CFJ base values accreditation methodology and assessment protocols
Here’s the data and definitions behind our accreditation, along with disclosures, qualifiers, omissions and limitations of it.
Introduction
The CFJ base values accreditation is designed to recognise and uplift brands taking genuine strides towards a total ethics fashion system, helping citizen consumers to easily find and support those moving the fashion industry forward, while offering far more responsible options than the majority of the industry.
For our accreditation to be effective, and to avoid green- and ethics-washing, it is vital that our benchmarks, how we developed them, and the way in which we assess products and brands against those criteria are completely transparent and available to everyone. Furthermore, it is critical that these indicators, benchmarks and criteria are monitored, reviewed and evolved as new data and information becomes available, and as the industry progresses and new innovations, practices and solutions are developed. CFJ is committed to this.
As such, this page exists to share the methodology behind our accreditation criteria and benchmarks, and any substantiating evidence and information used to create these. We are also committed to clearly highlighting and communicating any and all omissions and limitations of the CFJ base values accreditation, acknowledging that it is attempting to create a minimum baseline for the industry, with much more improvement and progress required. We believe brands and products that meet these base values should be celebrated, as they are far strides ahead of industry standard practices.
This page aims to ensure comprehension of the CFJ base values accreditation, what it means, how it is devised, how products and brands are assessed, how it is contributing towards progress, and what opportunities remain to be tackled by future accreditation levels and further industry action.
Definitions
Definitions of terms used in our CFJ base values accreditation.
Total ethics fashion
A type of fashion (system) which prioritises the life and wellbeing of people, our fellow animals and the planet before profit. This system is one we must continually work towards, and which pays living wages to all people, embraces degrowth and circularity, and moves beyond the use of animal-derived and fossil fuel-based fibres, amongst other things. You can learn about a total ethics fashion system by reading our manifesto.
Base values
Base values always refers to the base values of a total ethics fashion system. These values should be expected as a minimum from the current fashion industry, in its efforts towards total ethics. These include payment of a living wage to people working at tier one of the supply chain, avoidance of all animal-derived materials, the use of CFJ’s environmentally preferred materials, and embracing degrowth and circularity. As the industry progresses, the base values of a total ethics fashion system will shift. Right now, most of the industry is woefully unable to meet these base values.
CFJ’s environmentally preferred materials
A list of materials ranked by CFJ from unacceptable, must be phased out, needs improvement, better than most, through to best currently available. In order to be accredited, a product, collection or brand must meet the following minimum requirements for preferred material usage:
100% of the product materials must be above ‘unacceptable’
90% of materials must be above ‘must be phased out’
50% of materials must be above ‘needs improvement’
15% of materials must be ‘best currently available’
You can find this list and learn more about it on our website.
CFJ’s environmentally preferred dyes
A list of dyes ranked by CFJ from unacceptable, must be phased out to acceptable. In order to be accredited, a product, collection or brand must meet the following minimum requirements for preferred material usage:
100% of dyes must be above ‘unacceptable’
70% of dyes must be above ‘must be phased out’
You can find this list and learn more about it on our website.
Animal-free
For a material, product, collection or brand to be considered animal-free, it must not include animal skins, fibres, feathers, fur, hairs, or other inputs within materials, dyes or glues. An animal is defined as any being on the Animalia branch of life.
Living wage
A living wage is defined as a remuneration for work which covers a person and their family’s basic needs and decent living expenses including food, shelter, medical care and so on, within a standard work week. Living wage shall be determined exclusive of overtime wages and by net wages including in-kind and cash benefits, and deducting taxes and deductions. CFJ adheres to the Global Living Wage Coalition’s definition of a living wage.
Tier one
Tier one refers to where the final products (whether they are footwear, accessories or garments) are finished, including but not limited to being stitched and sewn together.
Tier two
Tier two refers to where materials are knitted, weaved, washed, dyed, finished, printed and so on. This may also be where components that go into the finished product at tier one stage such as buttons, zippers, rubber soles, insulation, and fusibles are produced.
Tier three
Tier three refers to where raw materials are processed through ginning, spinning, and other methods.
Tier four
Tier four refers to where raw materials such as cotton, bamboo, or mycelium are grown, extracted, cultivated and/or harvested.
