On a warm autumn morning in Australia, a simple but powerful idea took root: what if our old bras, T-shirts, socks and labels didn’t just fill up landfills, but actually returned to the soil in a harmless, nourishing way?
That vision moved one step closer in March 2023, when Australia signalled its intent to become the first country in the world to introduce a technical standard specifically for composting textiles.
This is not just another eco-fashion headline. It’s an initiative born from frustration, ingenuity, and deep collaboration — and it promises to reshape how we think of clothing’s end-of-life.
From A Campaign To A Standard: The Story So Far
The push started with Stephanie Devine, founder of The Very Good Bra, a lingerie brand committed to 100% compostable, plastic-free bras and briefs. Devine had been experimenting: natural fibres, organic dyes, elastic from tree rubber, labels and clasps that could be removed.
Her products met basic compostability requirements. But when she tried to have them accepted by commercial composting services, she met resistance: there was no standard to prove safety and compostability.
Over about 18 months, Devine collaborated with academics, experts in soil systems, and industry stakeholders to prepare a proposal to Standards Australia — the body responsible for technical standards in Australia. In March 2023, after public consultation, the proposal was accepted.
What’s significant is that this standard would cover all parts of a garment — threads, labels, elastic, clasps — demanding that everything be compostable and safe for soil.
Why The Fourth Point Matters: Real-Life Implications
Of all the concerns that surfaced during this process, four stood out. The first three are technical or logistical; the fourth is arguably the most crucial, because it links the standard to real humanity, health, and ecological safety:
- Contamination Risks – If garments have threads or labels made of polyester, poly-cotton blends, or treated with waterproof, flame-retardant, or toxic dyes, they can release microplastics or harmful chemicals into compost, harming soil, plants, animals.
- Uniform Definitions And Criteria – Without clear, repeatable tests and definitions, “compostable textile” is a vague label. Commercial composters have good reasons to reject garments without proofs or certifications. The standard aims to establish definitions, testing regimes, and acceptable ingredients.
- Scale And Infrastructure – Even with compostable textiles, if commercial composters aren’t licensed or set up to accept them, they won’t actually be composted. The standard is one piece; regulatory licensing, signage, waste collection, and public awareness also need alignment.
- Public Health, Soil Health, And Ecological Safety – This is the point often missed in headlines but was central to those advocating for the standard. It’s not enough for a garment to “rot” in compost; it must do so without releasing heavy metals, toxic residues, causing harm to worms or plants, or leaving microplastic fragments. Without a standard, compost from mixed materials could be dangerous. Standards committee members like Oliver Knox, associate professor in soil systems, emphasised this: “We don’t really want poly-cotton or polyester labels or threads in the compost … they’ll end up basically creating contaminants, micro-plastics and the like.”
What The Standard Proposes: What Garments Will Need To Do
To meet the proposed technical specification or future Australian Standard:
- All components of textiles (including labels, seams, elastic, clasps) must be made of natural fibres or materials that are certified compostable. No hidden plastics.
- Organic dyes must be used; chemically harmful or persistent finishes should be avoided. Tests will check that compost contains no toxic effects for plants, earthworms, and soil microorganisms.
- The material must decompose in commercial composting conditions, under defined test conditions. That includes time frames, temperature/humidity, and breakdown to small particles without slow-decaying fragments.
Global Context And Analogous Efforts
While Australia is leading with a standard for compostable textiles, it is not entirely alone in dealing with the challenges of textile waste, ecolabels, bioplastics, and environmental claims:
- The Australian Bioplastics Association has existing standards for compostable plastics: AS 4736-2006 (commercial compostability) and AS 5810-2010 (home compostability). However, these apply to bioplastics, mainly packaging or similar applications—not covering all components of a textile garment.
- International Standards Organization (ISO) has a standard ISO 21701:2019, which specifies a test method for accelerated hydrolysis and biodegradation of textile materials’ hydrolysate under controlled composting. It helps in assessing how quickly certain biodegradable textile materials break down, but it doesn’t cover all parts/components or guarantee full safety of labels, dyes, etc.
- In Europe, policy is increasingly pushing for Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for textiles, more stringent waste sorting, ecolabelling, and traceability. Still, there is no widely adopted international standard for apparel compostability that is as comprehensive as Australia’s proposed textile-wide standard.
What This Could Mean For The Future — Hope, Challenges, Pathways
This proposed Australian standard could be a game changer. If successful, it can provide:
- Consumer Confidence: People will know what “compostable textile” truly means, leading to better purchasing decisions.
- Industry Alignment: Manufacturers and brands will have clear guidelines, pushing them to design for end-of-life, avoid harmful chemicals, and use natural fibres.
- Environmental Safety: Less microplastics, fewer toxins in soil, healthier compost, and better ecological outcomes.
- Reduced Landfill Waste: Australia already sends hundreds of thousands of tonnes of textiles to landfill each year; diverting compostable items means less resource and pollution burden.
However, challenges remain. The standard still needs to be developed into fully operational criteria; composting facilities must accept these materials; there must be regulatory support; supply chains need to adapt. Small brands may face cost or technical hurdles. And standards in one country don’t always translate elsewhere, given differences in climate, composting infrastructure, and soil conditions.
Concluding Thoughts
Australia’s move is bold, earnest, and deeply optimistic. It takes what many consider a small piece of the puzzle — textile waste — and treats it with seriousness: not just whether garments degrade, but how, under what conditions, and with what effects on soil, biodiversity, and human communities. It shows that fashion’s waste can be rewritten from a story of discard and harm, to one of regeneration and care.
As Stephanie Devine said through her work with The Very Good Bra, it’s not enough to talk about compostable clothing; you have to ensure every thread counts — the labels, the dyes, the clasps.
Because when that level of detail is neglected, good intentions can still leave harm behind. With standards like this, we edge closer to a future in which our clothes don’t cost us the health of the earth.
Sources:
The Guardian
SDGS
Thred
