should brands fake it or make it?

The use of simulated leather and down are on the rise in the fashion industry.

In March, US-based material science brand Pangaia launched a gilet made from a 100% bio-based leather substitute, Mirum, made from cork, minerals, natural wax and oils and natural rubber, which was used in everyday clothing for the first time (main image above). Meanwhile, synthetic stand-ins for down are also on the rise, as growing numbers of consumers shun animal-derived products. Research by Kantar showed that in the year to 18 September 2022, 29% of shoppers were looking for items without animal products – an increase of 11.4% year on year.

Younger consumers appear to be turning their backs on animal leather, research from Kantar shows: 25-to-34-year-olds’ spending on the fabric fell 5.2% year on year in the 11 months to 5 March 2023, as their spending on imitation leathers, including PU (polyurethane), increased by 14.8%. Overall, spending on simulated leathers rose 11.8%, while animal leather spending increased by only 5.3%.

In December, French fashion house SCMP, owner of Sandro, Maje, Claudie Pierlot and De Fursac, banned the use of duck and goose feathers by autumn/winter 23.

Yvonne Taylor, director of corporate projects at animal activist group PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), tells Drapers that brands including The North Face, Save The Duck and Napapijri are now using “feather-free fillers” alongside down.

However, alternatives are not yet the golden ticket for environmentally conscious consumers or retailers, as many are not easily recyclable at end of life, often because of the small percentage of plastic they contain. Drapers examines the benefits and challenges of synthetic replacements for leather and down.

Leather looks

Amanda Parkes, chief innovation officer at materials science brand Pangaia, cites the methane produced when raising cattle for the food industry, and the “incredibly polluting” toxins and dyes used by the leather industry as prompting the need for alternatives. However, “on the flipside, by mining fossil fuels [for petroleum-based alternatives such as polyurethane], you’re creating problems just in a different way up the supply chain”.

The production of leather, and its dyeing and tanning processes have a high toll on the environment. A 2019 study in the Journal of the American Leather Chemists Association found that to process 1,000 kg of raw hides, tanneries in China emitted 1,180 kg of carbon dioxide equivalent (C02 eq), in India 1,608 kg, in  Italy 1,198 kg and Spain 755 kg.

However, Warren Bowden, head of sustainability and innovation at manufacturer Scottish Leather Group, counters: “There is no more sustainable material on the planet than leather: [cowhides are] waste from agriculture [and food waste] and are [part of a] circular [process].”

Scottish Leather Group has an independent lifecycle analysis of 8kg of CO2e/m2 of hide, or 1.3kg of CO2e per hide, which it says are the lowest in the leather trade. The hides it uses are byproducts of the local food beef-farming industry.

[Leather] is a long-lasting, versatile product. At the end of life, it will biodegrade

Kerry Senior, director, Leather UK,

The director of industry body Leather UK, Kerry Senior, tells Drapers he is frustrated with the way leather is viewed by consumers: the organisation’s 2021 research that found 50% of consumers think that cattle are specifically reared for the leather industry: “[Leather] is a long-lasting, versatile product. At the end of life, it will biodegrade. PU made from [petroleum bases] won’t last as long as animal-derived leather. The newer materials are more interesting, but they fall short in a number of areas, including needing plastic to have functionality.”

There are a growing number of bio-based alternatives to leather, often made from food waste such as apple skins or grape byproducts from the wine-making industry, and businesses argue that these are more sustainable than synthetic materials such as PU (polyurethane) or leather itself.

However, Cristina Sabaiduc, senior sustainable textiles specialist at WRAP (Waste and Resources Action Programme), explains that materials with bio-based content are often still bonded or coated with PU or a component derived from fossil fuels, limiting their ability to be recycled at end of life: “The longevity of the item might be better, but if we don’t have the technology to un-bond the different layers, we actually can’t reuse those materials. The only option would be landfill or incineration.”

Pangaia’s Parkes concurs that bio-based leathers “all have a unifying problem: their use of polyurethane as a sealant”.

Every material comes with its own unique sustainability challenges – for example,  [fake] materials can be difficult to recycle

Karen Perry, sustainability manager – raw materials, John Lewis

London-based outerwear brand Jakke uses only non-animal derived materials. Founder Nina Hopkins creates fake fur and imitation leather coats made from recycled polyester. From spring/summer 23 linings also contain recycled polyester. Jakke has also introduced a leather alternative made with 30% bio-based content from post-consumer coffee bean waste, which was used in its grey and red fake leather trench coats.

Hopkins says the technology “is not quite ready yet” for 100% bio-based outerwear: “When I was sourcing, we were looking at pineapple, mushroom, apple leathers, but they are not suitable for outerwear – more for bags, car seats and shoes – as they are too rigid.”

Karen Perry, sustainability manager – raw materials at John Lewis, explains that the retailer sells both alternative and traditional leather goods, and selects the “most appropriate” material for the product: “Every material comes with its own unique sustainability challenges – for example,  [fake] materials can be difficult to recycle and some ‘plant-based’ leathers may still have plastic-based structure for durability.”