Accreditation criteria disclosures and qualifiers
The criteria required for products to meet CFJ base values accreditation status and our method of assessment.
Animal-free
Applicants sign in assurance CFJ through their application and licensing agreement that no animal-derived ingredients or materials (based on above definitions) are used in their approved products
CFJ does not conduct independent lab testing to determine if these assurances are accurate, however material sourcing information is required, and helps us to verify this.
Living wages paid at tier one
Applicants must provide proof of living wages (per Global Living Wage Coalition and Ethical Trading Initiative indicators and definitions) for the lowest paid employee of their tier one supplier or facility in any of the following forms:
Independent third party audit within last year from recognised body (including but not limited to SMETA, BSCI, WRAP, SA8000, Higg FSLM and UNIC)
Accreditation of compensation systems within the last year by a recognised labour organisation such as the Fair Labor Association, the Asia Floor Wage Alliance, Fair Wear Foundation, or local union groups
Self-enforced and reported living wage policies and payroll analysis (such as from the Fair Labor Association’s calculation tool) supported by 2 payslips of the lowest paid worker (within the last 6 months)
Working conditions and protection at tier one
All brands seeking accreditation must have and provide CFJ with a policy in place to protect all tier one suppliers involved in the production of accredited products. This policy must outline a ban on the use of child labour and modern slavery practices, and must highlight permission and encouragement of unionisation, while demanding safe working conditions and living wages. This policy must also condemn racial, gender-based and other discrimination in the workplace, and limit excessive over-time.
CFJ environmentally preferred materials
Our focus on materials as the main environmental requirement for this accreditation is based on the major impact tier four of fashion supply chains (where raw materials are produced) has on the planet. This tier is responsible for as much as 38% of the industry’s impact, with many brands reporting far higher numbers for their own supply chains.
Our preferred materials and dyes lists take into consideration multiple sustainability and ethical factors which cannot be separated, prioritising materials that align with the values of our organisation and which move away from materials associated with the animal industrial complex, fossil fuel extraction and deforestation given the destruction and environmental harm inherent to these.
Based on best currently available government and industry data, this list also prioritises materials which are biodegradable and recyclable (allowing for better cradle to grave outcomes), which release fewer emissions during production, which have a smaller land footprint (and thus biodiversity impact), and which generally require less resource extraction and use.
The Made-By Environmental Benchmark, Common Objective’s material reviews, the Higg Index and a range of life-cycle assessments have also been reviewed and considered. With no one perfect data set for the fashion industry, we have had to rely on our expert analysis of material production and life-cycle impacts to offer an aspirational yet achievable guide for brands and citizens.
While reiterating that none of these datasets are perfect or can be relied upon in isolation, and many LCAs are geographically limited, there is a serious lack of data on fashion’s impact. We do not have the luxury of waiting until perfect data is available to act and call for change, in the midst of a climate and biodiversity crisis. This data does provide us with a solid indication of what materials are more harmful than others, and we have made the decision to do something, rather than nothing.
Our list recognises that in many cases, perfect materials do not yet exist. Therefore, we have a rigorous annual review policy to ensure we reassess our preferred material and dye list inline with industry developments, as new data and new materials are released.
Considers slow and circular fashion
All brands applying to get products or collections approved by the CFJ base values accreditation must be working to become more circular and contributing to a more circular system. Brands must demonstrate this through the implementation of at least two circular practices such as using a majority of biodegradable and recycled materials, offering repairs or rental programs, and offering product recycling.
All brands applying to get products or collections approved by the CFJ base values accreditation must also demonstrate that they are not contributing to overproduction in fashion and use a business model counter to the growing ultra-fast fashion system, instead encouraging considered, thoughtful production and consumption. Brands must demonstrate this through the implementation of at least two responsible production and consumption practices such as avoiding marketing strategies that rely on heavy discounts and frequent sales, offering information on how to care for, and repair, products to make them last, provide information on the importance of slow fashion, etc.
Accreditation omissions and limitations
While we recognise the importance of transparency around our standards and the processes implemented to ensure they are upheld, we also recognise the importance of being clear about what is not addressed by the CFJ base values accreditation. The below provides a comprehensive review of key areas that are not covered under this accreditation level, that we plan to address and include in future levels.
