Fast Fashion Sector: Business Models, Supply Chains, and European Sustainability Standards

Abstract

One of the core objectives of the European Green Deal in pursuing climate neutrality and sustainable development is the decarbonization of high-impact sectors. Among the most polluting is the fast fashion industry, driven by linear business models that must urgently transition to circular economy frameworks and decarbonized supply chains. Fast fashion poses significant environmental and social challenges due to its high greenhouse gas emissions, excessive resource consumption, and substantial waste generation. To foster greater sustainability within the sector, this study examines environmental indicators defined by the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), in accordance with the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) 2022/2464. Aligned with the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), these standards aim to harmonize sustainability disclosures and enable better decision-making across environmental, social, and governance (ESG) dimensions throughout Europe. This research focuses on five key environmental aspects—climate change, pollution, water resource management, biodiversity, and circular economy/resource use—across four leading fast fashion brands: Mango, Zara, H&M, and Shein. Using an exploratory web-based methodology, this study evaluates how these companies disclose and implement ESG strategies in their supply chains. The central aim is to assess the sustainability and resilience of their operations, with particular emphasis on communication strategies that support the transition from linear to circular business models. Ultimately, this study seeks to highlight both the progress and persistent challenges faced by the fast fashion industry in aligning with ESG and ESRS requirements.

1. Introduction

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), established in 2015 as part of the 2030 Agenda, provide a comprehensive framework for addressing global environmental, social, and economic challenges. Aligned with these objectives, the European Green Deal (2019) constitutes the European Union (EU)’s strategic initiative aimed at achieving climate neutrality by 2050. This strategy seeks to foster a sustainable and resource-efficient economy by integrating digitalization and circular economic principles into key industrial sectors [1].

A central focus of the European Green Deal is the transformation of highly polluting industries into circular economy models to facilitate decarbonization. Among these industries, the fast fashion sector presents substantial environmental challenges due to its significant carbon emissions, resource consumption, and waste generation. This sector accounts for approximately 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions [2,3], with textile production and dyeing processes consuming vast amounts of water and energy [4,5]. Furthermore, the industry produces considerable textile waste and pollution, including chemical contaminants, microplastics, toxic dyes, and synthetic fibers that pose severe threats to ecosystems [6,7,8,9,10,11].

In the pursuit of enhanced sustainability within the fast fashion sector, this study examines the environmental standards delineated in the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) under the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) 2022/2464. These standards, aligned with the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), seek to facilitate harmonized sustainability disclosures, thereby supporting informed environmental, social, and governance (ESG) decision-making across Europe. This research specifically focuses on five key environmental aspects: climate change, pollution, water resource management, biodiversity, and circular economy/resource use. Additionally, it explores the transition from a linear business model to a circular one.

The principal objective of this research is to analyze the sustainability and resilience of the fast fashion supply chain while evaluating transparency and communication strategies employed in business model transitions and sector-wide decarbonization efforts. More specifically, this study addresses the following research questions:

• How do sustainable initiatives in the fast fashion industry align with ESRS?
• What challenges does the sector face in complying with ESRS?

To address these inquiries, this study conducts a comparative case study analysis of four major fast fashion brands: Zara, H&M, Shein, and Mango. These brands were selected based on their significant market influence, business strategies, and sustainability challenges [12]. The analysis evaluates their business models, supply chains, sustainability initiatives, communication strategies, transparency, and compliance with EU environmental regulations under the ESRS (Directive 2022/2464).

The research methodology follows an exploratory approach, employing case study analysis based on publicly available disclosures published on company websites. The case studies assess each brand’s sustainability strategies within their supply chains, compliance with ESRS, and effectiveness in communicating their environmental impact and transition toward circular economy practices.

Following this introduction, this study presents a comprehensive literature review, followed by an empirical analysis of sustainability disclosures across four major fast fashion brands. The discussion section interprets the findings in the light of the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), highlighting both alignment efforts and compliance challenges. This paper then concludes with strategic recommendations aimed at improving sustainability practices and enhancing regulatory compliance within the fast fashion industry. The final section outlines this study’s research limitations, acknowledging methodological constraints and suggesting pathways for future research to strengthen the empirical and theoretical foundations of sustainability reporting in this sector.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Fast Fashion Business Model and Its Impact

The existing body of academic literature examines the evolving patterns of consumer behavior within the fast fashion industry. Historically, fast fashion has been predicated upon affordability and extensive variety, particularly appealing to younger consumer segments such as Millennials and Generation Z. These demographics prioritize rapid access to emerging fashion trends over product longevity [13,14]. This consumer preference has facilitated the proliferation of “disposable” fashion; however, an observable paradigm shift is underway, with increasing consumer demand for sustainability and ethical production practices. Notably, Generation Z exhibits a heightened awareness of sustainability concerns, including pollution and textile waste associated with the fast fashion sector, and endeavors to reconcile sustainability considerations with the affordability of fast fashion [5,15,16].

The fast fashion production model, distinguished by its high turnover rates [17], is characterized by the mass production of low-cost apparel that is rapidly replaced. This consumption-driven, “use-and-dispose” framework generates significant environmental and social externalities [18,19]. Moreover, the advent and widespread adoption of social media platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, and Pinterest have accelerated trend cycles, wherein influencers and brands propagate new “see-now, buy-now” styles [20,21]. Although Generation Z acknowledges the environmental ramifications of fast fashion, the omnipresence of social media continues to perpetuate consumerist tendencies [22]. Empirical research suggests that the confluence of fast fashion dynamics and the psychological phenomenon of fear of missing out (FOMO) perpetuates sustained consumer demand [17,23].

Within this context, the fast fashion industry confronts the challenge of balancing cost efficiency with the principles of ethical consumption [18,19]. Empirical evidence indicates that fast fashion products are frequently worn only a limited number of times, culminating in a substantial escalation in textile waste [24,25]. The sector adheres to a linear economic model predicated on frequent purchasing and the rapid obsolescence of fashion styles, leading to extensive resource depletion, waste accumulation, microplastic pollution, and broader environmental degradation [13,23,26]. Concurrently, digital marketing strategies and the acceleration of consumer lifestyles have further reinforced this mode of consumption [18,20,22].

In response, the fashion industry is actively pursuing sustainable business models that align with the principles of the circular economy [27,28,29]. This paradigm shift advocates for responsible consumption practices [30], consistent with the objectives outlined in the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, specifically Sustainable Development Goal 12, which emphasizes “Responsible Consumption and Production”. Furthermore, regulatory initiatives such as the “New Circular Economy Action Plan” and the “EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles” aim to compel fashion conglomerates to integrate circular economy principles, thereby mitigating waste generation and fostering recycling efforts [24,31]. A pivotal objective of these initiatives is to reconfigure consumer behavior pertaining to clothing usage, thereby reducing waste and greenhouse gas emissions [32,33]. This strategic transition is imperative, given that the fashion industry is recognized as the second-largest global polluter [34]. Moreover, the linear model underpinning fast fashion is typified by rapid turnover, agile supply chain production [35], low production costs [36], expedited distribution processes [37], targeted digital marketing campaigns [37], and prevalent consumer shopping addiction [17,38]. These factors underscore the exigency of transitioning toward a circular model that minimizes environmental impact across the supply chain [5]. The detrimental environmental consequences of fast fashion are largely attributed to excessive water consumption, substantial textile waste generation, the emission of toxic chemicals, and microplastic contamination [5,15]. Nevertheless, the affordability of fast fashion products poses a significant impediment to resolving these environmental challenges [6,7,16,39].

The carbon footprint of the fast fashion industry is indicative of its considerable pollution levels and extensive resource demands, particularly in relation to water and energy consumption [9,40,41]. The sector is estimated to contribute approximately 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, synthetic fibers exacerbate environmental stress, accounting for approximately 20% of global wastewater pollution [9,10,42,43]. The accelerated turnover of inventory results in substantial textile waste accumulation, estimated at 92 million tons annually [9]. If incinerated for economic efficiency, these waste materials further augment the sector’s carbon footprint; if relegated to landfills, they contribute to the proliferation of microplastics and hazardous chemical contamination in soil and groundwater, thereby exacerbating environmental degradation [9,44]. Furthermore, the dyeing and chemical processing of textiles pose significant risks to aquatic ecosystems [8]. Synthetic fibers such as polyester, nylon, and acrylic, which are widely utilized due to their low cost and durability, discharge microplastics during washing cycles, posing a substantial ecological hazard [9,10,11].

2.2. European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) in Fast Fashion

Directive 2022/2464 promotes the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) to ensure transparency and uniformity in corporate sustainability disclosures, aligning with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the European Green Deal. Specifically, the 12 standards (environmental, social, and governance-related) are structured into 169 indicators (85 environmental, 58 social, and 26 governance-related), enabling the comparison of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) actions and initiatives. These 12 standards aim to achieve uniformity (harmonization across EU companies), transparency (verification for investors, consumers, and stakeholders), and compliance with European regulations. The twelve standards include two general ESRS standards, ESRS 1 and ESRS 2. The first establishes the general principles that EU companies must follow when disclosing sustainability information, providing a conceptual framework and rules to ensure consistency and comparability in sustainability reports. The second specifies the mandatory disclosures that companies must include in their sustainability reports. Following these two general standards, there are five environmental standards with indicators focused on climate change mitigation, aimed at reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in line with the Paris Agreement (

Table 1. Environmental indicators according to ESRS.

Climate Change Indicators (ESRS E1)	Pollution Indicators (ESRS E2)	Water and Marine Resources Indicators (ESRS E3)	Biodiversity and Ecosystems Indicators (ESRS E4)	Resource Use and Circular Economy Indicators (ESRS E5)
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions (Scope 1, 2, and 3)	Air Pollutant Emissions (NOx, SOx, fine particles, etc.)	Total Water Consumption	Impact of Operations on Biodiversity	Consumption of Renewable and Non-Renewable Materials
Carbon Emission Intensity	Discharges of Pollutants into Water and Soil	Water Footprint	Protected Areas Affected by the Company	Recycling and Reuse Rate of Materials
Use of Renewable and Non-Renewable Energy	Production and Management of Hazardous and Non-Hazardous Waste	Impact on Marine and River Ecosystems	Ecosystem Restoration Measures	Waste Generation and Management
Climate Transition Plans	Use and Release of Hazardous Chemicals	Wastewater Discharges and Treatment	Sustainable Use of Natural Resources	Circular Economy Strategies
Climate Risks and Opportunities	Pollution Reduction Plans	Water Conservation Strategies	Collaboration with Conservation Entities	Waste Reduction in the Value Chain
Financial Impact of Climate Change on the Company	Air Pollutant Emissions (NOx, SOx, fine particles, etc.)
Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Measures

).

Regarding climate change indicators, Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions correspond to metrics aimed at reducing direct, indirect, and value chain emissions. In terms of climate adaptation, the indicators assess the identification and management of climate risks, including climate resilience plans and physical risk assessments (e.g., droughts and floods). For water resources and marine ecosystems, key indicators focus on water usage and the protection of aquatic ecosystems, including metrics on water consumption, impacts on water sources, and the preservation of marine biodiversity. In the area of sustainable resource use and circular economy, the indicators measure the management of material resources and the integration of circular economy principles, emphasizing the use of recycled materials and waste management practices. Regarding biodiversity and ecosystems, the indicators evaluate the impact of business activities on terrestrial and marine biodiversity. The pollution category focuses on identifying and minimizing pollution in air, water, and soil.

In the case of social standards and equal opportunities, companies are required to report on policies and practices that promote equality of opportunity. Key indicators include measures of gender pay disparities and diversity in leadership. Regarding working conditions, the indicators assess the work environment, employee well-being, and workplace safety. Key metrics include accident rates, access to training programs, and health policy implementation. Concerning human rights, companies must verify that they respect and promote human rights within their operations and throughout the supply chain.

Governance standards emphasize business ethics and integrity in corporate practices. The indicators focus on anti-corruption measures and fraud prevention, in addition to corporate ethics policies. These standards highlight the integration of sustainability into corporate strategies and decision-making, with a focus on sustainability leadership and ESG performance assessment. Other metrics detail social investments, the reduction in business travel, and the management of community conflicts.

2.3. Sustainability Frameworks in Fast Fashion

The environmental and social challenges associated with the fast fashion sector have become increasingly visible in the context of global sustainability frameworks, such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the European Green Deal. Fast fashion directly intersects with at least five of the seventeen SDGs. These include SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), and SDG 5 (Gender Equality), given the high proportion of women working in low-paid garment manufacturing roles [45].

Moreover, both the European Green Deal and the EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles aim to align production and consumption with climate neutrality goals, promote circular business models, and eliminate environmental harm from textile value chains [46]. The new Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and its associated European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) serve as operational mechanisms that require fashion brands to report transparently on both environmental and social impacts, including working conditions, living wages, and human rights due diligence [47].

