Climate · Scope 3
98.9%
Nike's Scope 3 emissions as a share of its total footprint, FY21.
Your carbon footprint is made by other people.
For a fashion brand, almost every tonne you report is produced by a company you do not own, in a facility you may not be able to name.
Nike
- Scope 3: 98.9% of total
- Purchased goods and services: 88.5% of Scope 3
FY21
Decathlon
- Scope 3: 99% of total
- Raw materials and manufacturing alone: 73% of total
FY21
Fast Retailing
- Scope 3: 97% of total
- Purchased goods: 86% of total
FY20
Lenzing
- Scope 3: 53% of total
- Scope 1: 31%
- Scope 2: 15%
FY21
Lenzing is the outlier because it is a fibre producer. Its emissions are largely its own. A brand's purchased goods emissions are its suppliers' Scope 1 and 2, the same tonnes, counted from the other end of the chain.
Source: UNFCCC / Sustainable Apparel Coalition, Guidance for Measuring GHG Emissions for Purchased Goods and Services for the Apparel and Footwear Industry, September 2023.
Almost none of it is yours to make.
Scope 3 dominance is structural, not a reporting quirk. The decisions that drive the number, fibre selection, dyeing and finishing, tier two processing, freight mode, are made by other companies, often years before your reporting deadline.
So the accounting question is not only how much. It is who holds what.
The gap is widening, not closing.
Apparel sector greenhouse gas emissions, gigatonnes CO2e. Source: Apparel Impact Institute, Taking Stock of Progress Against the Roadmap to Net Zero 2025. The 2030 business-as-usual figure reflects the revised forecast of 1.194 Gt.
| Year | Scenario | Emissions (Gt CO₂e) | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | Baseline | 0.889 | Actual |
| 2023 | Most recent actual | 0.944 | Actual |
| 2030 | Business as usual | 1.194 | Projected |
| 2030 | 1.5°C aligned | 0.489 | Target (45% reduction on 2019) |
The emissions are not at Tier 1.
Ninety-two percent of the sector's emissions sit above the tier most brands can actually name.
Apparel sector emissions by tier, 2023. Source: Apparel Impact Institute, Taking Stock of Progress Against the Roadmap to Net Zero 2025 (calendar year 2023). Aii describe this as a reasonable but not definitive estimate given the state of impact data in the sector.
Visibility runs the opposite way to emissions.
H&M
Nearly 1,200 Tier 1 factories. Nearly 400 Tier 2 mills.
adidas
Over 440 Tier 1 factories and subcontractors. 180 wet processing facilities.
Fast Retailing
Nearly 600 Tier 1 factories. Over 90 fabric mills.
Over 16,000 cotton farms in the United States alone.
A brand's knowledge of specific suppliers, and therefore its visibility into real impact data, declines as you move upstream. Most brands know their finished goods factories. Fewer know their mills, spinners and farms.
Source: UNFCCC / Sustainable Apparel Coalition, Guidance for Measuring GHG Emissions for Purchased Goods and Services for the Apparel and Footwear Industry, September 2023. Supplier counts compiled August 2022.
| Tier | What happens | What that means for your number |
|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 | Cut and sew | Your most accurate figure covers your smallest impact. |
| Tier 2 | Dyeing, finishing, fabric formation | Your largest impact, often estimated. |
| Tier 3 | Spinning fibre into yarn | Estimated. |
| Tier 4 | Fibre and farming | Estimated. |
Most companies, if not all, use average data for portions of their purchased goods inventory, particularly tiers 2 to 4. It is a reasonable estimate. It is not those companies' actual data. Source: UNFCCC / Sustainable Apparel Coalition, Guidance for Measuring GHG Emissions for Purchased Goods and Services for the Apparel and Footwear Industry, September 2023.
"Data collected from a supplier may actually be less accurate than industry-average data for a particular product."
Specificity and accuracy are not the same thing. Allocation introduces its own uncertainty, and a supplier figure that has been divided across every customer of a facility can be less reliable than a well-chosen average. Knowing which is which is the work.
Your best evidence is attached to your smallest number.
| Tier | Share of sector emissions | Calculation approach | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 | 8% | Supplier-specific | Finished product / retail tier |
| Tier 2 | 55% | Facility-adjusted | Component and material assembly |
| Tier 3 | 15% | Industry average | Raw material processing |
| Tier 4 | 22% | Industry average | Raw material extraction |
| Calculation approach | What it means |
|---|---|
| Industry average | Generic emission factors with no supplier data |
| Facility-adjusted | Emission factors adjusted by known facility attributes |
| Supplier-specific | Primary data from named suppliers and products |
Share of apparel sector emissions by tier: Apparel Impact Institute, Taking Stock of Progress Against the Roadmap to Net Zero 2025 (calendar year 2023). Calculation approach typically used at each tier: UNFCCC / Sustainable Apparel Coalition, Guidance for Measuring GHG Emissions for Purchased Goods and Services for the Apparel and Footwear Industry, September 2023.
What you get
Tier map
Which facilities, at which tier, for which product ranges.
Nominated versus open sourcing exposure
Where you have leverage and where you have none.
Emissions concentration by tier
Where the footprint actually sits.
Primary versus secondary data by tier
Confidence rated, not assumed.
Calculation approach disclosure
The method used at each tier, stated. Recommended by the UNFCCC guidance and almost never done.
Priority intervention list
Ranked by emissions multiplied by leverage, not by emissions alone.
Questions we are asked
Related reading
Measurement, reporting and verification
How a figure becomes evidence an assurance provider will accept.
Digital Product Passport methodology
The product-level data model that carries emissions evidence.
Who owns compliance
Where responsibility for product data actually sits inside a brand.
Human Impact Equivalence (HIE®)
Measuring human impact alongside the carbon number.