Living wages and working conditions in tier two through four
Living wages in tier one only: It is vital for workers throughout the supply chain to receive fair compensation. However, the CFJ base values accreditation does not require a living wage commitment for workers in tiers 2, 3 and 4 of an approved product’s supply chain. Currently, less than 2% of garment workers in tier one are paid a living wage, and it is likely that percentage of those receiving a living wage and working in other tiers is even less. Our hope is that increased awareness around living wages in tier one will help to drive more awareness and action in other parts of the supply chain and is something we aim to address in future accreditation levels.
Worker protection policies versus enforcement: Although the CFJ base values accreditation requires brands to have policies in place with tier one suppliers that address modern slavery and other fair and safe working conditions, having a policy does not mean these policies are enforced. The CFJ base values accreditation does not conduct or require evidence of physical factory or facility audits or checks to assess whether these policies are being practised or enforced. We believe that facilities paying living wages are more likely to be providing safer working environments than those that are not, and mitigate some risk of unjust working practices through our demand for living wage payment. Such policies are also not required for other parts of the supply chain such as tiers 2, 3 and 4. Again, our hope is that increased awareness of tier one worker policies will help to drive more awareness and action in other parts of the supply chain and that mandatory factory and facility audits are something we can incorporate into future accreditation levels.
Beyond supplier policies and audits: Important to ensuring better working conditions for those in the supply chain is the development of better Buyer Codes of Conduct as these address the power imbalance between buyers and their suppliers (e.g. factories, farms) by having buyers commit to improving their own purchasing practices. Purchasing practices include, to name just a few examples, the pricing and payment terms offered by the Buyer, production timelines, and delivery terms, among others. Something that future accreditation levels will incorporate. In future levels of our accreditation we will be exploring the inclusion of these conduct codes.
CFJ’s preferred materials and dyes
Product only: the preferred material and dye requirements relate only to the finished product itself, not packaging or sundries such as hardware. Future accreditation levels may aim to cover packaging as well as components and sundries too. We focussed only on product materials given the significance of their impact.
Finish product only: the preferred material and dye volumes and rankings are based on the material used in a sample sized finished product, not including waste material or cut-offs at the cut and sew stage. Future accreditation levels may aim to incorporate zero waste management practices.
Best currently available data: as discussed previously, the PM&DL is based on the best currently available data and information, and developed through the lens of our organisation’s values and priorities to protect people, animals and the planet before profit. However, available data is limited. As a result, it can be argued that our PM&DL is not able to definitively compare one material to another. However, we believe that in a global environmental crisis we cannot wait before acting to improve fashion production and consumption, and that indicative data is important to use while the fashion industry’s data gap is addressed. We are committed to reviewing our PM&DL regularly to ensure it takes into account the latest and most reliable new data and research, and is adjusted accordingly.
Environmental impacts
There are no explicit targets related to emissions, chemical or water use across the fashion supply chain, as we primarily focus on material impacts. This means that energy use in facilities and other environmental impacts are not considered.
Again, given the significant portion of environmental impact associated with material production, our base values accreditation focuses on these. As environmental science in fashion improves, we aim to build on the base values accreditation with additional levels, which may address these other issues and impacts.
Slow and circular fashion
The impact of the circular and slow practices encouraged by the CFJ base values accreditation are not assessed and no specific targets are required around responsible production or consumption volumes, new product drop frequency, or waste management practices. Future accreditation levels would aim to set concrete targets and impact scores in these areas.
Other animals in the fashion supply chain
While animals are protected from being transformed into materials by our base values accreditation, we do not address fashion’s impact on other animals surrounding fashion supply chains. While our preferred materials list aims to address biodiversity and other impacts harming wildlife, issues such as the targeting of animals considered ‘pests’ on plant-based farms are not addressed.
Accreditation stakeholder and peer review
The CFJ base values accreditation criteria, benchmarks, indicators and processes will be reviewed annually to consider and address any required updates due to changes or developments in material science and certifications; industry, NGO, government and academic data and research; global market, environmental and societal conditions; and global and local legislation and regulation.
We aim for this to be done in consultation with an advisory board of experts in the field and stakeholders.