Despite this, the fast fashion model often remains misaligned with these principles. Many brands continue to rely on opaque supply chains, low labor standards, and mass overproduction to maintain low prices and short lead times. Addressing both environmental and social dimensions of sustainability—particularly through improved traceability, ethical sourcing, and labor rights enforcement—will be critical for ensuring that the sector contributes meaningfully to the broader SDG agenda and complies with emerging regulatory frameworks. In this study, we address the environmental dimensions of compliance with European regulations due to their significance in corporate sustainability reporting and accountability [48].

2.4. Supply Chain in Fast Fashion

The fast fashion supply chain encompasses the design, production, and distribution of garments within accelerated cycles to accommodate dynamic fashion trends. This model necessitates high-speed and large-scale manufacturing, predominantly in regions with low labor costs, relying on inexpensive materials, subcontracted production, and rapid distribution networks to facilitate continuous product turnover. While this approach enhances commercial efficiency, it also generates significant environmental and social externalities. The advent of globalization, digital marketing, and advanced logistics has further intensified commercial activities within the sector.

Contemporary supply chain management increasingly integrates a global perspective to mitigate inefficiencies associated with fragmented logistics. Although awareness of the environmental and social repercussions of fast fashion has grown among consumers and industry stakeholders, efforts are underway to develop more sustainable supply chains. These initiatives prioritize waste reduction, energy efficiency, carbon footprint minimization, and the enforcement of ethical labor standards.

3. Methodology

This study adopts an exploratory qualitative case study approach to assess how major fast fashion brands align their environmental strategies with the European sustainability strategy. This case study analysis is based on publicly available information from sustainability reports and corporate disclosures published on the companies’ websites [49]. A case study approach is appropriate for exploratory research that seeks to understand complex, real-world practices across organizations [50,51], and evolving and heterogenous sustainability practices across organizations, particularly in a regulatory context where transparency is still inconsistent [46,52,53].

The analysis is based on secondary data collected between 2019 and 2023, which reflect the post-European Green Deal period and include implementation phases of the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (Directive 2022/2464). This time frame also reflects the pre- and post-adoption window of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), marking a shift from voluntary to mandatory sustainability disclosures in the EU [46]. Data sources include official company reports, such as annual sustainability and ESG disclosures available on corporate websites, voluntary frameworks and commitments referenced by companies, such as the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), and data from peer-reviewed academic literature, particularly where company reporting lacked completeness or standardization (e.g., [54]). Documents were included based on the following criteria: relevance to ESRS environmental indicators, European market presence, publication date (2019 onward), and source credibility. Excluded materials involved non-EU disclosures, outdated reports, or non-verifiable third-party commentary.

Four companies—Zara, H&M, Shein, and Mango—were chosen for this study due to their significant influence in the fashion industry, the diversity of their business strategies, and the distinct sustainability challenges they present [12]. Specifically, these companies were selected based on three criteria: (1) their operational presence in Europe, including supply chains or retail foot-print, (2) the availability of publicly disclosed environmental or ESG-related data; and (3) the representation of distinct business models across the fast fashion spectrum: vertically integrated (Zara), mass-market (H&M), ultra-fast fashion (Shein), and slower, design-driven (Mango) models. This selection facilitates a cross-case comparison of sustainability practices from diverse strategic approaches.

The analysis was structured using the five environmental standards of the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS): E1, E2, E3, E4, and E5. A qualitative content analysis was conducted to assess how each company addressed these indicators in its disclosures. Indicators were coded based on presence, clarity, and specificity, allowing for cross-brand comparability. Where quantitative data (e.g., emissions) were provided, these were documented, and where only qualitative claims were made (e.g., “we aim to be circular”), these were evaluated based on context, materiality, and independent corroboration when available. At the same time, particular emphasis was placed on Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions, circularity efforts, and renewable energy adoption due to their material relevance to the fast fashion sector and alignment with ESRS E1 and E5 indicators. Scope 3 emissions, which include upstream activities such as raw material extraction, textile manufacturing, and logistics, often represent more than 90% of total emissions in apparel companies [55,56]. Therefore, focusing on Scope 3 provides a more realistic assessment of climate impact than Scope 1 and 2 alone.

Likewise, metrics related to recycled content, waste reduction, and energy sourcing were prioritized because they reflect core expectations under ESRS E5 and directly support SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) and the EU Circular Economy Action Plan. Other indicators, such as biodiversity impact or water discharge, were included when data were available but were often underreported by the companies analyzed. This selective focus reflects both the availability and strategic relevance of certain metrics over others in current fast fashion sustainability discourse.

A qualitative content analysis approach was applied to evaluate how each company addressed these indicators. This method allows researchers to systematically analyze unstructured textual data within corporate reports and policy documents [57,58], which is especially useful in ESG-related studies. Indicators were coded based on presence, specificity, and relevance to the ESRS standards, allowing for cross-brand comparability.

Given the reliance on self-reported corporate data, this study acknowledges key limitations, including selective disclosure, lack of external verification, and potential bias in portraying environmental impacts [59,60]. To partially address these concerns, particularly for Shein, which does not release standardized ESG reports, supplementary academic sources were used. For Zara, H&M, and Mango, data were primarily drawn from company reports referencing alignment with frameworks such as GRI, CDP, or the UN Global Compact, and Shein’s data were derived from self-reported disclosures and secondary sources such as the peer-reviewed literature (e.g., [54]) and select third-party assessments that estimated environmental and supply chain impacts.

To mitigate these types of selective disclosures and lack of external verification biases and improve comparability, cross-verification was used through academic or third-party sources where available. At the same time, an avoidance of reliance on non-specific or promotional corporate statements and the application of a uniform ESRS-based evaluation rubric were used to ensure structured analysis across all cases. Despite these efforts, the authors acknowledge that reliance on unaudited disclosures limits precision and objectivity. Future research should incorporate primary data collection, such as stakeholder interviews and supplier audits, to strengthen verification [61] and third-party validated datasets [62,63].

4. Comparative Case Study Analysis: Zara, H&M, Shein, and Mango

This section presents a comparative case study of the fast fashion brands Zara, H&M, Shein, and Mango to analyze their business models, supply chain strategies, transparency, and sustainability initiatives, as well as their compliance with European environmental regulations. In accordance with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) established under Directive 2022/2464, companies operating within the European Union, such as Zara and Mango, are required to align their practices with these regulatory frameworks.

4.1. Business Models and Supply Chain Strategies

A comparative case study of Zara, H&M, Shein, and Mango reveals that these multinational fashion retailers operate agile supply chains, leverage data-driven production models, and employ rapid marketing strategies to deliver low-cost fashion in global markets characterized by dynamic consumer demand [64]. However, such operational models contribute significantly to environmental and social challenges, including high greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, excessive water and energy consumption, textile waste accumulation, and concerns related to labor exploitation [5,6].

As a result, these brands must align their business practices with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). This comparative analysis highlights the environmental practices and challenges faced by these companies in enhancing sustainability, as mandated by Directive 2022/2464 of the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union [46].

Zara, H&M, Shein, and Mango adopt distinct approaches concerning product turnover, pricing strategies, and market positioning, reflecting diverse operational priorities and geographic focuses [34,54,65].

The strategic approaches adopted by Zara, H&M, Shein, and Mango diverge in key areas such as product turnover rates, pricing strategies, market positioning, and operational priorities, reflecting distinct geographic and commercial focuses [34,54,65].

• Zara operates under a “quick response” model, emphasizing speed and flexibility through vertical integration. This structure enables the brand to streamline its processes from design conceptualization to retail distribution within a matter of weeks [64].
• H&M follows a cost-driven business model with an increasing focus on sustainability. The company has integrated eco-friendly materials and collaborations with sustainability innovators to reduce its environmental footprint [66].
• Shein exemplifies the ultra-fast fashion paradigm, leveraging advanced data analytics, e-commerce dominance, and social media engagement to introduce thousands of new products daily. This rapid production cycle is facilitated by a decentralized supplier network, real-time demand analysis, and influencer-driven marketing strategies [54,67].
• Mango, in contrast to Shein and Zara, does not adhere to an ultra-fast fashion model. Instead, the brand positions itself as an affordable luxury label, prioritizing quality and timeless designs over high-speed production. With a Mediterranean aesthetic and a mid-to-high price range, Mango emphasizes longevity in fashion, slower product turnover, and the use of sustainable materials. This approach appeals to consumers who value durability and craftsmanship rather than the continuous pursuit of new trends [68].

Table 2. Business models.

CRITERIA (Teece, 2010, Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010)	Zara	H&M	Shein	Mango
Market positioning	Operates on a “quick response” model with vertically integrated supply chains, offering high-fashion-inspired clothing at mid-tier pricing. Targets fashion-conscious young adults with frequent trend updates [65,69]	Combines affordability with a commitment to eco-conscious practices. Appeals to a wide demographic, offering trendy and basic clothing with sustainable options [34,66]	Ultra-fast fashion model driven by rapid production and trend response. Offers extremely low prices, targeting Gen Z consumers with heavy social media and influencer engagement [54]	Focuses on accessible luxury with Mediterranean-inspired designs. Targets fashion-forward consumers seeking quality and timeless style at mid-level prices [68]
Product turnover	Introduces new items biweekly, enabling constant freshness and quick responses to market trends [64,69]	Follows a seasonal schedule with mid-season releases, providing moderate flexibility but slower turnover than quick response models [66]	Leads the industry in product turnover, introducing hundreds of new styles daily based on real-time data analytics [54]	Launches quarterly seasonal collections with a slower turnover, focusing on quality over quantity to provide durable and timeless pieces [63]
Pricing strategy	Uses ultra-low pricing strategy to offer affordable luxury-inspired fashion. Balances budget-friendly fast fashion brands globally	Prioritizes affordability, making it one of the most widely seen budget-friendly fast fashion brands globally	Relies on minimal physical stores, heavily dependent on online presence and competitive pricing strategies [54]	Focuses on blending Mediterranean elegance with sustainability and material quality. Emphasizes a refined, customer-centric shopping experience [68]
E-commerce and Digital Marketing	Maintains an omnichannel presence, integrating online platforms with in-store experiences, including click-and-collect services [69]	Operates a loyalty-driven e-commerce platform, offering personalized recommendations, discounts, and sustainability insights through a mobile app [34]	Operates exclusively online, relying heavily on social media and influencer marketing to reach global consumers. Uses targeted advertising to engage with younger demographics [54]	Offers omnichannel features like click-and-collect and online exclusives. Prioritizes mobile-first design for its expanding digital consumer base [70]
Customer Data utilization	Uses real-time sales data to inform restocking and product design decisions. Integrated systems allow for rapid data-driven responses [69]	Uses insights from loyalty programs and customer feedback to optimize marketing campaigns and guide sustainability initiatives [66]	Relies heavily on data analytics to track consumer preferences and trends, enabling continuous product updates and targeted advertising [54]	Utilizes data to refine product assortments, improve regional inventory management, and personalize customer experiences [70]
Personalization and AI-driven Consumer Insights	Moderate personalization via online and in-store experiences [69]	AI-supported personalized recommendations and marketing in-app [66]	AI-driven personalized recommendations on the app; heavily targeted marketing [54]	AI integration in both digital marketing and customer experience personalization [70]

presents a comparative analysis of the key strategic initiatives employed by these brands to differentiate their business models, including product turnover criteria, pricing strategies, consumer segmentation, and brand differentiation. Additionally, it illustrates how each company balances market demands, operational efficiency, and sustainability efforts.

Effective supply chain management and operational strategies are critical components of the fast fashion business model, ensuring speed, flexibility, and cost efficiency throughout the supply chain. Companies such as Zara, H&M, and Shein have developed distinct strategies to optimize their supply chain processes, ranging from production cycle improvements to logistics and inventory management. These approaches facilitate rapid product turnover; however, they also present sustainability challenges and influence each brand’s competitive positioning in the global market [64,65].

Table 3 compares the supply chain and operational management strategies of Zara, H&M, Shein, and Mango, focusing on key aspects such as production cycles, vertical integration, agility, and sustainability initiatives. This analysis highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each company’s operational model, emphasizing environmental impact and strategic priorities.

Zara’s vertically integrated system and proximity to European markets enable one of the fastest production cycles in the industry, introducing approximately 230 new items per week to swiftly respond to evolving fashion trends [69,71]. In contrast, H&M relies on a globally outsourced supplier network, benefiting from cost efficiency and product variety but experiencing longer lead times of approximately six weeks [66,72]. Shein surpasses its competitors in speed, launching around 14,000 new items per week through data-driven production and a flexible, decentralized network of over 5000 suppliers [54,73]. Meanwhile, Mango prioritizes sustainability and product quality, operating on a quarterly seasonal production cycle, introducing fewer but more durable items compared to its competitors [68,70].

