We have identified key areas of work, including Human Rights and Livelihoods in relation to due diligence, to align with legislation currently in development, such as the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD).  

We are currently monitoring the development of legislation that is in an earlier stage, such as the Green Claims Directive (GCD) and the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR) delegated acts for textiles.  

We have also taken ESPR into account in key areas of work, such as the updates we have made to the Reclaimed Materials Declaration Form (RMDF), which now more clearly supports the feedstock eligibility requirements for reclaimed materials.  

As part of the strategy for the standards system alignment with legislation, Textile Exchange is developing a prioritization framework to determine which legislation will be prioritized for alignment first. Determination of the exact timeline and the external communication is currently being defined.  

The post How is the EU legislation considered in the development of the Materials Matter standard system?  appeared first on Textile Exchange.

• This threshold applies only to final products or components.   

• It applies to consumer-facing claims only, it does not apply to unfinished products in B2B transactions or transaction certificate eligibility.   

• The 30% threshold is a combined requirement that can be achieved through a blend of multiple Materials Matter certified materials.  

Examples: 

• Product containing 50% certified recycled polyester and 50% cotton. 

• Component containing 100% certified wool. 

• Product containing 5% certified recycled nylon and 25% certified alpaca. 

After careful and intentional data and feedback gathering, we have confirmed the 30% labeling threshold is both largely achievable while meeting a higher standard to drive impact and maintain credibility. The majority of certified materials in our system can achieve the 30% minimum as a single material on their own.  

Materials that cannot achieve the 30% threshold on their own can be blended with other certified materials to achieve the minimum threshold for labeling. 

Recycled MMCFs and recycled cotton are the two exceptions to the 30% threshold and will adopt a lower, time-bound, labeling threshold of 20%. There are current technical limitations to achieving a 30% labeling threshold for these materials.  Setting a threshold of 20% for these materials now still sets a high ambition level and ensures that at least 20% of the materials in the product support the goals of the Materials Matter Standard to move the industry toward more uptake of certified materials. 

We intend to raise the labeling threshold for these materials to 30% to align it with all materials in scope of the Materials Matter Standard in line with industry progress on the technical limitations. 

The post What is the minimum content threshold required to make claims under the Materials Matter Standard?  appeared first on Textile Exchange.

The post Will the Content Claim Standard (CCS) remain part of the Materials Matter Standard system?  appeared first on Textile Exchange.

The post How is Textile Exchange approaching partnerships? Will there be new fibers and materials in the standard in the future?   appeared first on Textile Exchange.

2026 will be dedicated to preparation, with a particular priority placed on preparing certification bodies (CBs) so they are fully equipped to begin auditing against the new system in 2027. CBs will receive targeted training to ensure consistency and confidence in how the standard is applied across different materials and geographies.  

At the same time, other stakeholders, including producers, suppliers, and brands, will have opportunities to align internal systems, adapt processes, and begin capacity-building activities. Engagement throughout this phase will emphasize practice, peer exchange, and readiness-building so that by the end of 2026, certification bodies and stakeholders are positioned to move into optional implementation. 

From 2028 onward, the Materials Matter Standard is required for all Tier 4 audits to maintain certification. This shift establishes a clear and consistent standard of practice for raw material production and primary processing across the certified community. 

The post When will the Materials Matter Standard go into effect and what will happen to certifications against current Textile Exchange Standards?  appeared first on Textile Exchange.

Textile Exchange began developing the new framework in 2021 with a clear goal: to align the ambition, rigor, and expected results across its material-specific standards and transition the industry into a more coherent, science-aligned way to measure and verify impact. 

Since then, the organization has worked closely with stakeholders from across the supply system to design and test a framework that is both robust and workable in real-world production systems. 

Built on a combination of practice-based and outcome-based expectations, the standard includes comprehensive criteria for land management, animal welfare, human rights and livelihoods, and primary processing, which covers water, chemical, and energy use, as well as waste and emissions management. Its purpose is to provide a common language and shared direction for the industry, while recognizing the unique contexts of different material producers, processors, and the communities and landscapes they depend on.  

The post Why is Textile Exchange moving towards the Materials Matter Standard? appeared first on Textile Exchange.

Since then, the organization has worked closely with stakeholders from across the supply system to design and test a framework that is both robust and workable in real-world production systems. Built on a combination of practice-based and outcome-based expectations, the standard includes comprehensive criteria for land management, animal welfare, human rights and livelihoods, and primary processing, which covers water, chemical, and energy use, as well as waste and emissions management.  

The criteria were developed over five years in close collaboration with a designated International Working Group made up of brands, retailers, suppliers, producers, NGOs, and technical specialists. Two publicly consulted drafts and a pilot version, tested in key material production regions from Peru to Italy, have helped refine the framework, alongside extensive work to ensure alignment with the ISEAL Code of Good Practice for Sustainability Systems. These practices ensure that all of our standards, including the Materials Matter Standard, provide value, rigor, accessibility, inclusiveness, and transparency 

Stakeholder input included public consultation, pilots, and workshops, and feedback from subject matter experts in environmental science, chemical management, animal welfare, and human rights and livelihoods. Rather than relying on a one-time consultation, the process emphasized ongoing feedback loops, ground-level testing, and a cross-sectional view of industry realities to inform refinement. This interactive approach has enabled the standard to evolve based on stakeholder expertise, emerging practices, and pilot feedback—ensuring it remains relevant and practical for today’s supply chain context. Learnings from these activities informed refinements to the criteria and related policies, with the Materials Matter Standard published on December 12, 2025. 

The post How has the Materials Matter Standard developed? appeared first on Textile Exchange.

Evidence Requirements

Evidence must be uploaded to the platform and meet all of the following criteria:

• Public:
  Must be accessible on the organization’s website or elsewhere in the public domain. Only web links are accepted.
• Relevant:
  Must clearly originate from the assessed organization or program. Unlabeled documents (e.g., without a name or logo) are not accepted.
• Credible:
  Must be a formal, complete document. Screenshots or isolated excerpts that do not show context within the broader documentation are not accepted.
• Current:
  The assessment reflects current practices. Future commitments or planned revisions do not qualify for higher scoring.

Examples of acceptable evidence include (but are not limited to):

• Principles and criteria documents
• Policies and standard operating procedures (SOPs)
• Program manuals
• Theory of change documentation
• Annual reports
• Impact reports
• Assurance and verification procedures

The post How are scores determined? appeared first on Textile Exchange.

After the mandatory-based assessment is completed, programs may choose to expand their evaluation by incorporating recommended or continuous improvement criteria. While these additional criteria may not always be fully implemented in practice, they represent aspirational goals outlined in program documentation.

This two-step approach allows for both:

• A baseline assessment based strictly on mandatory compliance, and
• An understanding of the potential impact of more ambitious, non-mandatory program elements.

The post What are “Recommended” surveys? appeared first on Textile Exchange.

1. Quantitative environmental impact
   Indicators that directly measure environmental impact (e.g., Climate, Freshwater, Chemicals & Toxicity) draw on LCA data to inform scoring.
2. Quality and completeness
   LCA documentation is reviewed for its rigor, transparency, and comprehensiveness, contributing to the quality assessment of the program.

The post How is LCA data incorporated into the methodology? appeared first on Textile Exchange.