The statement to be reviewed originates from the website of the fashion company SHEIN and refers to its publicly communicated efforts in the area of climate protection and decarbonisation: “Our operational teams and supply chain partners are working to reduce the environmental footprint of our products and facilities.” Despite the statement being mostly true, it is strongly limited by the vagueness of the statement and the scope of the company’s actions in regards to environmental protection.
This section of the website was first published in 2021, after SHEIN released its first Sustainability and Social Impact Report in the same year. According to the source code, the page was last updated in 2025, which suggests that the company continues to stand by this statement.
The quote is part of SHEIN’s broader sustainability communication, through which the company has presented its climate targets, emissions measurements, and operational measures since 2021. It signals that SHEIN is working to reduce its carbon footprint both at the organisational level and across the supply chain, textile production, and the products themselves.
It should be noted that the statement is formulated using “are working to,” which gives the company a certain degree of flexibility in implementation. In the following fact check, the presented efforts are critically examined using the company’s own figures from the Sustainability and Social Impact Report. This is followed by an independent assessment based on neutral sources.
The accuracy of this statement is of great societal relevance, as climate change represents a global threat and textile consumption in the European Union alone generated approximately 159 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalents in 2022, highlighting the sector’s significant contribution to greenhouse gas emissions.
Development of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Since the Introduction of Decarbonisation Targets
SHEIN publishes an annual “Sustainability and Social Impact Report”, which provides an overview of the fast fashion company’s engagement in the areas of sustainability and social responsibility. The goal of decarbonisation first appeared in the report for the year 2022 (p. 39). In 2024 (p. 43), the company presented long-term and short-term climate targets for 2050 and 2030 that were jointly adopted with the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi). In doing so, SHEIN follows the classification of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, which divides emissions into three categories. Scope 1 describes emissions that arise directly from the company’s activities, Scope 2 refers to greenhouse gas emissions from the generation of purchased energy, and Scope 3 includes all other emissions along the supply chain over which the company has no direct control. For fashion companies such as SHEIN, these typically account for the largest share of the carbon footprint. According to the company’s own statements (p. 39), Scope 3 emissions account for more than 99 percent of SHEIN’s total emissions (p. 32).
The most recent report refers to the year 2024. In this year, the data were fully externally audited for the first time and verified by Bureau Veritas. SHEIN also refers to methodological adjustments in emissions calculations.
The reported changes in greenhouse gas emissions between 2023 and 2024 are summarised below.
| Category | Scope | Change 2023 vs. 2024 | Emissions |
| Total Emissions | Scope 1, 2, 3 | +12.8% to +23.1% | – |
| Scope 3 categories with SBTi targets | Scope 3 | +6% to 108% | >26 million tonnes |
| Fuel and Energy-Related Activities (Cat. 3) | Scope 3 | +106% | – |
| Use of Sold Products (Cat. 11) | Scope 3 | +107.6% | – |
| End-of-Life Treatment of Sold Products | Scope 3 | +72.6% | – |
| Capital Goods | Scope 3 | –50% | ~34 thousand tonnes |
| Upstream Leased Assets | Scope 3 | -50% | ~5 thousand tonnes |
| Fugitive Emissions | Scope 1 | –72.4% | ~5 thousand tonnes (2023) |
SHEIN presents various measures to reduce CO₂ emissions, including the expansion of photovoltaic systems, currently comprising 10 installations on company-owned buildings, as well as energy-saving measures such as optimised consumption monitoring in offices and warehouses (p. 48-49). In textile manufacturing, energy- and water-saving technologies are being introduced at eight fabric production facilities, achieving significant annual savings (p. 50). In the transport sector, SHEIN relies on improved route planning to reduce air freight, produces closer to customers, and promotes electromobility (p. 51). In addition, the company is working to minimize waste and establish closed recycling loops in its own operations (p. 52) and encourages suppliers to switch to climate-friendly technologies such as photovoltaics (p. 50).
In 2022 and 2023, a similar pattern can be observed, with isolated savings but an overall increase in CO₂ emissions compared to the previous year, which the company attributes to its own growth (p. 31). The various measures and developments are described little or not at all in the reports from these years. Since the explicit decarbonisation target was introduced, the company’s emissions have increased continuously. Moreover, there is a noticeable gap between the communicated climate protection measures and the company’s actual emissions figures. This contradiction is also confirmed by independent sources. The Fossil Free Fashion Scorecard by Stand.Earth reports that SHEIN increased its Scope 3 emissions by 170 percent over the past two years (p. 7). In this report, SHEIN performs poorly overall: in the categories “Commitments & Transparency,” “Renewable Energy Transition,” “Advocacy,” and “Clean Shipping,” the company receives the lowest possible rating. In the category “Materials and Circularity,” SHEIN received a grade of D– under the American grading system (p. 3-4). These are exactly the categories SHEIN claims to currently reduce their carbon emissions in. It is also notable that SHEIN reports an unusually high share of transport emissions within Scope 3, indicating a strong dependence on air freight (p. 47). This directly contradicts SHEIN’s own claim that it seeks to promote the use of lower-emission transport modes.
Environmental and Social Impacts of the Fashion Industry
Multiple studies show that low-cost fashion is associated with significant environmental and health burdens. These extend across the entire life cycle of a garment. Such burdens arise both in processing and raw material extraction, as well as in working conditions within the supply chain. In the fast fashion industry, the associated ecological and social costs are considered a structural feature (p. 1-2).