Flexibility and agility are essential for managing demand fluctuations and maintaining competitiveness in the fast fashion industry. Zara achieves high agility through smaller production batches and real-time data analytics to manage inventory and restocking efficiently [65]. H&M, with its larger production volumes and outsourced supply chain, exhibits lower agility, responding to seasonal changes at a more moderate pace [66]. Shein also demonstrates exceptional agility by rapidly adjusting production and introducing new designs daily based on consumer trends and feedback [54]. In contrast, Mango maintains moderate flexibility, supported by strong supplier partnerships and an optimized logistics system, though its slower product turnover limits its ability to respond swiftly to short-term trends [68,70].

Significant differences exist among these brands regarding sustainability and transparency. Zara and H&M have made distinct advancements in sustainability initiatives. Specifically, Zara’s “Join Life” program focuses on traceability and waste reduction through local sourcing and supply chain audits (Inditex Sustainability Report, 2022). Meanwhile, H&M differentiates itself by prioritizing sustainable materials and implementing in-store recycling programs as part of its “Conscious” initiative, in collaboration with organizations such as the Better Cotton Initiative [34]. Mango has also increased its transparency efforts, enhancing supplier tracking and improving sustainability reporting to comply with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) outlined in the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) [46] (European Parliament and Council of the European Union, 2022). In contrast, Shein’s lack of transparency and limited waste management programs raise concerns about its environmental impact, given its high-speed, high-volume production model [54,74].

On the other hand, logistical infrastructure and digital integration further distinguish these brands. Zara’s centralized distribution centers and real-time analytics facilitate efficient inventory rotation and restocking [69]. H&M employs regional warehouses to reduce shipping times and costs while investing in AI-driven demand forecasting to optimize logistics [66]. Shein, leveraging a decentralized and e-commerce-driven supply chain, rapidly optimizes international shipping but remains heavily reliant on outsourced logistics infrastructure [54]. Mango implements an omnichannel strategy, incorporating in-store pickup services and enhancing digital collaboration with suppliers to optimize inventory management [63,74].

These operational strategies differentiate each brand based on speed, cost efficiency, and sustainability, shaping their competitive positioning in the fast fashion market.

Table 3. Supply chain, operations, and management.

CRITERIA (Supply Chain Council, 2012)	Zara	H&M	Shein	Mango
Key strengths	Speed and flexibility: Proximity to European markets and efficient logistics [69]	Cost and variety: Global network allows access to cheaper labor markets [72]	Speed to market: Ability to introduce new products almost daily through rapid production cycles [54]	Focuses on offering accessible luxury through high-quality, durable collections with Mediterranean-inspired designs. The company balances elegance with sustainability efforts, differentiating itself from fast-paced competitors [68]
Production cycle	Two to four weeks from design to retail, one of the fastest in the industry [9,71]	Average lead times around six weeks due to outsourcing; longer than Zara but faster than traditional retail [66,72]	Extremely short, often around one week, supported by data-driven production and agile supplier relationships [54]	Operates on a quarterly seasonal cycle, emphasizing fewer but long-lasting and quality-focused collections. The slower turnover supports its emphasis on sustainability and durability [70,74]
Annual new items	Zara introduces around 12,000 new designs annually [69]	H&M releases approximately 23,000 new items annually [72]	Shein adds approximately 104,000 new items per year [73]	Produces approximately 18,000 to 20,000 new items annually, less than competitors such as Shein and Zara, aligning with a more sustainable production model [70]
Weekly new items	Zara adds about 230 new items per week, thanks to a vertically integrated supply chain	H&M introduces around 442 new items per week, with a global sourcing strategy [72]	Shein adds thousands of new items each week, driven by real-time data analytics [54]	Mango introduces new items weekly, focusing on quality and sustainable designs [70]
Sustainability practices	Zara has a strong commitment to sustainability, with initiatives like the Better Cotton initiative and developing enhanced supplier monitoring systems [69]	H&M implements detailed sustainability reporting and traceability in its “Join Life” line. Suppliers are regularly audited [69]	Low transparency, limited supply chain information available to the public, raising ethical concerns [54]	Mango integrates sustainability frameworks such as the ESRS [70]
Digital supply chain management	Uses RFID and data analytics to track inventory and optimize restocking [69]	Invests in AI for demand forecasting and inventory management; ongoing digital upgrades [66]	Data-driven production model uses consumer insights to plan inventory; highly dependent on digital analytics [54]	Gradually integrating digital technologies like data-driven inventory optimization and supplier collaboration platforms, though still in earlier stages compared to competitors like Zara [70,75]
Customer recycling initiatives	Zara runs in-store textile collection programs in some locations, allowing customers to drop off used garments for recycling [69]	H&M has widespread in-store recycling bins where customers can return old clothing to be recycled, part of its “Conscious” initiative. It encourages consumers to engage in recycling through awareness campaigns [34]	Shein has limited customer-facing recycling initiatives. Their model prioritizes quick turnover of fashion rather than encouraging recycling [54]	Encourages customers to recycle through in-store take-back programs, promoting circular fashion practices and reducing post-consumer waste [66,70]

Table 3. Supply chain, operations, and management.

CRITERIA (Supply Chain Council, 2012)	Zara	H&M	Shein	Mango
Key strengths	Speed and flexibility: Proximity to European markets and efficient logistics [69]	Cost and variety: Global network allows access to cheaper labor markets [72]	Speed to market: Ability to introduce new products almost daily through rapid production cycles [54]	Focuses on offering accessible luxury through high-quality, durable collections with Mediterranean-inspired designs. The company balances elegance with sustainability efforts, differentiating itself from fast-paced competitors [68]
Production cycle	Two to four weeks from design to retail, one of the fastest in the industry [9,71]	Average lead times around six weeks due to outsourcing; longer than Zara but faster than traditional retail [66,72]	Extremely short, often around one week, supported by data-driven production and agile supplier relationships [54]	Operates on a quarterly seasonal cycle, emphasizing fewer but long-lasting and quality-focused collections. The slower turnover supports its emphasis on sustainability and durability [70,74]
Annual new items	Zara introduces around 12,000 new designs annually [69]	H&M releases approximately 23,000 new items annually [72]	Shein adds approximately 104,000 new items per year [73]	Produces approximately 18,000 to 20,000 new items annually, less than competitors such as Shein and Zara, aligning with a more sustainable production model [70]
Weekly new items	Zara adds about 230 new items per week, thanks to a vertically integrated supply chain	H&M introduces around 442 new items per week, with a global sourcing strategy [72]	Shein adds thousands of new items each week, driven by real-time data analytics [54]	Mango introduces new items weekly, focusing on quality and sustainable designs [70]
Sustainability practices	Zara has a strong commitment to sustainability, with initiatives like the Better Cotton initiative and developing enhanced supplier monitoring systems [69]	H&M implements detailed sustainability reporting and traceability in its “Join Life” line. Suppliers are regularly audited [69]	Low transparency, limited supply chain information available to the public, raising ethical concerns [54]	Mango integrates sustainability frameworks such as the ESRS [70]
Digital supply chain management	Uses RFID and data analytics to track inventory and optimize restocking [69]	Invests in AI for demand forecasting and inventory management; ongoing digital upgrades [66]	Data-driven production model uses consumer insights to plan inventory; highly dependent on digital analytics [54]	Gradually integrating digital technologies like data-driven inventory optimization and supplier collaboration platforms, though still in earlier stages compared to competitors like Zara [70,75]
Customer recycling initiatives	Zara runs in-store textile collection programs in some locations, allowing customers to drop off used garments for recycling [69]	H&M has widespread in-store recycling bins where customers can return old clothing to be recycled, part of its “Conscious” initiative. It encourages consumers to engage in recycling through awareness campaigns [34]	Shein has limited customer-facing recycling initiatives. Their model prioritizes quick turnover of fashion rather than encouraging recycling [54]	Encourages customers to recycle through in-store take-back programs, promoting circular fashion practices and reducing post-consumer waste [66,70]

4.2. Communication Strategies and Initiatives

The comparison of the communication strategies of Zara, H&M, Shein, and Mango, as outlined in

Table 4. Communication strategies and initiatives.

CRITERIA	Zara	H&M	Shein	Mango
Business Model Integration	Quick response (QR) model with real-time analytics, leveraging advanced data analytic [65]	“Conscious Collection” focuses on sustainable textiles and innovative fabric recycling [34]	“EvoluShein” line with limited use of recycled fabrics, lacks transparency [54]	Small-scale eco-friendly capsule collections, lacks strategic implementation [76]
Omnichannel Strategy	RFID technology for inventory management, seamless online-offline integration [77]	AI-driven personalization, digital customer engagement, mobile app loyalty programs [78]	Influencer marketing, TikTok campaigns, viral social media tactics	Weak omnichannel presence, mainly brick-and-mortar sales with slow digital integration [79,80]
Sustainable Collections and Materials	“Join Life” line using organic and recycled materials, but lacks full supply chain integration [81]	“Conscious Collection” focuses on sustainable textiles and innovative fabric recycling	“EvoluShein” line with limited use of recycled fabrics, lacks transparency [54]	Small-scale eco-friendly capsule collections, lacks strategic implementation [76]
Circular Economy Initiatives	In-store recycling programs, textile reuse initiatives, but lacks full circular economy adoption [69]	“Close the Loop” program and partnerships with textile recyclers [82]	No significant circular economy efforts, lacks clothing return or recycling programs [54]	Minimal recycling initiatives, lacks transparency in textile sourcing [83]
Carbon Footprint and Energy Use	Some renewable energy adoption, but gaps in Scope 3 emissions tracking [69]	Goal to be 100% renewable by 2030, significant investment in low-carbon logistics	No transparency on carbon emissions or energy efficiency [54]	No structured energy efficiency plan, limited focus on emissions reduction

, highlights significant differences in their approaches to consumer engagement, digital transformation, and sustainability communication. While Zara and H&M demonstrate strong capabilities in quick response models, omnichannel integration, and sustainability messaging, their transparency and circular economy initiatives vary in depth and execution. Mango, on the other hand, focuses on cultural storytelling but lacks a structured approach to sustainability communication and digital integration. In contrast, Shein excels in social media-driven marketing and trend responsiveness but falls significantly behind in sustainability, circular economy initiatives, and transparency. These differences underscore the varying degrees of commitment and strategic priorities that each brand adopts in response to evolving consumer expectations and regulatory pressures within the fast fashion industry.

First of all, Zara’s communication strategy is intricately linked to its quick response (QR) business model, a cornerstone of its competitive advantage. This model allows Zara to move from design to store shelves in as little as two weeks, significantly faster than traditional retailers. By leveraging advanced real-time data analytics, Zara closely monitors customer preferences and market trends, which enables rapid adjustments to inventory and marketing campaigns. This adaptability ensures that Zara’s offerings remain relevant and aligned with current consumer demand, fostering a sense of exclusivity and urgency among buyers. The dynamic communication of new arrivals and limited stock availability further enhances Zara’s ability to attract and retain consumers while maintaining a streamlined supply chain [65].

Omnichannel integration has become a critical strategy for retailers, enabling them to offer seamless shopping experiences across digital and physical platforms. This approach has transformed customer engagement, loyalty, and operational efficiency. Omnichannel retailing integrates online, offline, and mobile platforms to create a unified shopping journey. Scholars outline the drivers behind this trend, emphasizing the role of digital technologies like mobile devices and social media. They identify challenges in aligning customer expectations with technological capabilities and the transformation of traditional brick-and-mortar stores into experiential destinations [77]. Zara leverages a combination of mobile apps, websites, and physical stores to provide customers with a unified shopping experience. Customers can browse, purchase, and track orders online while also enjoying in-store features like self-checkout and the instant pickup of online orders. These practices align with the principles of omnichannel retailing, which emphasize integrated, customer-centric shopping experiences [77]. Zara employs Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology to streamline inventory management. RFID ensures the real-time tracking of stock, enabling precise order fulfillment and minimizing delays. This technology supports Zara’s “ship-from-store” model, allowing inventory from physical stores to be used for online orders, bridging digital and brick-and-mortar channels [84]. Through machine learning algorithms, Zara personalizes product recommendations based on browsing and purchase history. This tailored approach enhances customer satisfaction and fosters loyalty, an essential outcome of effective omnichannel integration [85]. While Zara has successfully adopted an omnichannel model, challenges persist in maintaining consistency across channels. For example, the synchronization of in-store and online inventory and ensuring a seamless transition between these touchpoints require ongoing technological upgrades and operational alignment [86].

