Next and Byford are renowned brands of UK. The brands sign up to US Cotton Trust Protocol that will help them to source all cotton from responsible sources by 2025. The U.S. Cotton Trust Protocol provides fashion brands and retailers with the critical information they need to show the cotton fiber element of their supply chain is responsibly grown. It works by providing member brands with verified data on the sustainability practices used on U.S. cotton farms, with participating growers collecting data in six key areas of sustainability:
water use, greenhouse gas emissions, energy use, soil carbon, soil loss, and land use efficiency.
Byford, founded in Leicester, UK with its origins dating back the early 20th century, is dedicated to quality garments, reflecting a commitment to high standards of design and craftsmanship.
Today, the brand has more than 1,500 sales points in over 20 markets around the world. Byford said that “By working with them, we are now able to monitor and track sustainability improvements, including greenhouse gas emissions. Our direction as a brand is to use more authentic and ethically sourced fabrics and the Trust Protocol gives us confidence the cotton we purchase is from a more sustainable source.”
Next ’s 2025 target to source 100% of its main raw materials through known, responsible or certified routes means that it will only use cotton produced in line with key sustainability performance indicators. The U.S. Cotton Trust Protocol underpins and verifies sustainability progress through sophisticated data collection and independent third-party verification.
Dr. Gary Adams, president of the U.
S. Cotton Trust Protocol, said, “The Trust Protocol’s emphasis on measurement and independent verification provides the confidence and trust that a brand is using responsibly grown cotton and producing a product that consumers can believe in. With each member that joins, we have greater resources to help provide tools and knowledge to U.S. cotton farmers to help them continuously improve their sustainability practices.”
