates collecting and storing a wide range of data, including product specifications, supply chain logistics, sourcing information, and potentially sensitive business information. This raises concerns about the types of data being collected, who has access to this data, and how it can be used. Companies may hesitate to share detailed information about their supply chains, production processes, or proprietary technologies, fearing exposure to competitive disadvantages or intellectual property theft [44]. Again, even if some tools already exist and are on the market (see previous Figure 2), a consolidated material–information structure remains unavailable today.

3.2.3. Investments in Technology and Employees’ Education

The implementation of DPP in T&C ecosystems necessitates significant investments in technological infrastructure. This includes acquiring advanced tracking and tracing technologies, data management systems, and communication networks to facilitate real-time data sharing across the supply chain. Investments in Internet of Things (IoT) devices, blockchain technology, and cloud-based platforms are critical for ensuring that DPPs can function effectively and provide accurate and up-to-date information [47,52]. Artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, and big data analytics offer great potential. These technologies can enhance the functionality of DPPs by enabling predictive analytics, improving supply chain visibility, and facilitating data-driven decision-making. However, integrating them requires substantial financial resources and expertise, making it essential for companies to invest in both technology and skilled personnel to manage these systems effectively [35,53], thereby creating an urgent need for workforce training and development.

Employees at all levels must understand how to use DPPs, interpret data, and respond to the evolving technological landscape. Companies should invest in training programs that focus on digital literacy, data management, and sustainable practices [54]. By equipping the workforce with the necessary skills, organizations can ensure a smooth transition to a more technology-driven and sustainable operating model [13,39].

Beyond internal workforce training, there is also a need for consumer education regarding the benefits and functionalities of DPPs. Educating consumers about accessing and interpreting DPP information can drive greater engagement and trust in the products they purchase. This can involve marketing campaigns, workshops, or community outreach initiatives aimed at raising awareness about sustainability, transparency, and the importance of informed purchasing decisions [55,56].

However, in the European environment, T&C ecosystems are mainly composed of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) [57] that may struggle to secure the necessary resources to adapt, thereby making the system more accessible to larger companies [31]. However, while the upfront costs of investing in technology and education can be substantial, companies must conduct thorough cost–benefit analyses to understand the long-term advantages of these investments. DPPs can lead to improved operational efficiency, reduced waste, an enhanced brand reputation, and greater consumer loyalty, which can result in significant financial returns. Companies should assess the potential benefits of DPP implementation against the costs to make informed decisions about their investments [34].

3.3. Materials Role in the T&C Ecosystems and DPP Implementation

Building on the above analysis, the literature highlights the central role of materials in implementing DPP and their significance in promoting sustainability and transparency in the T&C sector.

Because T&C ecosystems profit mainly from physical artifacts, the choice of materials directly impacts the circularity of fashion products. Understanding the entire lifecycle of materials (from extraction to disposal) and creating a digital version of them is therefore essential in achieving sustainable value creation and improving product lifecycles in the T&C sector [58]. The contribution of material traceability towards achieving sustainability in the textile sector is substantial, and DPPs can be used to document material information effectively [29]. The DPP, in fact, theoretically facilitates the identification of materials used in products, forces them to be sourced sustainably, and can provide information on the recyclability of materials and the proper disposal methods at the end of a product’s life cycle. This is crucial for promoting circular economy practices and reducing textile waste [59,60].

The information included in the DPP can, in fact, be used for lifecycle assessments (LCA), enabling companies to evaluate the environmental impact of materials throughout their life. This helps in optimizing material choices for sustainable product design [53]. Moreover, by documenting the materials used, the DPP supports brands in substantiating their sustainability claims. This transparency can help mitigate greenwashing and build consumer trust [7,61], as well as help consumers and stakeholders to make informed decisions [47,62,63,64].

In addition, the DPP encourages the use of innovative, sustainable materials by providing a framework for sharing best practices and research on new materials with lower environmental impacts [36,65]. Innovation in the introduction of new low-impact materials or with recycled content and regenerative imprinting may lead to a significative reduction in, e.g., GHG emissions currently spent for fiber production (Figure 4), and in general, the use of organic cotton, recycled polyester, and biodegradable fabrics play a crucial role in helping to minimize environmental footprints at all levels (water pollution/usage, soil degradation, biodiversity maintenance, etc.) [36,66,67].

On the other hand, the DPP promotes collaboration among various stakeholders by standardizing materials-related information. This collective effort can enhance the overall sustainability of materials used in fashion products [38] and subsequently assist companies in meeting regulatory requirements related to material sourcing and sustainability standards—this can be particularly important as governments implement stricter regulations regarding environmental impact [68]. However, as already stated, ensuring accurate traceability of materials throughout the entire supply chain is challenging despite the intense governmental commitment to monitoring activities [51]. Data must be collected and verified at every production stage, from raw materials to the end consumer, requiring close collaboration among all stakeholders [29]. A lack of available and accurate information can be easily defined as one of the main barriers to the current limited development of textiles’ end-of-life treatment in the industry [2].

