Oxford Report Puts Fashion’s Farmland ‘Influence’ at 30 Percent

Fashion’s fiber sourcing may give the industry influence over almost one-third of the world’s agricultural land. However, this does not mean fashion occupies—or is solely responsible for—one-third of it.

The distinction sits at the center of a new report from the University of Oxford’s Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment and Dirt Charity. The report estimates that five groups of natural fibers affect about 1.45 billion hectares, or 30.15 percent, of global agricultural land.

Leather and wool account for almost 97 percent of that total. The researchers linked leather production to 876 million hectares of grazing land and wool to another 528.4 million hectares. Cotton accounted for 34.7 million hectares, followed by linen and hemp at 5.9 million hectares and silk at 2.3 million hectares.

The report does not attempt to calculate the share of that land directly attributable to textiles. Instead, it counts the full agricultural footprint associated with a fiber—even when the same land produces food or other commodities—to approximate the territory over which fashion and textile companies could exert influence through their purchasing decisions.

For cotton, the calculation includes all land used to grow the crop even though lint represents roughly 40 percent of harvested seed cotton. The remainder primarily consists of seeds used for oil and animal feed.

“We are not measuring blame. We are measuring power, and it turns out fashion has far more of it than anyone has been telling us,” said Arizona Muse, Dirt’s founder and one of the report’s authors.

Farmers do not make separate decisions about pesticide use or soil management for cotton lint and seed, Muse said, meaning a brand’s sourcing requirements could affect the entire field.

“That is not a technicality,” she said. “That is the whole point.”

Leather and wool present a more complicated allocation problem because the land supporting those materials also serves the meat and dairy industries. The report does not divide the acreage among those markets, noting that the leather industry itself has not settled whether hides should be treated as by-products or co-products of livestock agriculture.

“Sharing a system is not the same as having no voice in it,” Muse said.

More than 2.9 billion square meters of genuine leather were processed globally in 2024, according to the report. Footwear, handbags and apparel consumed 1.2 billion square meters, with furniture, automotive interiors and other products accounting for the rest.

Sam Fankhauser, director of the Smith School and another of the report’s authors, said the land estimate captures the scale of the opportunity available to fashion through its sourcing.

“A brand changing how it sources is changing how land is farmed,” he said.

Some of the assumptions behind the headline figure remain uncertain. The wool calculation assumes that producing one metric ton requires 250 hectares, based on a figure from animal-advocacy group Circumfauna that the authors said was the only available estimate they identified.

The appendix also notes that Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) data does not make clear whether sheep could be counted in both the leather and wool calculations. The researchers assumed the figures represent different animals because sheep raised for wool and leather are often different breeds, Muse said.

Even without wool, the remaining fiber categories would touch roughly 19 percent of global agricultural land under the report’s methodology. Leather alone represents 18.25 percent.

The estimate also goes beyond fashion. The report says apparel absorbs roughly half of global fiber production, with home textiles taking another quarter and industrial, technical, medical and other uses accounting for the remainder.

Muse acknowledged that “fashion” serves as shorthand for the broader textile economy measured by the report. She said Dirt emphasizes fashion because brands have the public profile and consumer relationships to press for changes in shared agricultural supply chains.

The report’s broader finding is that production methods can create wider environmental differences within a fiber category than the choice between two materials.

Life cycle assessments included in the review put leather’s global warming impact between 8.5 and 151.9 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent per square meter. One mycelium-based alternative registered emissions of 2.76 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent per square meter, while another produced using a coal-heavy electricity grid reached 57.15 kilograms.

Estimates for viscose ranged from 0.20 to 8.30 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per metric ton of fiber, reflecting differences in feedstock, production systems and energy supplies.

To note: those figures come from separate studies with differing locations, technologies, system boundaries and assessment methods. They are not the results of uniform comparisons conducted by the Oxford researchers.

“How a fiber is farmed matters more than what it is,” Muse said. “The gap inside one material can be wider than the gap between two completely different fibers.”

The second half of the report reviews organic, regenerative and biodynamic agriculture. It found evidence that organic and biodynamic systems can support greater species richness and improve some measures of soil health compared with conventional agriculture, while describing the scientific evidence specific to biodynamics as “tentative and incomplete.”

The report highlights a five-year trial at the Sekem initiative in Egypt, where pesticide use dropped to less than 10 percent of previous levels and cotton yields increased by almost 30 percent. Soil salinity fell by 18 percent during the study. It also mentions 12-year cotton-rotation trials in India that found healthier soils and stronger microbial communities with biodynamic management.

Existing research has not conclusively isolated the effects of preparations unique to biodynamics, however, and comparisons across crops, regions and farming systems remain difficult. The report calls for standardized methodologies, longer studies and more research into commercial viability, certification costs and land-use trade-offs.

Dirt initiated and partly funded the research, with Muse and Dirt strategy director Heleen Petzer among its five co-authors. The charity is also developing the Demeter Textile Standard with Biodynamic Federation Demeter International and advocates for fashion’s adoption of biodynamic agriculture.

The proposed standard covers 11 raw-material categories and extends from agricultural production through processing and manufacturing. Dirt said it includes requirements concerning soil health, biodiversity, animal welfare, working conditions and the compostability of finished garments.

The report arrives six days before European Union member states must begin applying the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive on Sept. 27.

“Our confidence is in the scale, not the second decimal point,” Muse said of the land estimate. “The report calls itself a preliminary framework for further inquiry, not a final analysis, and the headline is approximately 30 percent.”

Source link