However, Parkes believes the substitutes are worth trying: “I do actually think it’s good for us to start transitioning into these bio-based leathers, even if they’re not perfect. [It’s] the chicken-and-egg problem of ‘will it work?’ Well, we’re never going to know if we don’t try, and then we will find substitutes for the petrochemicals used. That’s the evolutionary process of innovation.”

Pangaia’s Mirum gilet was made in collaboration with US material research business Natural Fiber Welding. It imitates leather yet is bonded with natural rubber instead of plastic sealants, and is padded using Pangaia’s 100% bio-based alternative to duck and goose down – made using wildflowers – which is also biodegradable.

Parkes explains that this is the first development of Mirum into clothing. It was previously used to make footwear, by Allbirds, and handbags by Stella McCartney.

“I don’t think we’re ready to make like a full flexible catsuit,” she adds, acknowledging the fabric’s limitations, but says the more alternative leathers like it are used, the better the capabilities will become.

The low-down

There are also breakthroughs in the development of substitutes for down, to cater for the consumer who seeks fashion items made without animal byproducts. US-based thermal insulation material producer PrimaLoft was established in 1983, when the US Army commissioned it to replicate the warmth and compressibility of natural down in wet conditions, when feathers lose performance.

In 2020, PrimaLoft cultivated synthetic down replacement PrimaLoft Bio made using recycled polyester, which is 93.8% biodegradable in around 646 days in an accelerated landfill environment and 76.6% in an accelerated marine environment. Brands including Jack Wolfskin and Helly Hansen have used PrimaLoft Bio.

Chris Humphries, senior vice-president of sales at PrimaLoft says the challenge is replicating the properties of down in extreme temperature conditions: “We can do a pretty good job of getting a high-quality down alternative but it’s still a challenge to match the goose downs of 800-1,000 fill power [measure of quality of a down product – higher power means the down traps more air which allows for greater insulation]. Even though PrimaLoft has the thinnest fibres on the market – nine times thinner than a human hair – the ratios are still challenging.” Humphries adds that performance brands are slower to adopt synthetic down than fashion brands, as they have to compete with the highest fill power downs.

Pangaia’s Flwrdwn material is made using wildflowers grown in the Midwest US. The product is combined with biopolymer made using maize food waste, which brings out the thermal properties of the wildflowers, and makes the material compostable. A biodegradable Aerogel thermal insulator, made using cellulose, strengthens the structure of Flwrdwn.

Pangaia’s Parkes says price points are a barrier to some brands adopting alternatives such as Flwrdwn: “It’s a chicken and egg situation again. As we increase production, price points will come down. It’s literally made using weeds: there’s nothing inherently expensive about it.”

Canadian outerwear business Moose Knuckles uses both synthetic and natural down within its products. Tara St James, senior director of sustainable development and sourcing, tells Drapers that the natural down it uses is Responsible Down Certified by non-profit organisation Textile Exchange for suppliers that treat ducks and geese in a humane way, which allows for “full transparency of the supply chain”.

St James explains that using polyfill made from polyester or recycled polyester is more suitable for wetter climates such as the UK and central Europe. However, when asked if down substitutes can insulate wearers against extreme conditions, St James admits “the short answer is no. Even the highest-performing polyfill can ever only equal a lower tier for warmth.” She explains that down is more breathable than its synthetic alternatives, and also does not shed the harmful plastic microfibres that pollute oceans and the environment.

St James adds that animal-derived products are circular: “At the end of its useful life, the down in our products is recyclable and can be reused, while both shearling and down are biodegradable products, unlike their synthetic counterparts.” Moose Knuckles pledged to launch a recycling programme for its products by 2025, as part of its 2021 circularity strategy.

WRAP’s Sabaduic points to the benefit of using “mono-materials”, enabling an item that is made even of a synthetic material such as polyester to be easily recycled at its end of life – give or take a bit of waste depending on the recycler’s criteria: “There are brands that are making 100% polyester fake fur coats – those in theory, will be able to be recycled.”

She adds that add-ons such as trims, fastenings, dyes and linings are “disruptors” to the recycling of a synthetic product and “there needs to be an element of disassembly there”. Sabaduic explains that bio-based leathers with added plastic are difficult to recycle, and that one particular brand is offering to take back their product to separate and recycle it, although that depends on a consumer’s motivation to bring it back to the business.

Pangaia’s Parkes believes that while the adoption of alternative leather is growing, businesses should not shy away from celebrating even smaller amounts of bio-based content in alternative materials: “In our Pangaia messaging, we’re saying that is this is not a perfect solution. This is our transition solution.”

John Lewis’s Parry explains: “Using ‘real’ leather, feather and down comes with its own challenges. However, certifications and industry groups are more established and always evolving, working collaboratively throughout the supply chain to address existing challenges – retailers play a key role to set the demand for standards.”

Animal-derived materials are circular and have biodegradable qualities. While those with a petroleum base, such as polyester, can be more easily recycled, a process which is hindered when bio-based materials are combined with plastic components.

As WRAP’s Sabaduic tells Drapers, making the most sustainable choice “is not as black and white as it is presented sometimes”. Brands and retailers must choose the material most suited to their consumers’ needs, while educating the consumer to prolong its lifecycle, and eventually dispose of the product responsibly.