Some 20 million garments made with certified ethical cotton have arrived in Spain in a period of 12 months, between 2022 and 2023, by H&M and Inditex, which includes brands such as Zara, Bershka and Pull&Bear. But this clothing of supposedly sustainable origin is associated with “deforestation, land grabbing and violence against traditional communities” in Brazil, says research published this Thursday by the British NGO Earthsight. The aforementioned fashion companies defend themselves by arguing that they do not source cotton directly, but rather buy through suppliers with the world's leading sustainability seal, called Better Cotton (BC).
H&M and Inditex are the largest users of the Better Cotton certification, an initiative co-promoted by H&M in 2005 and based in Switzerland. Brazil is the origin of almost half of BC-certified cotton, more than any other country in the world.
Earthsight, a reference entity in the discovery of irregularities in global supply chains, tracked a total of 816,000 tons of direct cotton exports from two Brazilian producers, Grupo Horita and SLC Agrícola, between 2014 and 2023. These firms work in the State of Bahia (northeast of Brazil), in the Cerrado region, the most biodiverse tropical savanna on the planet, which occupies a quarter of Brazil, and is at the forefront of agroindustrial expansion. In this region alone, SLC Agrícola owns 44,000 hectares of cotton plantations, equivalent to more than 60,000 football fields, and the Horita Group controls at least 140,000 hectares of crops.
The two companies, which according to the report have a notorious history of “million-dollar fines for illegal deforestation” and are involved in accusations of land grabbing – the purchase or rental of large areas –, destruction of ecosystems and harassment and intimidation of local communities , supply cotton to several Asian suppliers. Specifically, the NGO identified eight, such as PH Kahatex, from Indonesia, Jamuna Group, from Bangladesh, and Interloop, from Pakistan, that sell finished garments to H&M and Inditex.
The defense of fashion companies
“We take the allegations against Better Cotton very seriously, which is why we are closely following the outcome of their on-the-ground investigation,” Inditex sources told this newspaper in response to questions sent by email. They also indicated that their suppliers acquire cotton from various countries through specialized intermediaries who, in turn, choose based on the characteristics of the raw material, certification and price, so Inditex does not have a direct relationship with the producers. Brazilians.
Inditex has sent a letter this week to BC asking for “transparency” in the certification process following the Earthsight report, as revealed by the Modaes website and confirmed by the Reuters agency. The Spanish company also states that it has been waiting for more than six months for the results of an internal investigation, which Better Cotton began in August 2023 and whose conclusions were expected in early March. “The accusations represent an abuse of trust placed in the BC certification process by our group and our suppliers,” the letter reads.
“We humbly recognize the challenges that still exist and admit our limitations, especially since brands like us do not directly source cotton,” an H&M representative explained via email.
Also in responses to this medium by email, H&M sources have stated that the findings on Better Cotton certified cotton are highly worrying, and that they are awaiting BC's measures to strengthen its certification standard. “We humbly recognize the challenges that still exist and admit our limitations, especially because brands like us do not directly source cotton,” commented the Swedish company, indicating that they are guided by the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. United Nations and the OECD due diligence guidelines.
Better Cotton did not respond to the questionnaires that Planeta Futuro sent by email, although it did provide details to Eartshigh, which publishes its full responses in the investigation. In September, Better Cotton told Earthsight that it would hire an independent auditor to evaluate the risk areas highlighted in the investigation, and that it hoped to have the results in about three months: “If there is evidence that farms do not meet the requirements of Better Cotton Standard, their license will be revoked and they will be ineligible until corrective action is taken.” The NGO has no details about the course or results of this inspection.