Several studies also demonstrate that the fashion industry makes a substantial contribution to climate change. Research suggests that the sector accounts for up to around eight to ten percent of global CO₂ emissions . Between the early 2000s and 2015, greenhouse gas emissions from the consumption of clothing and footwear increased significantly, from approximately one billion to around 1.3 billion tonnes per year.
Projections indicate that without fundamental structural change, annual emissions from the sector could continue to rise and approach three billion tonnes of greenhouse gases by 2030. Emissions from the fashion industry already exceeded two billion tonnes in 2018, with half attributed to the fast fashion segment (p. 2).
Global data further show that the environmental burdens of the fast fashion industry are intensified by rising production and waste volumes. Around 92 million tonnes of textile waste are generated worldwide each year. Between 2000 and 2015, textile production more than doubled, while the average duration of garment use declined by more than one third over the same period.
While only about eight percent of textile fibres used in 2023 were produced from recycled sources, around eleven percent of global plastic waste originates from clothing and textiles. This development confirms that increasing production volumes have not been offset by sufficient recycling or longer product use.
Sustainability Communication and Greenwashing
Empirical research on fast fashion highlights the substantial environmental burden associated with ultra-rapid production cycles, including high water consumption, chemical pollution, and the generation of significant textile waste. In their analysis, the scientists Giovana Santa Rosa Lana and Paulo Afonso Brardo Duarte argue that business models based on accelerated collection turnover and low-price strategies structurally intensify resource use and shorten product life cycles, thereby amplifying environmental externalities.
Applying this perspective to SHEIN’s ultra-fast fashion model suggests that its environmental footprint must be assessed not only at the level of individual sustainability initiatives, but in relation to the systemic logic of continuous demand stimulation and high-volume production. The authors further point to labour-related risks embedded in cost-driven global supply chains, including outsourcing practices, wage pressure, and limited transparency. From this standpoint, corporate sustainability commitments require evaluation in terms of their measurable structural impact rather than their communicative framing.
Limitations and Contradictions of the Statement
The statement is cautiously formulated and refers only to ongoing efforts (“are working to”), without claiming concrete target achievement or measurable reductions. In principle, it is plausible that large fashion companies implement operational measures to mitigate environmental impacts, such as supply chain adjustments, material substitutions, or internal sustainability structures. Such measures are not unusual in the industry.
However, the statement remains vague and provides no verifiable information regarding an actual reduction in the environmental footprint. Scientific studies demonstrate that environmental and health risks persist throughout the entire life cycle of clothing, that textile production continues to involve high water consumption, and that the fashion industry as a whole contributes significantly to climate change. Using SHEIN as an example, it also becomes evident that communicated sustainability measures are often disproportionate to company size and environmental impact and are therefore criticised as greenwashing. SHEIN, as one of the largest ultra-fast fashion companies, only implements marginal changes not on par with what a company that size is capable of.
Evidence for this is provided by studies analysing the environmental and social costs of the fast fashion industry along the entire supply chain, showing these impacts to be structurally embedded. Research on greenwashing further highlights the discrepancy between announcements and actual effects using the case of SHEIN. Despite isolated improvement measures, emissions data from the sector underline that absolute environmental impacts remain high.
It remains unclear how absolute emissions will develop with continued production growth, to what extent the environmental footprint per product is declining, and whether independent life cycle analyses can demonstrate measurable reductions.
Conclusion
Although the statement is partially correct, it has only limited explanatory power. While it is reasonable to assume that operational teams and supply chain partners are working on improvements, the available evidence does not confirm a demonstrable positive environmental effect.
It should be emphasised that the figures presented in SHEIN’s Sustainability and Social Impact Report are not independently verifiable and should therefore be treated with caution. The stated climate targets and climate-friendly measures are not reflected in the annual CO₂ balance. With regard to climate protection measures, it is noticeable that the company has implemented these measures in only a small number of warehouses and textile production facilities (p. 50). The figures presented are therefore never placed in relation to the total number of SHEIN’s production sites. Statements regarding the implementation of climate-friendly measures at production facilities also remain vague, as they refer only to encouraging suppliers (p. 50). How this encouragement is implemented and what incentives are offered remains unclear. Consequently, the evidence provides insufficient support for the statement.
SHEIN, as one of the largest ultra-fast fashion companies, only implements marginal changes that fall short of what a corporation of its scale, financial capacity, and global influence would be capable of. Rather than fundamentally restructuring its production model, supply chain transparency, and labor standards, the company appears to prioritize reputational management and incremental adjustments over systemic transformation. Given its market dominance and technological resources, SHEIN could act as a driving force for industry-wide reform; instead, its current measures remain largely reactive, fragmented, and insufficient to address the structural environmental and social challenges inherent in ultra-fast fashion.
Based on this, it is necessary that sustainability-sounding statements are critically examined. Individual measures are insufficient to resolve the systemic environmental problems of the fashion industry. Independent scientific studies are particularly essential for assessment.
RESEARCH | ARTICLE © Golnaz Bayati, Angelina Burger and Theresa Hunker, Stuttgart Media University, Germany
Leave your comments, thoughts and suggestions in the box below. Take note: your response is moderated.
