Fashion’s Natural Resource Crisis (2025) Part 2: The Brands Driving Overproduction

A. Falconer
Dec 25, 2025
2 min read

Updated: Dec 28, 2025

By Falcon Research | December 2025

Fashion’s environmental damage is not accidental.

It is the result of business models designed around volume, speed, and disposability — even as sustainability pledges multiply.

In 2025, several global brands are increasingly seen as environmental defaulters: companies whose operating logic is fundamentally incompatible with planetary limits.

What “Defaulter” Means in 2025

A defaulter is not necessarily breaking the law — yet.

Instead, these brands:

Rely on perpetual growth
Normalize overproduction
Outsource environmental damage
Offset rather than reduce impact

Shein: Ultra-Fast Fashion at Scale

Shein represents the most extreme evolution of fast fashion.

By 2025:

Its emissions reportedly surged over 170% in two years
Production is algorithm-driven, not demand-led

A Greenpeace investigation found:

32% of tested products exceeded legal chemical limits
PFAS detected at up to 3,300× allowed thresholds

Speed and scale have replaced accountability.

Inditex (Zara)

Zara pioneered fast fashion — and its influence remains massive.

Over 450 million garments produced annually
A 15-day design-to-shelf cycle

Efficiency gains cannot offset sheer volume.

Speed accelerates trend turnover, shortening garment lifespans and defeating circularity.

H&M Group

H&M has invested heavily in resale, recycling, and “Conscious” collections.

Yet in 2025, scrutiny intensified due to:

Limited disclosure of absolute emission reductions
Continued high production volumes

Recycling initiatives cannot compensate for unchecked output.

Greenwashing Enters the Courts

In early 2025:

Adidas faced legal challenges over climate-neutrality claims
Brands like Aritzia and Abercrombie & Fitch were flagged for missing Scope 3 targets

Marketing language has become legal risk.