“The private sector has been making promises of sustainability, traceability and social responsibility for years, but it is clear that these commitments to self-regulation and certification have not worked,” Rubens Carvalho, Earthsight deforestation expert and Brazilian co-author of this research, told this newspaper. , which has lasted a year and was based on analysis of thousands of import and export data, the analysis of satellite images and the consultation of other records, in addition to “undercover investigators who posed as foreign investors to infiltrate the world of Brazilian agribusiness and European fashion.” For Earthsight, laws are needed—both in producing and importing countries—that “regulate these issues and penalize companies that fail to comply,” instead of continuing to leave oversight in the hands of voluntary initiatives by manufacturers or consumers. buyers, who cannot trace the origin of the hundreds of products they consume.
Brazil is the origin of almost half of the cotton certified as organic by Better Cotton, and is on track to overtake the US as the main cotton exporter by 2030
Although pioneering, the European Union regulation on Deforestation adopted in 2023 to stop the import of raw materials that cause forest loss does not include cotton. The EU is the largest importer of clothing in the world and Spain, the third country in the common market that imports the most products that cause deforestation, such as viscose, leather, wood pulp and soy. In the coming weeks, the EU Business Due Diligence Directive on Sustainability must be approved. Although the ambition of this future standard has been lowered by resistance from some European parties, it still offers the possibility of including raw materials that until now do not appear in the regulations.
From the sheet to the closet
According to researchers, if cotton linked to deforestation ends up in these fashion stores it is thanks in part to these loopholes in the policies of European companies but, above all, to the fact that they trust cotton that is certified as sustainable. Better Cotton updated some of its standards this March, but Earthsight believes they are insufficient to ensure respect for community rights and care for the environment.
“Better Cotton has launched an initiative to trace cotton back to the country of origin, rather than to individual farms, which is the only thing that really matters,” laments Earthsight's Carvalho. In Brazil, the certification program is implemented by a national association of cotton producers, so agribusinesses are certifying themselves, says the researcher. Furthermore, auditors are paid by the very companies they are supposed to inspect, the report concludes. Brazil is on track to surpass the United States as the main cotton exporter by 2030, the year by which countries will be held accountable for meeting the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
For Carvalho, there is no excuse for cotton with so many warning signs to be penetrating world markets and doing so with a seal of sustainability: “If a small organization like ours can bring these failures to light, large corporations , who have many more resources, too.”
Sacrifice the Cerrado to save the Amazon?
With an area equivalent to four times the size of Spain, the Cerrado is home to 5% of the world's species and a third of Brazilian biodiversity. But it is a very vulnerable area: while deforestation has visibly receded in the Amazon in recent months, that of the Cerrado is skyrocketing. This biome has lost more than half of its native vegetation in recent decades. “Many say that the Cerrado can be sacrificed so that agribusiness can expand without threatening the Amazon,” says André Sacramento, coordinator of the Association of Rural Workers Lawyers (AATR). But “in reality, the Cerrado is essential to preserve the Amazon.” Important Amazonian rivers like the Xingu emanate from the tropical savannah, and both biomes are key to water regulation.
On its vast plains, among stunted trees and expanses of golden grass, live giant armadillos, maned wolves and vizcacher owls. And through its valleys and plateaus, the cattle of the
geraizeiros
graze ,
traditional communities with legal right to usufruct of lands they have occupied for about 200 years. At least, where industrial agriculture of cotton, soybeans and corn, which are usually grown on a rotational basis and are destined for export, has not yet reached.
“Before, when we swam in rivers, we were afraid of alligators. Today, even lizards have disappeared,” local environmentalist Marcos Rogério Beltrao dos Santos explained to the report's authors, referring to the impacts of deforestation in the west of the State of Bahia. Local inhabitants show dry springs and dusty beds in what had been rivers. In other places there is still water, but it is loaded with chemicals that are harmful to fish and people. According to the NGO report, “the livelihoods of local communities are seriously hampered by plantation encroachment [and the consequent] collapse of biodiversity, pesticide pollution and water overexploitation.”
To produce a kilo of cotton fiber, about 10,000 liters of water are needed, and to make a T-shirt of this material, about 2,700 liters, this research points out.