From this perspective, the role of material in defining a DPP begins to emerge as intrinsic information that traverses the production chain. However, in some cases, the implementation of material information is relatively easy to follow (e.g., products with monomeric components). Nevertheless, materials become a significant issue for implementation within T&C ecosystems. Material selection in the design phase may significantly affect DPP by influencing the quality and accuracy of the data recorded and the final product’s environmental footprint [69].

Sustainable and easily recyclable materials can enhance traceability [2,35,70], as well as products that utilize innovative manufacturing technologies to preserve the structure of fibers [62,64]. In contrast, complex or mixed materials may complicate the definition of a DPP, ultimately undermining successful end-of-life treatments and circularity practices, and hindering effective information sharing.

In summary, materials play a crucial role in the DPP and vice versa, as they enhance traceability, support sustainability claims, facilitate recyclability, and promote innovative practices. This comprehensive information can significantly impact the fashion industry’s move towards a more sustainable and circular economy. Along the path, material-related information has begun to play a significant role in addressing the sustainability (mainly environmental) of the T&C sector, and preliminary DPP attempts have started to appear in the literature, building upon this foundation [71]. Properly documented materials can improve and enable better recycling and circularity. However, since there is no universally accepted standard format for textile data sheets, several initiatives are aimed at standardization. Formats and certifications like the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standards and the Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS) provide frameworks for documentation. Additionally, the use of the Material Declaration (MD) format and standards (e.g., the Higg Index, OEKO-TEX, and EU Ecolabel) is becoming increasingly common for sharing material information, although industry-wide adoption is still evolving. Unfortunately, these schemes do not always adopt the same taxonomy and risk being exploited as sustainability decoys for brands, enabling greenwashing on a massive scale [7,72].

Therefore, due to the centrality of material-related information in the T&C sustainable transition, supply chain transparency, and DPP definition for this sector, and a state-of-the-art analysis concerning the typologies of information currently inserted in DPP for the T&C sector, it was essential to understand if a common ground for standardizing material-related information for T&C’s DPP is emerging.

4. Discussion

Examining DPP technology across various industrial sectors, it can be summarized that the minimum data categories necessary to define a DPP to monitor, in general, include the following.

General Information: Data that identifies the product and the manufacturer, general physical characteristics of the product (such as weight, volume, and color), and information related to the geographical location of the selling facility.

Material Information: Details regarding the type and origin of the materials used in the product, any information about chemicals, end-of-life treatment, and other specifics related to the physical attributes of the product and its components. In the specific case of the T&C, this section must refer to the raw fiber or fabric origin (e.g., recycled or virgin) as well as specifications concerning its nature (i.e., inorganic, fossil-based, or bio-based).

Environmental Impact: Data relating to the ecological footprint of the product typically includes information on energy and water usage, as well as CO2 emissions. But for T&C ecosystems, other parameters also become significant for materials mapping (i.e., land occupation, water contamination, ecotoxicity, and water eutrophication).

Ownership: In the clothing and luxury goods sector, ownership can be transferred through the digital passport application. When someone buys, sells, or gifts a luxury item (like a handbag, watch, or designer clothing), ownership can be digitally transferred through NFTs, or QR univocal codes and blockchain technologies. This may potentially lead to having proof of authenticity, maintaining resale value, and facilitating after-sales services (i.e., having easier access to repair, warranty, and resale programs).

Repairability: Information on the repairability features of a product and the ‘events’ of repair that have occurred throughout its life. This may include details about the location or outlet that performed the repair, information on the nature of the repair, costs, and additional notes to provide context for the reason for the repair. For example, a luxury watch owner initiates a repair after accidental damage, with all details recorded in the associated digital passport.

Documentation: Warranty, service, insurance, and guarantee documents that can be immutably stored within the digital passport and accessed by all relevant parties.

Instructions: The DPP will store instructions and protocols for various operations such as disassembly and recycling, end-of-life management and disposal, along with procedures on how to repair, refurbish, upgrade, or reuse the product. This combined data will inform relevant stakeholders on the steps to take to effectively transition the product into the remanufacturing process, aiding circularity.

It is essential to note that several companies are currently undertaking attempts to adopt DPP technologies.

Table 2. A selection of fashion brands already adopting DPP technologies and specific key features.

Company/ Entity	Type of DPP	Key Features
Nobody’s Child	QR code pilot via Fabacus	Fiber-to-finish traceability; Tier 5 (raw material) transparency; ~110 data points per product; boosts consumer trust and supports circular fashion.
Tammam	Blockchain-based DPP (ESA collection)	Fiber-to-finish tracking; blockchain ensures data security and sustainability claims.
Bon+Berg	Public blockchain DPP (Polygon) via PicoNext	Immutable environmental data; long-term traceability even if brand ownership changes.
The Morphbag	Cloud-based QR DPP (future migration to blockchain declared)	Tracks vegan certifications, audits, and social impact (tree planting, charitable donations).
PANGAIA	ReWear Digital ID with QR (via EON)	Full lifecycle visibility; resale support; optimized for longevity and reuse.
LVMH	DPP via Aura Blockchain Consortium	Tracks authenticity, material origin, and full product history (used by Louis Vuitton, Bulgari, etc.).
Circular.fashion	Plug-and-play DPP tools	Helps fashion brands integrate circular design principles and create interoperable DPPs.
Kappahl & Marimekko	QR-based DPP pilot via Trace4Value	Over 3000 garments equipped with QR codes; supports interoperability, value chain visibility, and EU compliance.
Certilogo (partner brands)	Interactive DPP platform for luxury brands	Enhances consumer interaction; supports authentication, anti-counterfeiting, and resale (used by Giorgio Armani, Diesel, etc.).

presents some examples collected by the authors through web research to analyze the current key features of the technologies adopted by these brands.

