Industry News

After decades of decline, the UK’s textile and clothing sector is starting to take a hard look at itself; how it operates, what it stands for and whether it can rebuild domestic production. Growing scrutiny over labour practices, material quality and environmental performance has exposed the limits of its fragmented certification schemes and voluntary sustainability claims, leaving buyers with little clarity about what responsible UK manufacturing really looks like in practice.

According to analysis by the UK Fashion & Textile Association (UKFT)¹, UK fashion and textile exports grew by 36 per cent between 2011 and 2017, reaching a peak of nearly £7.36 billion ($9.49 billion at 2017 exchange rate). Since then, the picture has shifted dramatically. Between 2018 and 2023, exports fell by 47 per cent overall, including a 63 per cent drop in exports to the European Union, indicating how far the sector’s global competitiveness has dropped.

At the same time, geopolitical instability, tariff pressures and the growing demand for transparent, low-carbon supply chains are forcing brands and institutions to rethink long, fragile sourcing routes. While this has renewed interest in nearshoring and domestic production, UK manufacturers continue to face structural challenges, especially in the absence of a clear, trusted benchmark for quality and responsible production.

That gap has been further exposed by labour abuses uncovered within domestic supply chains. In Leicester, investigations found that more than 1,200 textile workers were illegally underpaid, with some earning as little as £3 to £5 an hour. The resulting sweatshop scandals highlighted serious gaps in oversight and exposed the limits of voluntary standards and fragmented codes of conduct, leaving buyers struggling to distinguish responsible UK manufacturers from those operating outside the law.

In response, industry bodies are developing the UK’s first national Textile Quality Mark², in hope to restore confidence in UK manufacturing, support responsible factories and create clearer incentives for ethical, transparent and resilient textile production.

What the UK Textile Quality Mark is
The UK Textile Quality Mark is being developed as a national benchmark for textile and garment production, aimed at bringing greater clarity to how quality, ethics and sustainability are defined across the sector. The initiative is being delivered by a consortium led by the Garment & Textile Workers Trust and the Apparel & Textile Manufacturers Federation, alongside Fashion-Enter Ltd, De Montfort University and an additional industry partner yet to be announced.

At its core, the Mark is intended to give buyers and brands a clearer signal of production integrity. The focus is on how textiles are made, under what conditions and with what environmental impact, not just how the finished product performs. This process-led approach reflects growing concern around traceability, greenwashing and opaque supply chains.

Unlike regulatory conformity labels or multi-sector quality schemes, the Textile Quality Mark is industry-led and specific to textiles and clothing. It is not being designed as a statutory compliance requirement, nor as an additional audit layer. Instead, it sits alongside existing UK and EU legal frameworks and is intended to summarise and signpost the compliance and due diligence work already taking place.

“A step in the right direction will be having a recognisable Quality Kite Mark [quality mark] to provide confidence to brands. The Kite Mark is not another layer of compliance with more audits; rather there will be a summary of the compliance and due diligence work that is taking place,” says Jenny Holloway, CEO of Fashion-Enter and Chair, ATMF.

Holloway says the Quality Mark is intended to function as a practical confidence tool for buyers, supported by live information on production capability and ongoing checks, rather than one-off certification.

“The Quality Kite Mark will provide any brand the latest information on production capabilities using live reviews, and the ATMF will be spot checking orders as they go through the factories. We are prepared to stake our good name and reputation on the factories approved for the website.”

The website is intended to provide greater transparency into ethical manufacturing practices, production capabilities and participating UK factories. The website is currently in development and is expected to be unveiled at Leicester Made & Regions in April 2026, as the Quality Mark moves through its pilot phase.

While the Mark is designed primarily around UK production, its reach is likely to extend further. As the UK remains heavily reliant on imported textiles and garments from countries including China, Bangladesh, Türkiye, Italy and India³, international suppliers may increasingly be expected to demonstrate alignment with similar quality, labour and environmental standards. In practice, this points to a shift in how competitiveness in the UK market is judged, moving beyond price alone.

Standards and Criteria
Although the final framework for the UK Textile Quality Mark is still under development, its proposed standards point towards a broader and more integrated understanding of what quality means in modern textile and garment manufacturing. Rather than focusing narrowly on product specifications, the Mark is expected to assess the systems and conditions that underpin production.

Ethical Labour Practices
Ethical and safe working conditions form a central pillar of the proposed framework. This is likely to include compliance with UK labour law and internationally recognised standards covering wages, working hours, health and safety and worker welfare. For domestic manufacturers, this may reinforce existing best practices. For overseas suppliers exporting to the UK, it could require stronger documentation, clearer subcontracting controls and more consistent audit processes.