Cotton is one of the crops that consumes the most water. To produce a kilo of cotton fiber, about 10,000 liters of water are needed, and to make a T-shirt of this material, about 2,700 liters, this research points out. Agribusinesses in western Bahia extract 2 billion liters of water every day, equivalent to the supply for 12 million people, according to Earthsight data. At this rate, it is estimated that the main rivers of the Cerrado will lose 34% of their flows, equivalent to eight Nile rivers, between now and 2050.
According to the report, agribusinesses dump some 600 million liters of pesticides into the Cerrado each year. Added to the risks of these chemicals for human health is their high carbon footprint. Textile manufacturing emits more greenhouse gases than international flights and shipping combined, and it is estimated that 70% of these emissions result from the production of fibers such as cotton.
Local communities threatened
In Brazil and by law, between 20 and 35% of the original vegetation of Cerrado properties must be preserved, compared to 80% that must be preserved in the Amazon. According to the Earthsight report, there are companies, including Grupo Horita and SLC Agrícola, that evade this rule by placing these legal reserves in areas of little economic interest while the best lands, where the greatest threat to local ecosystems weighs, are dedicated to crop.
In its report, Earthsight focused on two cases of land grabbing and deforestation in western Bahia, those of two macro-farms, Estrondo and Capão do Modesto. “At first, we heard the sound of machinery; As time went by, they got closer, expanding their crops, building headquarters and advancing in the deforestation of the chapada [plateau],” says the resident of the Cachoeira village Jossone Lopes, remembering the arrival of the first agricultural potentates in 1981. These crops are part of Estrondo, a farm located on public lands that should be reserved for the
geraizeiro
communities and their subsistence activities. In the last decade, communities began to suffer intimidation, harassment and livestock theft by gunmen working for ranch owners and tenants, the report summarizes.
The images obtained thanks to satellites, property titles, court documents and other elements analyzed by Earthsight indicate that Grupo Horita is one of the owners of properties within Estrondo, although they have denied this in comments to Eartsight collected in the report.
In 2018, the Attorney General of Bahia declared that Estrondo is one of the largest monopolized areas in the history of Brazil, and filed an ongoing lawsuit to recover these state-owned lands. In a letter to Earthsight, the Estrondo administration stated that the use of all its lands is legal, and that it has never carried out any land grabs or restricted the movement of communities.
A similar case affects the traditional community of Capão de Modesto, where Grupo Horita has a property and SLC Agrícola, a legal reserve. SLC denies having a reserve there, despite the fact that the property titles, the Brazilian Rural Environmental Cadastre and the Bahia environmental agency consulted by the researchers demonstrate the opposite. The prosecutor has considered that Capão de Modesto is one of the most serious cases of land grabbing in Bahia, and has requested the suspension of all property titles that overlap that territory. However, the
geaizeiros
remain afraid. “They have attacked me four or five times inside my own house,” says the president of the Capão de Modesto community association Antônio dos Santo Silva
.
“When a stranger approaches, I fear that he will come to eliminate us.”
These Brazilian cotton producers also have a history of illicit deforestation and environmental violations. For example, Grupo Horita has received around twenty fines for a total of 4.1 million euros between 2002 and 2019, the report calculates. Since 2017, they have also bypassed the embargo on one of their farms several times for environmental violations and have continued to grow cotton, according to satellite images analyzed by Earthsight.
The company told the authors of the investigation that “practically all the fines [...] have been declared uncorroborated,” but the public database of the Brazilian environmental agency consulted by the NGO shows that at least two-thirds of the fines are still valid or have been paid, which confirms their validity.
SLC Agrícola has received fines from Ibama amounting to more than 230,000 euros since 2008. All of this prompted the Norwegian Pension Fund Global, which describes itself as one of the largest in the world, to divest from the company in 2017. In response to the Earthsight findings, SLC Agrícola said it has appealed against all of the environmental agency's fines and is awaiting rulings.