Even if the fashion sector is undergoing a significant upheaval for the adoption of the DPP, a homogeneous version of this technology is still lacking. With regards to the T&C sector, a tailored DPP would undoubtedly contain a consistent section regarding material-related information, being one of the main topics to secure sustainability objectives in the T&C. Focusing on materials and fibers, according to the analyzed literature, a list of the necessary information for materials in use in the T&C is generically described in Figure 5.

This type of information related to materials must be produced and is interesting for numerous actors throughout the entire supply chain, from Tier 4 to Tier 0. However, the standardization of information display has not yet reached a significant level, resulting in a fuzzy environment of material information disclosure that makes material selection difficult and relies, de facto, on the textile producers’ sales abilities.

At the end of the analysis, if some topics are well envisioned (e.g., introducing technologies such as blockchains for data protection), specific questions remain uncovered: are European companies ready to introduce the DPP? Do they preview some courses or specific activities to educate their employees and improve their working routine, aligning it with EU objectives quickly? Are designers, the actual game changers, aware of their heavy responsibility in introducing innovative materials in the envisioned products?

Although an accurate overview of material-related information for T&C DPP has been envisioned, some crucial elements remain uncovered. Even if technological readiness is perceivable, mainly cultural and economic barriers still pose obstacles that, especially for SMEs, must be faced. Moreover, even if baselines of minimum required information (in this case, concerning materials) can be studied and highlighted, it is essential to confront companies and actual barriers to information disclosure (e.g., data interoperability with internal software as well as external systems, such as ERP and blockchain).

Therefore, further implementation of this work will be driven through assessments with T&C companies to highlight and underline opportunities, obstacles, and eventual difficulties in the mapping and sharing of material-related information. The authors propose conducting a series of interviews to further assess knowledge from the field.

5. Conclusions

The presented work demonstrated that the recent literature is rapidly exploring the possibility of implementing transparency, cooperation, and information sharing across the T&C supply chains. Although the premises in this direction are vast and concordant, the difficulties in implementing tracing technologies rely on multi-level reasons, from privacy and intellectual property protection to economic investments, from the education of personnel to the mapping and traceability of the supply chain itself, from the flexibility of industrial asset to the control and transparency of the whole actors participating at the supply chain worldwide. This intricate environment, coupled with the small to medium dimensions of the industries involved in the T&C ecosystem on average, is not easy to tackle or modify. In addition, to reverse the trends in the use and disposal of T&C products, a focus on materials is essential. Mono-material components and products are pretty rare in this sector. At the same time, the prime matter deployed to the T&C product’s realization is one of the primary activators of the emissions and sustainable production-related challenges for this sector. It follows that keeping an eye on existing materials and how they are used in this environment becomes essential.

The minimum information required for materials to be added to fashion products has been mapped. The missing information is how this kind of material information, even once mapped, can and must be used by companies themselves to reverse the current production models. The integration of this information into the working routine of companies in the T&C ecosystem remains an unaddressed concern.

The following steps of this work will explore intervention areas with companies to facilitate the collection and archiving of material-related information in the daily practice of T&C industries, to highlight opportunities to accelerate conversion. According to the authors’ previous work [73], the necessity of introducing material-related information management within industrial companies must be addressed by understanding the material properties and the reverberation that material choices have on production. Due to the amount of information to manage, this process must permeate industrial companies in their everyday work, considering them as dynamic and intelligent systems.

In light of the complexities identified in current textile and clothing (T&C) supply chains, future research should focus on developing scalable and integrative frameworks that facilitate the implementation of transparency and traceability mechanisms. Such frameworks should consider systemic and multi-layered barriers, including technological, economic, organizational, and educational ones, that hinder the widespread adoption of traceability tools across the sector.

Further research is needed to understand how material information can be made operational within business routines and decision-making processes. Although the types of material data to be associated with fashion products have been preliminarily mapped, the integration of such data into existing industrial workflows remains insufficiently explored. Future studies should therefore focus on characterizing and classifying materials in relation to their environmental impact and circularity potential. Standardized protocols and metrics need to be established to support companies in selecting and using materials based on life cycle thinking and end-of-life strategies. The development of decision support tools based on material intelligence could further accelerate the transition to more sustainable production models.

Therefore, interdisciplinary collaboration between materials scientists, supply chain experts, and industry professionals is strongly recommended to bridge the gap between technological potential and real-world applicability. Only through such collaborative approaches can the T&C sector evolve into an adaptive and intelligent system capable of responding dynamically to sustainability challenges.