Environmental Sustainability and Low-carbon Production
Environmental performance is another core component. While specific thresholds have not yet been published, the Quality Mark is expected to consider resource efficiency, waste management, chemical use and energy consumption across textile and garment manufacturing. This aligns with increasing pressure on manufacturers to reduce emissions and environmental impact as part of broader net-zero and ESG commitments.

Craftsmanship, Durability and Innovation
The Mark also places emphasis on craftsmanship, durability and technical capability. From a manufacturing perspective, this may involve assessing material selection, construction quality, consistency in production and the ability to meet defined technical standards. Innovation in processes, machinery and skills development is expected to be encouraged, supporting long-term competitiveness rather than short-term cost reduction.

Textiles and Materials
The Mark is expected to focus primarily on production processes rather than specific fibre compositions or fabric thicknesses. Issues such as chemical management, including PFAS use, material traceability and durability might be addressed through process and environmental controls rather than fixed material specifications. The emphasis is on how textiles are made, under what conditions and with what environmental impact, rather than mandating particular fibre blends.

Piloting and Industry Collaboration
Importantly, the Quality Mark is being developed through piloting and industry collaboration. Manufacturers, training providers and academic partners are involved in testing criteria before wider rollout, helping ensure standards are both credible and achievable across a diverse manufacturing base.

Strategic Significance for UK Manufacturing
For domestic manufacturers, the Quality Mark is being framed as a demand-side intervention, not simply a compliance exercise. By creating clearer signals of quality and responsibility, proponents argue that the Mark could help shift sourcing decisions in favour of UK factories, particularly in segments where durability, reliability and ethical production are valued.

This is especially relevant in the context of public-sector procurement. The initiative is closely linked to a wider push for a ‘UK-first’ approach to sourcing uniforms and workwear for institutions including healthcare, emergency services and government uniform to prioritise UK-made garments and PPE. These bodies collectively purchase millions of garments each year and clearer quality standards could support more consistent domestic sourcing.

From a manufacturing perspective, public procurement offers long-term, predictable demand, which is critical for sustaining factories, investing in skills and upgrading machinery. By linking the Quality Mark to procurement frameworks, the initiative seeks to create a more stable economic environment for UK producers.

Implications for Imports and Exports
While the UK Textile Quality Mark is not expected to introduce new trade restrictions or function as a regulatory barrier, it is likely to influence how textile and clothing imports and exports are assessed and prioritised by UK buyers. As a largely import-dependent market for finished garments, the UK relies heavily on overseas suppliers across Asia, Europe and the Mediterranean.

For UK buyers and brands, the Mark may increasingly act as a procurement filter, favouring suppliers that are able to demonstrate alignment with its criteria. Overseas manufacturers exporting to the UK could face rising expectations around labour compliance, environmental reporting and production transparency, particularly where UK retailers are seeking to strengthen due diligence and reduce reputational risk.

For countries exporting textiles and garments to the UK, alignment with the Quality Mark is likely to require stronger labour compliance documentation, clearer subcontracting controls, improved environmental reporting and greater transparency across production stages. While the Mark is not expected to be mandatory, exporters seeking to retain or grow access to UK buyers may face increasing pressure to demonstrate equivalence with its standards.

The Mark could also serve as a model for other countries seeking to strengthen domestic manufacturing through quality-led sourcing rather than price competition. While the framework is specific to UK industrial conditions, similar industry-led benchmarks could be replicated elsewhere to support local factories, skills development and ethical production.

Challenges and Limitations
Despite its ambitions, the UK Textile Quality Mark faces several challenges that could shape its impact. One major issue is uneven adoption. Larger manufacturers with established compliance systems may be well positioned to participate, while smaller factories may struggle with the cost and administrative burden of audits and reporting. Without adequate support, these risks excluding parts of the manufacturing base the initiative aims to strengthen.

The voluntary nature of the scheme also presents limitations. Uptake will depend on brand, retailer and public-sector engagement. This could result in a two-tier market, where the Mark becomes a differentiator for premium or institutional contracts but has limited reach in high-volume, low-margin segments.

Furthermore, without formal government enforcement, the success of the Quality Mark will depend heavily on uptake by retailers, brands and public-sector buyers. While the initiative is industry-led, its impact is likely to be significantly strengthened if procurement policies, incentives or public-sector sourcing frameworks actively reference the Mark. Without such alignment, there is a risk that adoption remains limited to a small segment of the market.

The introduction of the Mark could also increase prices, particularly where higher labour, environmental and production standards increase manufacturing costs. However, the aim of the Mark is not to raise prices across the board, but to encourage longer-lasting, better-made garments and more stable supply chains, potentially reducing long-term costs linked to poor quality, reputational risk and supply disruption.

Verification and consistency are further challenges. To avoid being perceived as a branding exercise, the Mark will require robust, transparent and consistent assessment processes across both domestic and international suppliers.