ASOS, Selfridges, Mulberry and New Look among signatories of Drapers Conscious Fashion Manifesto

The Drapers Conscious Fashion Manifesto launched at the Drapers Conscious Fashion Summit on 11 March 2026 at Hilton London Bankside, drawing signatures from sustainability leaders at ASOS, Selfridges, Mulberry and New Look, among others. The document frames itself not as a retailer pledge but as a formal ask of government, a four-point roadmap that Drapers, the voice of fashion retail since 1887, will present to ministers on behalf of an industry worth £62bn annually to the UK economy and supporting 1.3 million jobs, according to data from the UK Fashion and Textile Association and Oxford Economics.

That framing matters enormously if you're trying to figure out whether this is real accountability or well-branded positioning. The manifesto asks government for policy alignment on textiles Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), investment in textile-to-textile recycling and collection infrastructure, support for skills and traceability, and measures that level the playing field on environmental compliance. In plain terms: retailers want government to build the system they need to comply, rather than committing to unilateral action in its absence.

Drapers developed the manifesto by canvassing brands, retailers, suppliers, manufacturers and policy makers across the UK and Ireland on the biggest sustainability challenges they face. The result is a document shaped as much by the industry's fear of regulatory overload as by genuine green ambition. An overwhelming concern for retailers is confusion around legislation, here and in other key markets, notably the EU, with the majority of businesses saying they have not received communication from relevant government departments. That confusion has produced a chilling effect: growing legislation, scrutiny and sanctions are pushing brands toward "greenhushing," going quiet on sustainability to avoid greenwashing accusations, a risk that the Competition and Markets Authority has publicly warned against.

So what should readers actually be watching? On EPR, the meaningful metric is whether government introduces an eco-modulated scheme that penalises virgin fibre and incentivises recycled content. The manifesto calls for the government to look to European recycling funding models to boost collection services and textile-to-textile recycling capabilities. Until a UK EPR framework is in force with fees and reporting deadlines attached, signatories carry no financial consequence for the gap between their current materials mix and a genuinely circular one. ASOS, which uses some recycled materials but for which there is no evidence of minimising textile waste across its supply chain, sits in that gap. Mulberry, whose head of group sustainability Rosie Wollacott has been embedding its "Made to Last" repair-and-resale ethos, is further along the circular curve, but even Mulberry's programme remains voluntary.

On traceability, the summit's own programme flagged Digital Product Passports as an imminent EU requirement. The question for brands operating in both UK and European markets is whether they will implement DPPs to EU standards across their entire range, or only for product lines sold into regulated markets. That distinction is the difference between genuine supply chain transparency and regulatory arbitrage.

Drapers editor Jill Geoghegan said the manifesto would be presented to government "to demand help with compliance, sustainability and resilience." Almost half (45%) of fashion businesses say support with UK manufacturing would boost their sustainability efforts, with domestic production significantly reducing carbon emissions and enabling fairer labour standards through stronger employment laws.

The manifesto is a serious piece of industry coalition-building. But without publication deadlines on EPR fees, without independent audit of signatory materials sourcing, and without disclosed wage data across supplier tiers, the signatures themselves are not accountability. They are the opening bid in a much longer negotiation.