On the other hand, sustainability has become a critical component of Zara’s brand communication, exemplified by its “Join Life” initiative. The “Join Life” collection by Zara has been positioned as a sustainable alternative within the fast fashion sector. Scholars analyzed the collection, highlighting its partial success in using recyclable materials and eco-conscious practices. This program highlights the brand’s commitment to eco-friendly practices, such as sourcing sustainable materials (organic cotton, recycled polyester) and implementing water-saving technologies in production processes. Zara actively markets these efforts through campaigns and product labeling, signaling its alignment with global sustainability goals. However, the research critiques the transparency of supply chain data, indicating gaps in informing consumers about product origins and environmental impacts [81]. This aligns with broader concerns in the industry about the inadequacy of current transparency measures to meet consumer demands. However, critics argue that the “Join Life” initiative, while noteworthy, is limited in scope, as it focuses primarily on specific product lines rather than transforming Zara’s overall operations. This selective application of sustainability measures raises concerns about the brand’s ability to integrate eco-friendly practices comprehensively throughout its supply chain [83].

Moreover, as part of its broader sustainability goals, Zara has pledged to achieve 100% sustainable sourcing by 2025, underscoring its dedication to eco-friendly practices. In addition, the company employs water-saving technologies during textile dyeing and processing, addressing one of the most resource-intensive aspects of fashion production [87]. These practices align with global sustainability efforts, such as minimizing resource depletion and mitigating climate change. Furthermore, Zara has implemented energy-efficient operations as part of its broader emissions reduction strategy, incorporating measures such as optimized logistics, eco-efficient store designs, and LED lighting systems. A notable effort includes the partial adoption of renewable energy across its operations, such as solar and wind power in select facilities. However, Zara’s reliance on traditional energy sources in other areas poses a challenge to achieving its sustainability goals. The company has committed to reducing Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions but has faced criticism for the lack of transparency and comprehensive plans to address Scope 3 emissions, which account for the majority of its carbon footprint. While Zara’s incremental progress is noteworthy, the absence of detailed timelines and broader global implementation limits its ability to lead in this area [69].

Zara has taken steps toward supporting a circular economy through initiatives such as in-store textile collection programs. These programs encourage customers to return used clothing for recycling or donation, thus extending the life cycle of garments. Furthermore, Zara incorporates recycled materials into new collections, demonstrating its commitment to reducing waste and promoting resource efficiency. The company has also invested in research and development to explore innovative recycling technologies and sustainable design principles. While these initiatives are commendable, the scale of Zara’s overall production continues to generate significant waste, highlighting the need for more systemic efforts to integrate circularity across all product lines [69]. By aligning its communication strategies with its operational strengths, Zara has established itself as a leading player in the fast fashion industry. However, the continued scrutiny of its sustainability claims underscores the importance of enhancing transparency and accountability to meet growing consumer and regulatory expectations.

Secondly, H&M has strategically positioned itself as a front-runner in sustainable fashion by launching initiatives such as the “Conscious Collection”. This campaign emphasizes the use of eco-friendly materials, including organic cotton, recycled polyester, and other sustainable fibers, along with ethical production practices. These efforts are complemented by partnerships with innovators, such as the “Green Machine”, aimed at recycling polyester–cotton blends, showcasing H&M’s commitment to addressing complex sustainability challenges [87]. Additionally, the brand has implemented large-scale recycling programs, including its “Global Clothes Collecting” initiative, to encourage consumer participation in sustainability efforts [88]. By prominently marketing these collections, H&M appeals directly to eco-conscious consumers who prioritize environmental and social responsibility in their purchasing decisions. Additionally, H&M collaborates with innovators and sustainability-focused organizations to advance industry practices. For instance, initiatives like the “Green Machine”, a partnership aimed at recycling polyester and cotton blends, highlight its leadership in addressing complex sustainability challenges. However, some critics argue that H&M’s large-scale operations and fast fashion model inherently contradict its sustainability claims, raising concerns about greenwashing [34].

On the other hand, H&M is recognized as an industry leader in promoting circular economy practices. The brand’s in-store recycling programs incentivize consumers to return old garments by offering discounts or store credits, encouraging participation in textile recycling. H&M partners with organizations like the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and textile recyclers to develop and scale technologies for garment recycling. The “Close the Loop” campaign exemplifies its efforts to raise awareness and engage consumers in circular economy practices. H&M also integrates recycled materials into new products, actively reducing waste and resource dependency. While these initiatives are substantial, critics highlight that the brand’s high production volumes counteract some of its sustainability gains, emphasizing the need for further systemic changes [82]. Additionally, H&M is widely regarded as a leader in the use of sustainable materials within the fast fashion industry. The brand has committed to sourcing 100% sustainably sourced materials by 2030, including organic cotton, recycled polyester, and innovative fabrics made from agricultural waste or discarded textiles. H&M’s collaborations with textile recyclers and innovators, such as the development of the “Green Machine”, demonstrate its commitment to addressing systemic challenges in textile recycling. This technology, which separates polyester and cotton from blended fabrics, represents a significant breakthrough in the circular economy. Additionally, H&M actively educates consumers on the importance of sustainability through campaigns tied to its “Conscious Collection”. Despite these advancements, critics argue that H&M’s large-scale production volumes undermine its sustainability efforts, contributing to the industry’s ongoing challenges with overproduction and waste [34,82].

Also, H&M has set ambitious goals to operate entirely on renewable energy by 2030, aligning its strategies with the Paris Agreement. These efforts include investing in solar and wind power, upgrading energy-efficient infrastructure, and transitioning to low-carbon logistics. H&M also tracks and reports its progress on emissions reductions, including Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions, demonstrating a comprehensive approach. Collaborations with international climate initiatives, such as the Science-Based Targets Initiative (SBTi), further validate the credibility of its commitments. By adopting these measures, H&M positions itself as a leader in carbon management within the fast fashion sector, although the scale of its operations presents ongoing challenges in balancing growth with meaningful reductions in overall emissions [34].

On the other hand, H&M employs advanced AI-driven tools to create a personalized shopping experience, offering tailored product recommendations based on individual browsing histories, purchase behaviors, and preferences. These tools enhance customer satisfaction and foster brand loyalty by delivering a shopping experience that feels uniquely curated to each consumer. Research highlights that AI-driven personalization is a critical factor in improving engagement and loyalty, particularly in the fast fashion industry [78].

Moreover, H&M’s loyalty programs are designed to incentivize sustainable consumer behavior. For example, customers who recycle old garments at H&M stores receive store credits or discounts, encouraging participation in the circular economy. These initiatives align sustainability with consumer engagement, creating a mutually beneficial relationship that enhances H&M’s reputation as an innovative and responsible retailer [82]. H&M is recognized for its commitment to transparency, regularly publishing detailed sustainability reports that outline its environmental and social goals, as well as its progress in achieving them. These reports include metrics on carbon emissions, water usage, and labor practices, providing consumers and stakeholders with a clear understanding of the brand’s impact. By aligning its reporting practices with international frameworks, such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), H&M fosters trust and demonstrates accountability. Additionally, this level of transparency positions H&M favorably in regulatory environments that increasingly demand rigorous sustainability disclosures. While H&M’s reporting efforts are often lauded, ongoing scrutiny regarding the scale of its production and waste generation highlights the need for continued progress in balancing growth with genuine sustainability [34]. By combining sustainability initiatives, personalized consumer engagement, and transparent communication, H&M has cultivated a reputation as a progressive leader in the fast fashion industry. Nevertheless, the tension between its sustainability claims and the realities of large-scale production underscores the challenges of achieving true sustainability within the fast fashion business model.

Thirdly, Shein has established itself as a dominant player in the fast fashion industry through an aggressive social media-driven marketing strategy. By leveraging platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube, Shein collaborates with influencers and micro-influencers to engage its Gen Z audience. Tactics such as “Shein hauls”, where influencers showcase and review a variety of products, emphasize the brand’s affordability and wide range of trend-driven designs. This content resonates strongly with Shein’s target demographic, effectively enhancing consumer engagement and brand loyalty [54]. Research highlights that Shein’s use of interactive campaigns, such as hashtag challenges, and its reliance on user-generated content foster a sense of community and encourage active participation from consumers. This strategy not only amplifies Shein’s reach but also aligns with Gen Z’s preferences for authentic and participatory brand experiences. Additionally, Shein’s social media approach integrates demand-based production with real-time feedback from digital platforms, enabling the brand to adapt to consumer trends rapidly. This data-driven strategy underscores its competitive edge in the fast-paced e-commerce landscape [89].

Despite growing global scrutiny on sustainability, Shein’s communication strategy has largely avoided addressing this critical area. The introduction of the “EvoluShein” line, which features garments made with recycled materials, represents a minor and highly localized initiative within its vast production model. This limited effort is not accompanied by consistent messaging, measurable sustainability goals, or detailed reporting on its environmental impact. Critics argue that Shein’s business model—centered on mass production, low prices, and rapid turnover—runs counter to the principles of sustainability, contributing to significant textile waste and high carbon emissions. The absence of comprehensive sustainability communication and transparency, such as disclosures on supply chain practices or waste management, leaves Shein vulnerable to accusations of greenwashing. Furthermore, its lack of alignment with broader sustainability frameworks, such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), underscores the brand’s prioritization of growth and market dominance over environmental responsibility [54]. Shein’s approach to the circular economy is minimal, with little evidence of meaningful initiatives to reduce waste or promote recycling. The company’s production model prioritizes high-speed, low-cost manufacturing, resulting in significant amounts of textile waste. Unlike competitors, Shein does not offer garment collection or recycling programs, nor does it emphasize product durability or recyclability in its designs. The absence of a circular economy framework, combined with its high-turnover production model, underscores Shein’s prioritization of profit over sustainability. This lack of engagement with circular principles not only diminishes its environmental credibility but also leaves it vulnerable to consumer and regulatory pressures [54]. Shein’s success lies in its unparalleled ability to dominate digital platforms and appeal to younger consumers through affordability and trend accessibility. However, its minimal engagement with sustainability and transparency raises questions about its long-term viability in a market where ethical and eco-conscious consumer behavior is becoming increasingly influential.

Additionally, Shein’s sustainability efforts are nascent, with the introduction of the “EvoluShein” line marking a minor step towards incorporating recycled materials. This collection uses fibers made from post-consumer waste, aligning with basic principles of resource efficiency. However, the scale and impact of this initiative are limited compared to Shein’s vast production model, which prioritizes mass production and affordability. The company has not established clear sustainability targets or communicated a broader strategy for transitioning to sustainable materials. Additionally, the absence of transparency regarding material sourcing or certification undermines the credibility of Shein’s sustainability claims. Critics argue that Shein’s focus on low-cost, high-turnover fashion is inherently incompatible with meaningful progress on sustainability, particularly given the environmental impact of its extensive supply chain and production volumes [54].

Shein has made minimal progress in adopting renewable energy or implementing energy efficiency measures. Its production model, which emphasizes rapid turnover and low costs, inherently generates significant emissions across the supply chain. With little to no public disclosure of energy consumption or carbon reduction targets, Shein has faced widespread criticism for its environmental impact. The lack of commitment to renewable energy, coupled with the high emissions resulting from its mass-production and distribution model, places Shein as a laggard in addressing climate change. This neglect not only risks regulatory scrutiny but also diminishes Shein’s appeal to increasingly eco-conscious consumers [54].

Lastly, Mango’s communication strategy is rooted in creating an aspirational lifestyle brand, with a narrative deeply inspired by Mediterranean culture. This storytelling approach focuses on sophistication, elegance, and timeless style, appealing to an older and more affluent demographic compared to other fast fashion brands. The Mediterranean narrative is reinforced through the use of warm tones, natural landscapes, and imagery in campaigns that evoke a sense of heritage, leisure, and understated luxury. By aligning its branding with cultural storytelling, Mango differentiates itself from competitors who prioritize trend-driven, youth-oriented messaging. Research underscores the importance of emotional branding and storytelling in fostering consumer loyalty. Mango’s campaigns focus on cultural narratives and lifestyle aspirations rather than fleeting trends, aligning with strategies that build emotional connections and enhance brand perception [78]. This approach reinforces Mango’s identity as a brand that offers quality and cultural authenticity over transient fashion fads.

Mango’s approach to sustainability in its marketing efforts is limited and lacks the depth and transparency seen in competitors like Zara or H&M. Although Mango occasionally highlights the use of eco-friendly materials in certain collections, its communication lacks consistency and measurable long-term goals. The brand’s messaging does not emphasize regular updates on environmental initiatives or transparency regarding supply chain practices, leaving consumers with little information about its actual impact on sustainability. Research shows that transparent communication is vital for engaging environmentally conscious consumers, as it fosters trust and accountability in sustainability efforts [76]. Additionally, the lack of clear sustainability frameworks may alienate consumers seeking brands that align with their values and expectations of eco-conscious production [90]. By failing to adopt consistent and transparent sustainability messaging, Mango risks being perceived as less committed to addressing the environmental and social challenges associated with the fast fashion industry. This contrasts with research advocating for transparent eco-labeling and supply chain disclosures as critical components of successful sustainability communication [79].

