While many stakeholders in the textile industry have worked to close the loop on fabric waste, circular economy specialist Reconomy said there’s more work to be done.
That’s according to the United Kingdom-based company’s new research report on business-to-business textile circularity in that nation across five categories: Soft furnishings (hospitality and healthcare linens), upholstery and furniture textiles, automotive textiles, agricultural textiles, and geotextiles and construction textiles. Across all categories, Reconomy found that while circularity is technically possible, the process is impeded by challenges in sorting, aggregation, data visibility and underdeveloped end markets.
“Despite increasing focus on textile clarity, most B2B textile waste continues to leave organizations through default routes, not because solutions don’t exist, but because intervention happens too late,” the report said.
The report found that more than 6,000 metric tons of hospitality textiles—predominantly bed, bath and table linens—are lost each year in the U.K., either sent to waste, down-cycled, or unaccounted for. The U.K. healthcare system also generates approximately 42,000 metric tons of clinical gown textile waste per year, along with the loss of around four million individual linen items annually.
Reconomy also found that around 45,000 metric tons of textile waste is produced by end-of-life vehicles, and agricultural textiles and plastics combined for an estimated 36,000-40,000 tons per year, although the report noted that textile-specific data is not systematically tracked for this category. The report also found that robust national textile waste volume data doesn’t yet exist for the upholstered furniture and construction and geotextiles categories in the U.K.
The report identified three forces poised to transform unmanaged B2B textile flows—regulatory momentum, commercial exposure, and data and reporting expectations. Regulations such as the European Union’s Ecodesign and Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR), extended producer responsibility (EPR) and digital product passports, which are in effect or about to be placed, are putting greater pressure on companies to manage textile waste and pursue more circular practices.
At the same time, the disposal costs continue to rise, and recycling markets remain volatile, and for large organizations, unmanaged textile flows represent a source of avoidable cost and reputational risk. And with greater expectations for data management and reporting throughout the textile supply chain, the report noted that B2B textiles can no longer be treated as a peripheral waste issue.
Reconomy identified several structural barriers across sectors that have prevented B2B textile circularity solutions from scaling to meet the demands of waste production. Failure to intervene at control points before textiles enter mixed waste routing has made it more difficult for recycling further down the line, and fragmented and underdeveloped end-markets make it difficult to recycle at a larger scale.
Reconomy also noted that individual sites rarely generate the volume of textile waste that is required to support viable recycling routes—when a recycler requires around 50,000 metric tons of textile waste over two to three years, many individual companies are unable to produce anywhere near that amount.
And with tight refurbishment and decommissioning timelines, along with fire safety and hazardous substance compliance risks, many organizations simply don’t have the time to experiment with circularity techniques and default to funneling recyclable textiles into waste management. This pressure, along with limited data visibility for textile waste, has contributed to low adoption of circularity programs, according to Reconomy’s research.
“Across sectors, recycling pilots have failed not because materials are unsuitable, but because volumes are insufficient, decisions are taken too late, and responsibility is fragmented,” the report said. “Without earlier intervention and aggregation, even technically viable solutions remain commercially unworkable.”
To overcome these challenges, Reconomy offered several opportunities for organizations within each of the identified sectors to help mitigate textile waste and improve circularity through recycling.
While hygiene requirements restrict reuse of some textiles in hospitality and healthcare settings, Reconomy suggested introducing clearer sorting and decision rules at end-of-life that enable higher-value recycling routes rather than default rag or residual waste streams. Reconomy suggested similar sorting and collection strategies for other sectors, emphasizing the importance of identifying reusable textiles before they leave the facility of use.
Reconomy also suggested that companies work with other entities in their sector to aggregate textile waste to reach volumes that will be sufficient to make recycling economically viable. And then capturing data on volumes, fiber types and waste destinations will help these companies not only in compliance but also to inform procurement and replacement decisions.
“Across all sectors, progress is driven less by new technology and more by deliberate system design around materials already in circulation,” the report said. “For many organizations, B2B textiles are still not viewed as a strategic priority. This is precisely why they represent such a significant unmanaged risk and opportunity.”
