What happens when the end-of-pipe safety valve disappears?
The EU’s ban on destroying unsold clothing and footwear is now in effect for large companies.
But here’s the question I’ve been thinking about…
If brands can no longer destroy excess inventory, shouldn’t the alternatives already exist at scale?
Policies often focus on stopping undesirable behaviour. Markets, however, only change sustainably when there are commercially viable alternatives.
So what happens next? 🤔
❓ Will we see brands become dramatically better at demand forecasting because overproduction is suddenly much more expensive?
❓Will resale, refurbishment, rental and recommerce move from being “nice sustainability initiatives” to core profit centres?
❓Will fibre-to-fibre recycling finally receive the investment it has needed for years because feedstock is now worth preserving?
❓Will new intermediaries emerge—companies specialising in reverse logistics, authentication, repair, redistribution and material recovery?
And perhaps the biggest question…
Does this signal the beginning of a new competitive advantage?
For decades, success in fashion has largely been measured by how effectively brands create and sell products.
Over the next few years, I suspect the winners will be those that are equally good at managing what happens after products don’t sell.
The organisations that can accurately predict demand, recover value from returned and unsold inventory, and build profitable circular pathways won’t simply comply with regulation—they’ll operate with lower risk, lower waste and entirely new revenue streams.
History shows that regulation rarely changes markets on its own.
It changes incentives.
And
Markets then respond with innovation.
I’m curious to hear others’ views.
What new industries, capabilities or business models do you think this legislation will accelerate over the next five years?
Read More