By leveraging cultural storytelling and a focus on design excellence, Mango establishes a distinct identity within the fast fashion market, appealing to consumers who value sophistication and heritage. However, its minimal engagement with sustainability messaging and insufficient transparency in supply chain practices reveal significant areas for improvement. Research indicates that transparent and consistent communication about sustainability efforts is crucial for building consumer trust and fostering brand loyalty in an increasingly eco-conscious marketplace [76]. Additionally, studies show that the absence of clear and measurable sustainability goals can alienate consumers seeking accountability and ethical production standards [90]. As demand for ethical and eco-conscious practices continues to grow, adopting more robust sustainability strategies and transparent communication frameworks will be essential for Mango to maintain relevance and competitive advantage in the fast fashion sector [79]. Mango’s efforts to address energy consumption and carbon emissions remain minimal and largely undocumented. The company has yet to establish public commitments or measurable targets for reducing its carbon footprint. While some smaller-scale initiatives may exist, Mango does not prominently feature energy efficiency or renewable energy adoption in its sustainability reports or marketing. This lack of transparency and detailed carbon reduction strategies highlights significant gaps in its approach to environmental responsibility. In a market increasingly driven by eco-conscious consumer expectations, Mango’s limited engagement with energy sustainability places it behind competitors like Zara and H&M. Mango’s efforts to integrate sustainable materials into its product offerings have been modest and primarily limited to small, exclusive collections. The brand uses organic cotton and recycled fibers, which are promoted sporadically through targeted marketing campaigns. However, these initiatives lack the strategic depth and scalability seen in competitors such as Zara or H&M, which have more comprehensive sustainability programs [76]. Mango has yet to publicly outline a coherent roadmap to expand its use of sustainable materials or set measurable sustainability goals. Transparency is another shortcoming, with minimal disclosures regarding the sourcing and certification of sustainable materials. This lack of transparency contrasts with consumer expectations for greater accountability and traceability in supply chain practices [83]. Additionally, Mango’s adoption of circularity principles, such as the use of recycled content and designing for recyclability, remains underdeveloped. These gaps highlight the need for the company to adopt a more ambitious and structured approach to sustainability, aligning with industry standards and consumer demand for eco-conscious practices [79].

4.3. Sustainable Initiatives

The comparative analysis of Zara, H&M, Shein, and Mango presented in

Table 5. Use of sustainable and bio-degradable materials.

CRITERIA (Fletcher, 2022)	Zara	H&M	Shein	Mango
Use of sustainable materials	“Join Life” collection utilizes organic cotton, recycled polyester, target for 100% sustainable materials by 2025 [69]	“Conscious Collection” uses organic and recycled fibers; aims for 100% sustainably sourced materials by 2030 [34]	Limited use, small “EvoluShein” line with recycled materials; heavily criticized for low transparency [5]	Focuses on increasing the share of sustainable materials, including certified organic cotton, recycled polyester, and Tencel [70]
Use of organic fibers	Organic cotton used in the “Join Life” collection, with a goal of increasing usage by 2025 [69]	Strong emphasis on organic cotton, with the “Conscious Collection”, aiming to have all materials sustainably sourced by 2030 [34]	Limited use of organic cotton, focusing more on low-cost production [40,54]	Uses Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS)-certified organic cotton, particularly in key product lines, as part of its sustainability initiatives [70]
Use of inorganic fibers	Primarily uses polyester but is moving toward more sustainable alternatives [65,69]	Uses polyester but is working toward incorporating more recycled fibers in collections [34,40]	Heavy reliance on polyester and conventional methods, making it the largest user of inorganic fibers [40,54]	Limited reliance on inorganic fibers, with plans to phase out conventional polyester in favor of recycled alternatives [68]
Use of recycled fibers/fabrics	They aim to integrate more sustainable fibers in their collections [69]	Expanding the use of recycled polyester and organic cotton fibers [34]	Minimal use of sustainable fibers, with a predominant reliance on conventional materials [54]	Expanding use of recycled polyester and organic cotton fabrics [70]
Use of sustainable dyes	Expanding use of water-based and plant-based dyes in select product lines to minimize chemical pollution [70]	Minimal use of sustainable dyes, with a predominant reliance on conventional dyeing methods [54]. Exploring new sustainable dyeing techniques [54]	Expanding use of water-based and plant-based dyes in select product lines to minimize chemical pollution [70]	Expanding use of water-based and plant-based dyes in select product lines to minimize chemical pollution [70]
Use of non-sustainable dyes	Predominantly uses conventional dyes but is transitioning toward more sustainable options [69]	Uses conventional dyes, though efforts are underway to reduce harmful chemicals [34]	Heavy reliance on non-sustainable, conventional dyes, contributing to environmental impact [54]	Still uses conventional synthetic dyes in parts of its production, though efforts are underway to increase sustainable dye usage [68]
Use of sustainable linings	Incorporates recycled materials and organic fabrics in linings, but usage is limited [65,69]	Strong use of recycled materials (recycled polyester) and organic fabrics (like cotton) in linings, focusing on circular fashion [34,40]	Limited use of sustainable linings; focus remains on cost-effective, conventional materials [46]	Incorporates sustainable linings made from organic or recycled fibers, particularly in formalwear and premium collections [70]
Use of non-sustainable linings	Conventional linings are predominantly used (polyester, nylon, acetate, etc.), with plans for more sustainable materials [69]	Conventional linings are common, but H&M is working toward increased use of sustainable options [34]	Predominantly uses conventional linings, raising sustainability concerns [54]	Some collections still use non-sustainable linings, particularly in lower-cost product lines, though Mango is actively working to replace these with eco-friendly alternatives [70]

elucidates significant disparities in their levels of adoption, innovation, and transparency pertaining to sustainability strategies, particularly in the realm of sourcing sustainable and biodegradable materials. Zara, through its “Join Life” collection, underscores the importance of utilizing materials such as organic cotton, recycled polyester, and Tencel. The company has set an ambitious goal to achieve a 100% sustainable materials utilization by 2025, which involves the integration of advanced fiber technologies and the adoption of biodegradable dyes within select product lines to mitigate environmental impact [69]. Furthermore, Zara employs water-based and low-impact dye technologies, thereby enhancing its environmental footprint while ensuring traceability throughout its supply chain [65]. These initiatives are complemented by efforts aimed at waste reduction, characterized by smaller production batches and data-driven inventory replenishment methodologies. In a similar vein, H&M has emerged as a leader in sustainability with its “Conscious Collection”. This initiative predominantly emphasizes the use of organic and recycled fibers, including cotton, polyester, and wool. Through strategic partnerships with innovators such as Renewcell, H&M is at the forefront of integrating technologies that facilitate textile-to-textile recycling [34] The brand has set a target for utilizing 100% sustainably sourced materials by 2030, with a pronounced emphasis on transparency and circularity. H&M’s commitment to sustainability is further evidenced by its implementation of water-based dyes and sustainable linings, which collectively contribute to the reduction in toxic waste and pollution in production processes [66]. Conversely, Shein has only recently commenced introducing sustainability measures through its “EvoluShein” line, which features a limited application of recycled materials. The brand continues to exhibit a heavy reliance on synthetic fibers, particularly polyester, and conventional dyes, compounded by unsustainable linings [54]. Criticism has been directed at Shein for its minimal transparency and insufficient supply chain accountability, as evidenced by a lack of recycling programs or substantive waste reduction initiatives. The brand’s ultra-fast production model, which prioritizes cost efficiency and rapid turnover, presents significant challenges to the scaling of meaningful sustainability efforts. On the other hand, Mango, positioning itself as a purveyor of affordable luxury, emphasizes the importance of durable, high-quality collections and integrates fibers that are certified by the Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS), alongside recycled materials and plant-based dyes [70]. A salient differentiating factor among these brands is the utilization of recycled fibers. Zara, H&M, and Mango are progressively incorporating recycled polyester and alternative fibers into their product offerings to diminish reliance on virgin resources. For instance, Zara is systematically reducing its dependency on conventional polyester by replacing it with recycled options [69], whereas H&M is actively collaborating with initiatives like Renewcell to integrate recycled cotton and wool into its product lines [34]. Additionally, H&M has developed internal recycling technologies such as the “Green Machine”, which processes mixed-fiber textiles with efficiency [82]. Mango aspires to methodically phase out inorganic fibers, favoring sustainable innovations such as Tencel and viscose [68]. In stark contrast, Shein’s reliance on synthetic fibers persists, as the brand prioritizes rapid product launches at the expense of material sustainability, thereby resulting in a considerable environmental impact [54]. This divergence underscores Shein’s challenges in reconciling its operations with regulatory frameworks such as the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), which emphasize the necessity of transparency and circularity [46]. Moreover, the adoption of innovative fabrics and biodegradable dyes serves to distinguish Zara, H&M, and Mango from Shein. Both Zara and H&M have embraced natural, water-based dye technologies to curtail chemical consumption and minimize pollution. Zara has further adopted efficient water consumption practices and DyeCoo technology in conjunction with eco-friendly materials such as Tencel [69]. Similarly, Mango is expanding its utilization of sustainable dyeing methodologies, particularly within its premium collections [70]. H&M has committed resources to plant-based dyes and has forged partnerships to develop environmentally conscious dyeing techniques [34]. In contrast, Shein continues to depend on conventional synthetic dyes, showing a limited initiative towards transitioning to sustainable alternatives [54]. With respect to linings, Zara, H&M, and Mango are increasingly incorporating recycled and organic options into their formal wear collections; however, certain lines still rely on unsustainable materials due to cost considerations or production constraints [34,70]. This comparative assessment illuminates substantial differences in sustainability approaches among Zara, H&M, Shein, and Mango. Specifically, Zara, H&M, and Mango exhibit stronger commitments to sustainability, characterized by comprehensive programs and initiatives aimed at reducing carbon footprints and facilitating the decarbonization of the industry. Their collective strategies, focused on minimizing material consumption, optimizing dyeing processes, and managing waste through the implementation of recycled and organic fibers, align with emerging regulatory mandates and promote environmentally responsible practices within the fast fashion sector. In contrast, Shein’s environmental commitment remains comparatively weaker. Conversely, Mango’s emphasis on sustainable practices further distinguishes its position within the competitive landscape.

The examination of the sustainability initiatives undertaken by Zara, H&M, Shein, and Mango reveals divergent levels of commitment to mitigating energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions within the fast fashion industry (see

Table 6. Energy consumption and emissions in manufacturing.

CRITERIA (Global Reporting Initiative, 2016)	Zara	H&M	Shein	Mango
Energy consumption	Zara has focused on energy efficiency across its operations, including energy-efficient stores and production facilities [69]	H&M has implemented energy-efficient measures across its operations, including energy-efficient stores and production facilities [34]	Shein’s rapid growth and extensive supply chain have raised concerns about its environmental impact [54]	Mango is focused on reducing energy consumption through operational efficiency measures in both production and logistics. The brand has introduced energy-saving systems in warehouses and stores [70]
Energy efficiency	Zara is committed to reducing energy consumption per unit of sales, focusing on energy-efficient technologies in its logistics and stores [69]	H&M invests in renewable energy sources and has set energy efficiency goals as part of its sustainability strategy [34]	Energy efficiency efforts are not emphasized, significant energy consumption driven by rapid production cycles [54]	Mango has launched initiatives to improve energy efficiency, including LED lighting installations and energy audits across its global operations. They also aim to reduce emissions through more efficient logistics [68,70]
Renewable energy usage	Inditex, Zara’s parent company, uses renewable energy in some of its facilities, but overall data is limited [69]	H&M is heavily invested in renewable energy, aiming to power its global operations with 100% renewable sources by 2030 [34]	Shein has minimal commitment to renewable energy, and its rapid supply chain logistics create significant emissions [54]	Mango uses renewable energy, especially in European facilities. Approximately 40% of the company’s electricity usage comes from renewable sources, with plans to increase this share in the coming years [70]
Energy recovery	Inditex has invested in energy recovery from waste at some of its production sites to improve its circular economy efforts [69]	H&M has invested in advanced recycling technologies, such as the Green Machine, which can recycle cotton and polyester blends, to make garment recycling more efficient [82]	Shein has not been known to invest heavily in textile recycling technologies or energy recovery in its manufacturing process [54]	Mango has implemented waste-to-energy initiatives at select production sites, using waste heat recovery systems to optimize energy efficiency, though this is not yet widespread [70]
Carbon emissions	Zara has reduced carbon emissions per unit of sales but still relies on conventional energy sources in some areas [69]	The company has set targets to become climate-positive and reduce carbon emissions across its operations [34]	Shein has been criticized for its rapid growth in carbon emissions, with a significant increase in energy usage linked to production and logistics [54]	Mango aims to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 and is reducing its carbon footprint through efficient transport and low-carbon logistics partnerships [70].

