An NGO accuses H&M and Zara of using BCI-certified cotton linked to deforestation

The British NGO Earthsight has unveiled a series of documents pointing to illegal deforestation by Brazilian producers of “Better Cotton” certified cotton, who are said to supply fast-fashion giants H&M and Inditex, owner of Zara. In a letter sent to Better Cotton on April 6, the Spanish group had already demanded greater transparency in the certification process, and complained that it had been waiting six months for the results of an internal investigation promised by the certification body.
 

Three armed guards behind a fence point their guns at a local resident, who is ultimately shot in the leg. In a series of documents incorporating videos, satellite photos and graphs, the NGO paints a picture of Brazilian mega-farms, which are reportedly subject to long lists of court injunctions, corruption convictions and millions of dollars in fines for clearing around 100,000 hectares of Cerrado savannah, the strip of land running across the whole country south of the Amazon.

Above all, these farms are said to produce 816,000 tonnes of “tainted” cotton a year. A mass of fibre that Earthsight says it was able to trace to eight Asian clothing suppliers. These companies are said to supply 168 million items a year to H&M, Zara, Bershka, Pull&Bear and others. All using cotton that is sold under an internationally recognised label.

“The NGO Earthsight has discovered that all the soiled cotton it has traced is certified sustainable by Better Cotton (BC),” the NGO states. “Most H&M and Zara products are made with BC cotton, making them by far the biggest users of BC in the world. Nearly half of all BC cotton comes from Brazil, more than any other country (…). Cotton from land illegally deforested before 2020 can therefore still be considered ‘better’, even if it has been stolen from local communities,” the organisation denounced.

Inditex questions its confidence in Better Cotton

Better Cotton replied on April 4, stating in a press release that it had completed an independent audit of three farms said to be implicated by Earthsight, but that it would not publish its conclusions until it had seen the NGO’s full report, officially published on April 11. For now, Better Cotton is simply indicating that its strategic partner in Brazil, the Brazilian Cotton Growers Association, is revising certain elements of its standards to bring them into line with those of Better Cotton.

Not enough to calm the anger evident in the letter sent by Inditex to Better Cotton on April 8, and relayed by the Spanish media outlet Modaes. “These allegations represent a serious breach of the trust placed in Better Cotton’s certification process by our group and by our product suppliers,” said the Spanish group, which was expecting a report promised by Better Cotton in March. “The trust we place in such processes developed by independent organisations, such as yours, is key to our supply chain control strategy.”

In Brazil, the large family-run companies in the Cerrado are said to have taken advantage of the government’s desire to save the Amazon, which makes up the northern half of Brazil. Using corruption and sometimes violence, these farms are said to have accelerated the rate of deforestation by 43% last year, almost systematically outside any control or legal framework, according to Earthsight.

Half of the Cerrado has already been deforested to make way for intensive farming, which is also reported to be taking up massive amounts of water and releasing massive quantities of harmful fertilisers.

“While we all know what soya and beef have done to Brazil’s forests, the impact of cotton has gone largely unnoticed,” points out Earthsight director Sam Lawson. “However, this crop has grown enormously in recent decades and has turned into a veritable ecological disaster. If you own cotton clothes, towels or sheets from H&M or Zara, they are probably tainted by the plundering of the Cerrado. These companies talk about good practice, social responsibility and certification systems (…) . It has become very clear that crimes linked to the commodities we consume must be dealt with by regulation, not by consumer choice.” 

The NGO is calling on legislators in consumer countries to introduce strict laws and enforce them rigorously. This is an opportunity for the organisation to point to the role of Germany and France in the recent loss of momentum of the European draft law on the duty of vigilance. Or against the European “Deforestation Regulation” scheme, which it claims fails to monitor the impact of cotton on forests.