). Zara is notably distinguished for its integration of energy-efficient technologies, including LED lighting and sophisticated climate control systems across its retail outlets and logistics centers. Additionally, Zara has made significant strides in incorporating renewable energy sources within its production facilities, as documented in the Inditex Sustainability Report (2022). H&M mirrors this commitment, channeling considerable investments into energy-saving initiatives that constitute a core component of its global sustainability framework, with a strategic objective of achieving 100% renewable energy across all operations by 2030 [34]. In contrast, Shein has not publicly articulated a commitment to enhancing energy efficiency or reducing its carbon footprint, indicative of a minimal engagement in sustainability practices [54]. Mango adopts a more balanced approach, emphasizing the enhancement of operational energy efficiency and the utilization of renewable energy in its European operations, with approximately 40% of its electricity derived from renewable sources [70]. With respect to the adoption of renewable energy, both Zara and H&M are at the forefront of the transition, employing renewable electricity throughout their retail networks and the majority of their supply chains [34,69]. H&M further extends its efforts by collaborating with partners on renewable energy projects aimed at ensuring the sustained acquisition of renewable energy while concurrently reducing emissions. Mango is progressing along a similar trajectory, particularly within its European operations, while making incremental advancements in the use of renewable energy on a global scale [70]. Conversely, Shein continues to rely predominantly on conventional energy sources, resulting in substantial GHG emissions attributable to its high-volume global e-commerce operations [54]. The implementation of energy recovery initiatives serves to highlight additional disparities among these brands. Zara has adopted waste heat recovery systems in its manufacturing facilities to curtail energy waste and enhance overall energy efficiency [69]. H&M has embarked on the development of innovative waste-to-energy conversion projects within its supply chain [34]. Mango is beginning to implement heat recovery at select facilities [70]. Shein, however, lacks significant energy recovery systems due to its limited investment in energy and environmental sustainability strategies [54]. In terms of greenhouse gas emissions, all three brands—Zara, H&M, and Mango—prioritize this critical area, each having established climate neutrality (zero GHG emissions) targets. Both Zara and H&M have realized considerable progress through partnerships with low-emission logistics providers and the establishment of robust monitoring and reporting frameworks [34,69]. Mango is similarly committed to emissions reduction, with aspirations for climate neutrality by 2050, aligning its objectives with the European Green Deal, albeit with a comparatively less aggressive timeline relative to its peers [70]. In contrast, Shein’s opacity and lack of proactive measures regarding GHG emissions reflect a business model that prioritizes expeditious growth and scalability over environmental stewardship [54]. This analysis elucidates that Zara, H&M, and Mango are actively engaged in efforts to curtail energy consumption and GHG emissions through the adoption of renewable energy, implementation of energy efficiency measures, and transparent reporting of carbon emissions. Zara and H&M exhibit notable advancement in the global integration of these strategies, whereas Mango, while on a parallel path, remains in the nascent stages of expanding such initiatives. Conversely, Shein’s limited engagement with energy sustainability and carbon management presents a considerable disadvantage, exposing the brand to escalating regulatory and consumer scrutiny as environmental standards continue to solidify.

4.4. European ESRS Environmental Regulations: Actions by Mango and Zara

Directive 2022/2464 promotes the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) to ensure transparency and uniformity in corporate sustainability disclosures, aligning with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the objectives of the European Green Deal. This section specifically outlines the environmental indicators reported by Mango and Zara in 2023 (

Table 7. Environmental indicators according to ESRS 2023 (Mango).

Climate Change Indicators (ESRS E1)	Pollution Indicators (ESRS E2)	Water and Marine Resources Indicators (ESRS E3)	Biodiversity and Ecosystems Indicators (ESRS E4)	Resource Use and Circular Economy Indicators (ESRS E5)
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Scope 1, 2, and 3: Scope 1: 3294 tCO2e; Scope 2: 18,312 tCO2e; Scope 3: 1,572,156 tCO2e.	Air Pollutant Emissions (NOx, SOx, particulate matter, etc.): Direct emissions: 3294 tCO2e; Indirect emissions from purchased electricity and energy: 18,312 tCO2e; Other indirect emissions from transportation and production: 1,572,156 tCO2e.	Water use reported to CDP (Carbon Disclosure Project) as part of sustainable management.	Mango participates in carbon offset and biodiversity projects, such as the “Southern Cardamom REDD+” in Cambodia.	Use of recycled and sustainable materials in clothing production under the “No Waste” line.
Methodology based on the GHG Protocol and a “cradle-to-grave” approach to measure total carbon footprint.	Mango follows the Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals initiative to minimize chemical pollution in textile production, applying the Manufacturing Restricted Substances List with suppliers.	Measurement of water impact in production, prioritizing recycled and organic cotton.	No significant impacts on protected areas.	Creation of SCRAP (Collective Producer Extended Responsibility System) to improve textile waste management.
Renewable energy used: 94,169,365 kWh (69% of total).	Cardboard/Paper: 1806.98 tons; Non-recoverable waste: 563.41 tons; Plastics: 70.22 tons; Wood: 204.56 tons.	Implementation of chemical discharge reduction programs within its supply chain.	Support for reforestation and carbon capture projects like “Feng Po Po Wind” in China.	Reduced plastic packaging use and increased reuse of boxes in logistics operations.
Climate Transition Plans: Net Zero target by 2050, with emission reduction strategies.	Chemical monitoring via ZDHC Gateway, a tracking platform for chemical substances in the textile industry.	Wastewater quality monitoring in factories and application of ZDHC compliance controls.	Expanding the use of recycled and sustainable fibers to minimize environmental impact.	Expansion of circular design in products to facilitate reuse and recycling.
Analysis of physical risks (extreme weather events) and transition risks (regulatory and market changes).	Electrification of transportation fleet, renewable energy use in facilities, reduced plastic usage in packaging.	Use of tools such as Higg FEM to measure and reduce water impacts in production processes.	Partnership with ZDHC and other organizations to enhance sustainability across the value chain.	Expansion of circular design in products to facilitate reuse and recycling.
Scenario assessment of climate risks and their impact on Mango.	Direct emissions: 3294 tCO2e; Indirect emissions from purchased electricity and energy: 18,312 tCO2e; Other indirect emissions from transportation and production: 1,572,156 tCO2e.	Water use reported to CDP (Carbon Disclosure Project) as part of sustainable management.	Mango participates in carbon offset and biodiversity projects, such as the “Southern Cardamom REDD+” in Cambodia.	Use of recycled and sustainable materials in clothing production under the “No Waste” line.
Renewable energy supply agreement with Acciona Energía, reduced plastic usage, improved energy efficiency.			No significant impacts on protected areas.

and

Table 8. Environmental indicators according to ESRS 2023 (Zara).

Climate Change Indicators (ESRS E1)	Pollution Indicators (ESRS E2)	Water and Marine Resources Indicators (ESRS E3)	Biodiversity and Ecosystems Indicators (ESRS E4)	Resource Use and Circular Economy Indicators (ESRS E5)
GHG Emissions Scope 1 and 2 reduced by 11% in 2020 and continued to decline through 2023; Scope 3 efforts focused on logistics and materials optimization.	Reduced air pollutants (NOx, SOx, particulate matter) through cleaner dyeing and sustainable logistics; ZDHC program implemented in 2020 to phase out hazardous chemicals.	Implemented water-saving programs (18% reduction in 2020, 13% in 2021); Join Life expanded water footprint monitoring in 2023.	Conducted biodiversity assessments and monitored impacts in sensitive areas; invested in reforestation projects.	Increased use of recycled/sustainable materials (47% by 2021); expanded recycling and reuse programs; eco-efficient design promoted.
Set carbon neutrality target for 2040 with interim target of 50% reduction by 2030.	Improved wastewater treatment from 2019 to 2023; increased recycling across logistics and production.	Reduced aquatic pollution; improved wastewater systems throughout supply chain.	Promoted sustainable materials (goal: 100% organic/recycled cotton by 2025); expanded conservation partnerships.	Integrated circular design; optimized packaging and logistics to reduce waste.
Emission intensity decreased 17% in 2020; trend continued through 2023.	Pollution reduction through process optimization and sustainable practices.	Promoted water-efficient processes; expanded Join Life program.	No significant impacts on protected areas reported.	Optimized value chain to minimize textile waste; expanded circular economy strategies.
GHG Emissions Scope 1 and 2 reduced by 11% in 2020 and continued to decline through 2023; Scope 3 efforts focused on logistics and materials optimization.	Reduced air pollutants (NOx, SOx, particulate matter) through cleaner dyeing and sustainable logistics; ZDHC program implemented in 2020 to phase out hazardous chemicals.	Implemented water-saving programs (18% reduction in 2020, 13% in 2021); Join Life expanded water footprint monitoring in 2023.	Conducted biodiversity assessments and monitored impacts in sensitive areas; invested in reforestation projects.	Increased use of recycled/sustainable materials (47% by 2021); expanded recycling and reuse programs; eco-efficient design promoted.
Set carbon neutrality target for 2040 with interim target of 50% reduction by 2030.	Improved wastewater treatment from 2019 to 2023; increased recycling across logistics and production.	Reduced aquatic pollution; improved wastewater systems throughout supply chain.	Promoted sustainable materials (goal: 100% organic/recycled cotton by 2025); expanded conservation partnerships.	Integrated circular design; optimized packaging and logistics to reduce waste.
Emission intensity decreased 17% in 2020; trend continued through 2023.	Pollution reduction through process optimization and sustainable practices.	Promoted water-efficient processes; expanded Join Life program.	No significant impacts on protected areas reported.	Optimized value chain to minimize textile waste; expanded circular economy strategies.
GHG Emissions Scope 1 and 2 reduced by 11% in 2020 and continued to decline through 2023; Scope 3 efforts focused on logistics and materials optimization.	Reduced air pollutants (NOx, SOx, particulate matter) through cleaner dyeing and sustainable logistics; ZDHC program implemented in 2020 to phase out hazardous chemicals.	Implemented water-saving programs (18% reduction in 2020, 13% in 2021); Join Life expanded water footprint monitoring in 2023.	Conducted biodiversity assessments and monitored impacts in sensitive areas; invested in reforestation projects.	Increased use of recycled/sustainable materials (47% by 2021); expanded recycling and reuse programs; eco-efficient design promoted.

, respectively). Additionally, it presents a longitudinal analysis of the environmental performance of both companies over a five-year period (2019–2023), offering a comparative assessment of their key environmental indicators across the years 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023.

Longitudinal Environmental Performance of Zara and Mango (2019–2023)

This section presents a year-over-year assessment of Zara and Mango’s environmental performance from 2019 to 2023, focusing on climate change, pollution, energy use, and circular economy metrics in alignment with ESRS indicators.

• Climate Change Indicators (ESRS E1)

In 2019, Zara established strategies to measure and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions across its operations and supply chain, focusing on logistics improvements and sustainable transportation. In 2020, it achieved an 11% reduction in Scope 1 and 2 emissions, primarily due to the increased use of renewable energy. Regarding Scope 3 emissions, efforts were directed at working with suppliers to reduce supply chain emissions. By 2021, Zara consolidated its GHG emissions reduction strategy for Scopes 1 and 2 through greater use of renewable energy. For Scope 3 emissions, improvements in logistics and the implementation of energy efficiency programs were noted. In 2022, the reduction in Scope 1 and 2 emissions accelerated due to the continued shift to renewable energy. However, Scope 3 emissions increased in proportion, mainly due to supplier activities and transportation. In 2023, Scope 1 and 2 emissions continued to decline. While no specific reductions were reported for Scope 3 emissions, improvements were made in logistics and materials.

Emission Intensity and Energy Use—Zara and Mango (2019–2023)

In 2019, Mango measured GHG emissions across its operations and supply chain. Scope 1 and 3 emissions were the lowest during the analyzed period, whereas Scope 2 emissions were the highest. Between 2020 and 2023, Scope 1 emissions increased by 99%, Scope 2 emissions decreased by 81%, and Scope 3 emissions rose by 400%. It is important to note that the reported information is not referenced relative to units produced, square meters, or other normalization metrics.

In 2019, Zara progressively reduced its emission intensity through process optimization and the use of more efficient energy sources. In 2020, emission intensity decreased by 17% compared to 2019, primarily due to improvements in energy efficiency and transportation. In 2021, Zara achieved a significant reduction in emission intensity through the optimization of processes and enhanced energy efficiency in stores, offices, and logistics centers. This downward trend continued in 2022, with further reductions compared to the previous year. In 2023, Zara simply reported that emissions had decreased relative to the previous fiscal year, without specifying the extent.

During the 2019–2023 period, Mango also reduced its emission intensity through process optimization and increased energy efficiency. The company applied the GHG Protocol methodology to calculate its carbon footprint and adopted a “cradle-to-grave” approach to account for emissions throughout the entire product life cycle. However, specific units illustrating emission intensity are not provided.

In 2019, Zara increased the use of renewable energy in stores and logistics centers, aiming to improve energy efficiency across all operations. From 2020 to 2022, 80% of the electricity used came from renewable sources, supported by the implementation of energy efficiency projects in stores and logistics platforms. In 2023, the use of renewable electricity rose to 90%.

Throughout the 2019–2023 period, Mango steadily increased its use of renewable energy, reaching a 45% increase in renewable energy consumption in 2023 compared to 2019. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, the company intensified its commitment to renewable energy, likely driven by investments aimed at improving energy efficiency in response to Europe’s high energy costs in 2022. By 2023, approximately 70% of Mango’s total energy consumption was sourced from renewables.

Climate Transition and Environmental Strategy: Zara and Mango (2019–2023)

Climate Transition Plans

Zara began taking initial steps in 2019 toward decarbonization and optimizing its supply chain to reduce its carbon footprint. In 2020, the company established a target to reach carbon neutrality by 2040, with improvements in emissions and resource management. In 2021, a decarbonization plan was launched to support the 2040 neutrality goal, which included the adoption of renewable energy, process optimization, and emissions reduction throughout the supply chain. In 2022, Zara committed to a 50% reduction in emissions by 2030 as an interim target, which was reaffirmed in 2023 as it progresses toward climate neutrality by 2040.

Mango also adopted various strategies to achieve its Net Zero target by 2050. Notably, in 2021, it formed task forces in key operational areas such as product, transportation, maintenance, and construction to reduce GHG emissions. In 2020, Mango had already planned its climate transition as a signatory of the Fashion Charter for Climate Action, aligning with the European Green Deal. In 2019, it prepared for the 2020 transition to renewable electricity in headquarters, warehouses, and stores, reducing emissions by 50% through the use of mega-trailers for freight transport.

Climate Risks and Opportunities

In 2019, Zara identified supply chain risks linked to regulatory changes and extreme weather events, while exploring more sustainable products. In 2020, climate-related risks were analyzed in terms of supply chain impact and environmental regulation. In 2021, risks included regulatory shifts, extreme weather, and energy transition costs, prompting a focus on circular economy and sustainable products. In 2022, extreme weather events affected the supply chain, and in 2023, new risks and opportunities for improvement were redefined.

Mango conducted a continuous risk and opportunity analysis from 2019 to 2023. In 2019, it began identifying risks and exploring sustainability-related opportunities. In 2020 and 2021, Mango addressed physical and transition risks through energy efficiency and renewable energy use, while entering new markets. In 2022, it expanded its assessment to the broader textile industry. In 2023, the focus shifted to analyzing both physical risks (extreme weather events) and transition risks, including regulatory and market shifts.

Financial Impact of Climate Change: Zara experienced rising costs in 2019 due to investments in renewable energy and stricter environmental regulations. In 2020, costs increased due to investments in energy efficiency, renewables, and sustainable logistics. In 2021, additional costs were linked to store and logistics adaptation and regulatory compliance. These investment trends continued in 2022 and 2023, with further regulatory-driven expenses expected.

Mango assessed climate change’s financial impact on its business throughout the period. From 2019 to 2022, it analyzed how climate change affected its supply chain, energy costs, and operations, developing strategies to align with emerging regulations. In 2023, Mango focused on a scenario analysis to evaluate climate-related financial risks.

Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Measures

Zara implemented measures from 2019 to optimize transportation, improve energy efficiency, and use sustainable materials. In 2020, it continued these efforts. In 2021, recycled fabrics, energy efficiency programs in stores, and sustainable logistics strategies were introduced. In 2022, the use of recycled cotton, efficient transport, and renewables increased. In 2023, Zara further increased recycled materials use, optimized transport, and reduced store energy consumption.

Mango implemented climate mitigation and adaptation strategies from 2019 to 2023. In 2019, it offset 20,990 tCO₂e via sustainable projects. In 2020, it expanded renewable energy use in Spain and acquired 90,000 MWh of green energy internationally. From 2022 to 2023, it signed an agreement with Acciona Energía for renewable energy supply and reduced plastic usage. In 2023, climate mitigation efforts became more prominent as Mango adapted to new climate realities.

• Pollution Indicators (ESRS E2)

Air Pollutant Emissions (NOx, SOx, Particulate Matter): Zara reduced pollutant emissions from 2019 to 2023 through optimized transport, efficient production, sustainable logistics, and cleaner dyeing technologies. In 2023, a significant decrease in emissions was reported.

Mango also advanced in air pollutant reduction. In 2019, it focused on sustainable materials and efficient logistics. In 2020, it reported emissions by scope and identified pollution sources. In 2021, it set reduction targets (80% for direct and 35% for indirect emissions by 2030). In 2022, it introduced green hydrogen in transport to lower NOx and SOx. In 2023, it reported Scope 1 (3294 tCO₂e), Scope 2 (18,312 tCO₂e), and Scope 3 (1,572,156 tCO₂e) emissions.

Water and Soil Pollutant Discharges

Zara improved wastewater treatment from 2019 to 2023, especially among suppliers. Mango implemented the ZDHC initiative and the MRSL to minimize chemical discharge. By 2023, Mango reduced water and soil pollutants across its supply chain.

Hazardous and Non-Hazardous Waste Management

Zara increased recycling from 2019 to 2023 in logistics and production. Mango launched the “Second Chances” program in 2019, collecting 32 tons of textile waste. From 2021 to 2023, waste collection and recycling were expanded, with a detailed waste breakdown in 2023 (e.g., 1806.98 tons of cardboard/paper).

Hazardous Chemical Use and Release

Zara implemented the ZDHC program starting in 2020 to eliminate hazardous chemicals. Mango aligned with the Better Cotton Initiative in 2019 and later adopted MRSL and ZDHC Gateway for chemical monitoring.

Pollution Reduction Plans

Zara advanced circular economy strategies from 2019 to 2023. Mango joined the Fashion Pact in 2019, aligned with Science Based Targets in 2020, and electrified its fleet and increased renewable energy use by 2023.

• Water and Marine Resource Indicators (ESRS E3)

Total Water Consumption

Zara implemented water-saving programs, reducing water usage by 18% in 2020 and 13% in 2021. In 2023, the Join Life program further advanced water footprint tracking.

Mango began reducing water use in 2019, focusing on sustainable fibers. In 2022, it committed to a 25% water reduction by 2030. In 2023, it reported to CDP and emphasized full water footprint evaluation.

Water Footprint

Both companies worked on reducing water footprint from 2019 to 2023, adopting sustainable cotton, recycled fibers, and efficient dyeing technologies. Mango prioritized organic and recycled cotton in later years.

Impact on Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems

Zara reduced aquatic pollution through improved wastewater management. Mango began reducing chemical discharges in 2021 and expanded these efforts across the supply chain in 2022 and 2023.

Wastewater Discharges and Treatment

Zara improved wastewater systems from 2019 to 2023. Mango began wastewater monitoring in 2021 and implemented ZDHC Gateway tools by 2022, expanding them fully in 2023.

Water Conservation Strategies

Zara promoted water-efficient textile processes and expanded Join Life from 2019 to 2023. Mango set long-term goals in 2019, and expanded Higg FEM tools in 2022 and 2023 to measure, reduce, and audit water impact.

• Biodiversity and Ecosystem Indicators (ESRS E4)

Biodiversity Impact of Operations

Zara conducted biodiversity assessments from 2019 to 2023. Mango committed to the Fashion Pact in 2019, participated in forest conservation (e.g., Southern Cardamom REDD+), and expanded involvement through 2023.

Protected Areas Affected

Zara monitored and controlled impacts in sensitive areas from 2019 to 2023. Mango reported no significant impacts on protected areas during the same period.

Ecosystem Restoration Measures: Zara and Mango invested in reforestation and forest conservation. Mango supported carbon capture and reforestation projects like Feng Po Po Wind in China in 2022 and 2023.

Sustainable Use of Natural Resources

Zara promoted sustainable materials and aimed for 100% organic/recycled cotton by 2025. Mango aligned with BCI and emphasized circular economy practices throughout the period.

Partnerships with Conservation Entities

Zara expanded environmental partnerships from 2019 to 2023. Mango collaborated with SAC and ZDHC to improve water and chemical management in its supply chain.

• Resource Use and Circular Economy Indicators (ESRS E5)

Use of Renewable and Non-Renewable Materials

Zara and Mango increased the use of recycled/sustainable materials. Zara reached 47% sustainable materials by 2021 and launched the Committed line. Mango promoted “No Waste” collections from 2022 onwards.

Recycling and Reuse Rates

Zara expanded recycling programs from 2019 to 2023. Mango launched the “Second Chances” and “Committed Box” initiatives, and in 2023, established the SCRAP system for textile waste.

Waste Generation and Treatment

Both companies optimized waste management. Zara reduced packaging waste and increased reuse. Mango decreased plastic packaging and promoted box reuse in logistics.

Circular Economy Strategies

Zara and Mango integrated circular design into collections. Mango focused on recyclable product design and collaborated with NGOs on clothing collection and reuse programs.

Value Chain Waste Reduction

Both brands implemented process optimization to minimize textile waste. Zara focused on eco-efficient design. Mango emphasized circular product design to reduce value chain waste by 2023.

5. Discussions and Results

The fast fashion sector has a considerable impact on the environment, prompting several brands within this industry to implement a range of initiatives aimed at promoting sustainability, which includes the utilization of sustainable materials, waste reduction strategies, and the adoption of circular business models. However, the challenge of achieving decarbonization necessitates a commitment to climate neutrality, characterized by zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In terms of sustainable materials, a growing number of brands are increasingly incorporating organic cotton, recycled polyester, and innovative plant-based fibers to mitigate the carbon footprint associated with material sourcing [91]. The use of organic cotton is particularly noteworthy, as it necessitates reduced water usage and a decrease in chemical inputs compared to conventional cotton, thereby addressing critical issues such as water scarcity and pesticide contamination prevalent in traditional cotton farming [92]. Moreover, the adoption of recycled polyester derived from post-consumer plastic waste serves as a sustainable alternative to virgin polyester, thereby lessening the demand for fossil fuels and the GHG emissions associated with their production [93]. Nonetheless, the integration of sustainable materials within fast fashion collections may pose challenges, including limitations in textile availability and potential increases in the costs of certain fibers. Furthermore, issues surrounding transparency in sourcing persist, with numerous brands encountering difficulties in verifying the environmental claims of their suppliers, highlighting an urgent need for enhanced material traceability systems [94]. Improved transparency can significantly bolster sustainability by ensuring that claims correspond with actual practices [95]. Rapid production cycles and truncated product lifespans characteristic of fast fashion engender substantial waste in both manufacturing and post-consumer contexts. In response, many brands are adopting waste reduction strategies, such as implementing smaller production batches that align with real-time consumer demand, in accordance with lean production principles to minimize overproduction and waste [96]. Advanced inventory management systems and data analytics have significantly improved the accuracy of demand forecasting, enabling brands to mitigate excess inventory and avoid the proliferation of unsold stock [97]. In addition, clothing recycling programs initiated by retail stores serve as a vital component of waste reduction efforts, encouraging consumers to return used garments for sorting, reuse, or recycling into new textiles, which consequently extends product life cycles and curtails landfill waste [98]. However, the efficacy of such programs is often compromised by low consumer participation rates and the technical difficulties associated with recycling textiles, particularly those made from mixed fibers [99]. Moreover, many fast fashion recycling processes remain underutilized, frequently yielding lower-quality products from recycled garments, thereby underscoring the necessity for innovative approaches to closed-loop recycling systems [91]. To mitigate the environmental ramifications of traditional linear models, fast fashion brands are increasingly exploring circular supply chain practices. These circular strategies are designed to prolong the utilization of resources through services such as garment repair, resale, and recycling programs that reintegrate products into the supply chain [100]. One effective approach involves return schemes, wherein consumers are incentivized to return used garments, thereby fostering circularity by maintaining textiles in circulation and minimizing waste. Additionally, technological advancements are playing a crucial role in advancing circular supply chain initiatives by enabling traceability, resource optimization, and closed-loop logistics [101]. The integration of blockchain technology into fashion supply chains enhances traceability, thereby enabling companies and consumers to monitor products from their origin through to disposal [102]. This increased transparency validates sustainable practices and curbs greenwashing by ensuring that each stage of the supply chain aligns with environmental goals, particularly when disclosures are accompanied by external assurance and guided by regulatory frameworks such as the ESRS [61]. Furthermore, the application of artificial intelligence (AI) facilitates precise demand forecasting and inventory management, which can significantly reduce instances of overproduction and support more efficient, resource-conserving operational practices [103]. Nevertheless, transitioning to fully circular supply chains is beset by complexities. High operational costs, logistical hurdles, and the necessity for collaborative efforts among disparate global suppliers create barriers that demand substantial investment and commitment. Additionally, the overall effectiveness of circular models is significantly contingent upon consumer engagement with recycling and reuse initiatives, which remains low at present [104]. Brands are actively fostering changes in consumer behavior through educational campaigns, loyalty programs, and recycling incentives. For instance, various brands provide loyalty points or discounts in exchange for returned used garments, thereby motivating consumers to extend the lifespans of their products [105]. Educational initiatives designed to elucidate the environmental advantages of recycling, second-hand purchasing, and prolonged garment use seek to shift consumer habits toward more sustainable practices [93].

Among the four cases analyzed, we focus on Zara and Mango due to the greater availability of data and their adherence to the European regulations that apply to them.

Regarding the analysis of results in relation to Zara and Mango’s alignment with European environmental regulations over the five-year period examined, based on their corporate sustainability reports and publicly available online information, the environmental indicators E1 through E5 highlight several key trends. In terms of climate change (E1), Zara has reduced its Scope 1 and 2 emissions, while Scope 3 emissions have increased, signaling significant challenges in reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions across its supply chain. For Mango, Scope 1 and 3 emissions have risen, while Scope 2 emissions have declined, indicating that the challenges lie both within the company and throughout its supply chain. In both cases, Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions have increased, indicating the need for improved decarbonization across their supply chains.

Concerning GHG emission intensity, both Zara and Mango achieved reductions during the study period by increasing their use of renewable energy. Notably, Mango sourced 70% of its energy from renewables in 2023. However, Zara’s data do not specify the reductions in measurable units. Both companies must continue investing in renewable energy and reflect these expenditures in their budgets, as a means of lowering their carbon footprint through sustainable and climate-aligned investments.

In terms of climate transition strategies, Zara aims to cut GHG emissions by 50% by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2040. Mango is undertaking initiatives to reach climate neutrality by 2050, in accordance with the European Green Deal, focusing on operational areas such as product, transport, maintenance, and construction. These goals highlight the need for continued sustainable investments supported by sustainable financing mechanisms. In this area, and in line with the ESRS, both companies need to improve their climate transition metrics, ensuring greater objectivity and more robust numerical evidence.

In addressing climate risks, Zara prioritizes those related to regulatory changes and extreme weather events. Mango also considers these risks but places greater emphasis on energy-related risks, including costs and carbon footprint, which justifies its strategic shift toward renewable energy. In both cases, sustainable investment plays a central role in responding to new regulations, climate-related events, and the transition to greener energy in production, products, and distribution chains. Climate risks differ between the two companies, particularly in terms of energy, as Mango monetizes the risk in terms of costs and carbon footprint in tons, although it does not provide detail per unit produced.

These efforts inevitably result in significant financial impacts for both companies. These include the need for increased renewable energy capacity, investments in logistics infrastructure, and adaptation to evolving environmental regulations. Both firms must also prepare for the potential effects of climate change, including adverse weather events. These pressures reinforce the need to secure sustainable financing for climate-related investments, particularly in areas such as recycled textiles, energy efficiency, and sustainable logistics. Mango, in addition, offsets approximately 21,000 tons of CO₂ equivalent and continues to invest in renewable energy and plastic reduction initiatives.

Regarding pollution (E2), both Zara and Mango have reduced GHG emissions by focusing on sustainable materials and logistics. Mango stands out for its integration of green hydrogen into transportation to reduce its carbon footprint. Both companies have also improved wastewater treatment and reduced chemical discharges into water and soil over the analysis period. In terms of waste and recycling, both participate in dedicated programs—such as Mango’s “Second Chances” clothing collection—and recycle materials like cardboard and paper. Zara has adopted circular economy strategies focused on garments and fabrics, while Mango complements these with fleet electrification and expanded use of renewables to improve sustainability between 2019 and 2023.

Regarding water and marine resources (E3), both companies have reduced their water consumption. During the analysis period, Zara achieved a 20% reduction and Mango achieved a 25% reduction. Both adopted more sustainable cotton and recycled fibers, as well as less harmful dyeing techniques that reduce chemical discharges. Mango also monitors wastewater quality and reduces impacts through audits. Both companies are progressing in water conservation strategies, implementing more efficient textile processes in terms of water use.

As for biodiversity and ecosystems (E4), Mango carried out reforestation projects in Cambodia and carbon capture projects in China during the period under review, promoting a more circular economy and improving water and chemical management. Zara, aligned with circularity goals, has invested in more sustainable materials and strengthened its environmental partnerships, in line with SDG 16.

In terms of resource use and circular economy (E5), both companies use recycled materials—Zara at 47%—and have expanded recycling programs. Mango has introduced zero-waste collections and, in 2023, launched the SCRAP system for textile waste. Both companies have reduced packaging waste and promoted reuse—Mango reduced plastic packaging and reused logistics boxes—and integrated circular design principles into their collections. Mango also collaborates with NGOs in clothing collection and reuse programs. Within their supply chains, both companies have implemented waste reduction initiatives: Zara through eco-efficient product design and Mango through circular product development.

In conclusion, as active market players, both companies are immersed in a wide range of sustainable investments, which must be supported by sustainable financing. This will enable the development of more circular business models, more resilient and sustainable supply chains, and full compliance with harmonized European environmental regulations. Such alignment is essential for achieving the EU’s climate neutrality target by 2050.

6. Conclusions

The main objective of this research was to analyze sustainability in business models, supply chains, and compliance with European environmental regulations through case studies of four major fast fashion brands (ZARA, Mango, H&M, and Shein). Due to the density of ESRS indicators, this study has focused on environmental indicators; social and governance indicators were not analyzed and will be addressed in future research.

An exploratory methodology was applied, drawing from sustainability reports, corporate disclosures, and external communication channels to assess how the fast fashion sector aligns its actions with sustainability goals over the 2019–2023 period. This analysis was carried out in the context of the environmental framework established by the 2022 European Directive, particularly focusing on the twelve European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), with special attention to indicators E1 through E5.

Regarding the first research question, it is evident that sustainability initiatives in the fast fashion industry require a transition from linear “take-make-dispose” models toward circular models based on reuse, recycling, and redesign. This shift entails reducing water consumption, improving wastewater treatment, increasing energy efficiency, and managing waste to lower the sector’s carbon footprint. It also involves replacing traditional raw materials with recycled and more sustainable alternatives. The goal is to decarbonize the sector ethically, avoiding greenwashing by ensuring genuine compliance with the ESRS, as stipulated by the Directive.

This study shows that while fast fashion brands have taken actions in these areas, there are significant differences in their approaches, and a lack of harmonization in comparable indicators remains a challenge. Specifically, Mango and Zara are gradually aligning with European environmental indicators, supported by sustainable investments. However, comparability remains limited due to the lack of transparency in ESRS indicators and metrics (such as per-unit or per-square-meter indicators) which inhibits both comparability and the assessment of compliance levels. Moreover, external verification will begin in 2025, and it is likely that the quality of this information will improve in future reporting cycles.

Moreover, although companies are taking environmental actions, they often do not report the associated costs, monetary valuations, return periods, or details of sustainable financing mechanisms. This highlights the need for more integrated financial and sustainability reporting, which is increasingly viewed as essential for aligning corporate accountability with long-term environmental and social outcomes [106].

Regarding the challenges facing the industry, this study suggests that fast fashion brands should adopt best sustainability practices and ensure stricter compliance with ESRS indicators E1 to E5. While actions taken toward the end of the study period show improvements, especially with more quantitative environmental performance metrics, there remains a need to strengthen the quality and consistency of this information.

In conclusion, although fast fashion brands have taken initial steps to integrate sustainability into their operations, a significant gap remains between their stated initiatives and the environmental performance standards set by the ESRS. This study confirms that alignment with the ESRS is still incomplete, and since external assurance is not required until 2025, transparency remains limited. To meet the EU’s sustainability vision under the CSRD framework, fast fashion companies must improve ESRS compliance and reorient their business models toward greater circularity across the entire value chain in order to achieve full sectoral decarbonization by 2050.

Furthermore, circular business models must be supported by circular supply chains in order to meet ESRS requirements. These efforts should focus on three critical areas: water, energy, and waste management. ESG criteria must be integrated across the entire supply chain, supported by investments in technology and traceability, and strengthened through stakeholder collaboration.

Future lines of research should explore the actual impact of disclosed ESG strategies—particularly the social and governance dimensions, which were not addressed in this study. With the adoption of the ESRS under the 2022 CSRD, companies operating in the European market must shift from voluntary sustainability declarations to verifiable disclosures, which will significantly enhance the transparency required for effective accountability.

7. Research Limitations and Strategic Recommendations

While this study provides valuable insights into the alignment between sustainability initiatives in the fast fashion sector and the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), several limitations must be acknowledged.

First, the research relies exclusively on publicly available information disclosed through corporate websites and sustainability reports. While this approach ensures transparency and accessibility, the data have not been yet verified by independent third parties, as recommended under European regulatory frameworks.

Second, this study adopts a qualitative exploratory design, which limits the ability to conduct longitudinal or statistically robust analyses. Due to the lack of consistent quantitative metrics, comparisons between the analyzed brands are hindered, and the findings are not representative of SMEs in the sector.

Additionally, this study is limited to the environmental dimensions of the ESRS framework and does not address the social and governance components. These are equally critical in assessing sustainability risks and opportunities, particularly in relation to labor conditions, corporate governance, and ethical practices across the supply chain.

It is also important to note that the ESRS standards are relatively recent, and many companies are still in the early stages of adapting to regulatory changes for ESG compliance [74]. Once external verifications are in place, it will become easier to conduct the longitudinal tracking of sustainability indicators in the fast fashion sector [107,108].

At the same time, major fast fashion brands must collaborate with stakeholders to align disclosures with the ongoing changes being implemented [46,74,109]. Lastly, it should be noted that this study is based on corporate disclosures, which have not been independently verified, and no secondary sources were available to validate the data.

It is also worth acknowledging that Shein, despite facing widespread scrutiny over transparency, has recently taken initial steps to align with international expectations around sustainability reporting. The company has begun to publish aggregate emissions figures, committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions across its operations, and invested in programs aimed at circularity and renewable energy within parts of its supply chain [110]. These emerging initiatives—still in early stages and not yet fully aligned with ESRS criteria—reflect a recognition of evolving regulatory and consumer demands [54,111]. Continued efforts in transparency, third-party verification, and ESG governance may enhance Shein’s ability to contribute meaningfully to sector-wide sustainability goals in the coming years.

In light of these findings, several strategic recommendations can be proposed. Fast fashion companies should move beyond voluntary disclosures and prepare for mandatory alignment with ESRS by investing in data systems, traceability technologies, and external assurance partnerships that ensure consistent reporting across all scopes and indicators [61,112]. At the same time, regulatory bodies should offer tailored guidance and sector-specific templates for ESRS compliance to address the gap between general standards and the operational realities of complex fashion supply chains [46,112]. Also, third-party platforms such as NGO monitoring indices (e.g., Fashion Transparency Index) should be encouraged to complement corporate self-reporting, particularly for brands with low transparency or fragmented supply chains [113]. Finally, policymakers should consider transitional incentives and capacity-building programs for SMEs to avoid marginalizing smaller players that may lack resources for ESRS adaptation but represent a large portion of the sector [107,114].

8. Future Research Lines

Building upon the findings of this study, future research should consider several directions to deepen the understanding of sustainability implementation in the fast fashion sector under the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). At the same time, future research should integrate mixed-method approaches, combining case study analysis with stakeholder interviews, supplier audits, and quantitative benchmarking to enhance longitudinal insights and cross-brand comparability [52,53].

First, emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), blockchain, and digital product passports offer promising opportunities to enhance traceability, performance monitoring, and compliance with sustainability goals. These innovations could play a transformative role in enabling real-time ESG data collection and transparent reporting, especially in complex globalized supply chains [115,116].

Second, a longitudinal replication of the present study over a five-year period would provide valuable insights into the evolution of fast fashion companies’ alignment with ESRS. Such a follow-up study could assess whether current sustainability claims and initiatives have translated into measurable progress in environmental performance, supply chain transparency, and circularity. This would allow for a more robust evaluation of the effectiveness of the ESRS framework and hence the corporate adaptation over time.