soil to soil: when fashion meets the ground

May 1

Before fashion becomes image, silhouette, or commodity, it begins in the ground. The industry speaks fluently of materials - silhouettes, surfaces, innovation, and spectacle – yet, is notably less comfortable discussing the ground beneath them - the ecological systems from which those materials emerge or to which they ultimately return. Chief among these systems is soil: the living substrate upon which much of fashion’s material existence depends, and through which its afterlife is ultimately negotiated. Soil is not an inert surface. It is a dynamic biological system composed of microorganisms, organic matter, minerals, water, and air, structure through interactions that sustain terrestrial life. Its health is defined by activity: microbial diversity, nutrient circulation, and the capacity to decompose and regenerate organic matter. Without sufficient biological activity, the functional integrity of soil declines, reducing its capacity to decompose organic matter, cycle nutrients, and sustain regenerative ecological processes.

This distinction is consequential. Healthy soil transforms. It breaks down organic matter, reintegrates nutrients into biological cycles, and sustains the growth of new life. Degraded soil, by contrast, loses this regenerative capacity. Chemical inputs, industrial agriculture, and extractive land use diminish biological diversity and disrupt ecological balance, slowing or halting the processes upon which renewal depends. Synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, and other chemical treatments can change soil chemistry, disrupt nutrient cycles, and reduce the diversity of microbial communities by favoring certain organisms while suppressing others. Intensive agricultural methods such as mono cropping, repeated tillage, and heavy mechanization further degrade soil by disturbing its physical structure, breaking fungal networks, compacting the ground, and accelerating erosion. At the same time, extractive land use - defined by the continual removal of nutrients and organic matter without sufficient regeneration - depletes the soil of the resources necessary to sustain long-term fertility. Together, these processes impair the biological interactions upon which healthy soil depends. Soil organisms, including bacteria, fungi, and other decomposers, play a central role in breaking down organic matter, cycling nutrients, forming stable soil aggregates, and supporting plant growth through symbiotic relationships.

When Microbial communities are reduced in diversity or abundance, these functions become less efficient and less resilient. Nutrient cycling slows, decomposition rates decline, soil structure weakens, and the regenerative capacity of the system is compromised. As a result, the soil’s ability to sustain biological renewal is progressively diminished. It becomes less capable of decomposing organic matter, regenerating fertility, retaining water, and supporting the ecological processes through which living systems reproduce themselves. In this sense, soil degradation is not merely a loss of material quality, but a decline in the biological and functional integrity of the system itself.

Despite its foundational role in the cultivation and decomposition of many textile materials, soil remains largely absent from fashion discourse. Considering that most fashion materials begin in the ground and many end there too, six feet deep, soil’s omission from fashion discourse is slightly odd. Don’t you think? Within the fashion industry, materials are typically discussed in relation to their aesthetic performance, technical qualities, provenance, or symbolic value, while the ecological systems that produce and transform those materials receive comparatively little attention. Fashion, as both an industry and a design discipline, generally engages with materials only once they have been transformed into usable design inputs rather than during the earlier stages of ecological production. Designers and brands typically work with finished fabrics, yarns, trims, leather, technical textiles, and supplier-provided material libraries. They do not usually engage directly with the agricultural, biological, and ecological systems involved in the cultivation, extraction, and decomposition of those materials, including soil management, microbial activity, nutrient cycling, land-use practices, or decomposition processes. As a result, soil is often lies outside of immediate operation framework through which materials are typically encountered and evaluated within the fashion system.

Before fashion becomes image, silhouette, or commodity, it begins in the ground (© Edie Lou Freisinger)

Where the Materials are Coming From

By the time textile materials enter the fashion industry, the agricultural, extractive, and industrial processes through which they were produced have typically already taken place and are no longer directly visible within the design and sourcing process. But where do the raw materials underlying textile production originally come from? And why is it important to know where they originate? Does it matter at all? Well, a material cannot be meaningfully evaluated without understanding the systems from which it emerges. First, the origin of a textile material determines the ecological and industrial systems required for its production. Different raw material sources rely on fundamentally different forms of land use, extraction, cultivation, chemical processing, and energy input. Understanding where a material comes from is therefore necessary to understand the environmental systems implicated in its production. Second, material origin influences the physical and chemical properties of the resulting textile. Agricultural conditions, extraction methods, feedstock composition, and processing parameters can affect finer quality, durability, elasticity, dye uptake, degradation behavior, and performance characteristics. A material’s production history therefore contributes to its functional properties.

For example, cotton grown under different environmental conditions can vary in staple length, fineness, and maturity, all of which affect spinning performance and fabric quality. Wool fiber characteristics such as diameter crimp, elasticity, and softness are similarly influenced by breed, nutrition, climate, and the general management and living conditions under which animals are raised - grazing conditions, stocking density, climate exposure, housing/shelter conditions, stress levels, veterinary care, and health management. Poor nutrition can reduce wool fiber diameter consistency and strength, stress can affect growth rate and fiber uniformity, breed selection influences softness, crimp, and fineness, and climate can alter fiber density and thickness. In synthetic fibers, although the raw material feedstock originates from geological resources extracted from the earth, the physical and chemical properties of the resulting textile are determined primarily by industrial manufacturing parameters rather than by biological growth conditions, obviously. Polymer composition, molecular weight, extrusion, temperature, spinning speed, cooling rate, draw ratio, and finishing treatments affect polymer chain alignment, crystallinity, finer diameter, and surface morphology. These structural characteristics determine properties such as elasticity, tensile strength, abrasion resistance, moisture behavior, thermal stability, and degradation potential.

Under a framework - used here - in which petrochemical and fossil-derived materials are treated as originating from the ground because they are extracted from terrestrial geological systems, the category of textile materials that do not originate from soil- or ground-derived systems becomes comparatively narrow. The principal exceptions are materials derived from marine biological systems or from laboratory-cultivated feedstocks not directly sourced from terrestrial raw material extraction. These include seaweed-based and alginate fibers produced from marine algae, certain chitin- and chitosan-based fibers derived from crustacean shells or other marine biological waste streams, experimental bacterial or microbial cellulose textiles produced through fermentation processes, and certain bio-fabricated materials cultivated in controlled laboratory or bioreactor environments. Some examples of textile materials produced outside conventional terrestrial agricultural and geological systems include SeaCell TM by smartfiber AG, a seaweed-derived textile fiber; BioCouture, a bacterial cellulose material developed through microbial fermentation; Reishi TM by MycoWorks, Mylo TM by Bolt Threads, Ephea TM developed by SQIM, and Evocative, all of which are mycelium-based biomaterials cultivated in controlled growth environments.

Nearly all conventional fibers used in fashion can be understood as soil- or ground-based in origin (© Edie Lou Freisinger)

Soil-Based or Soil-Dependent Fibers

If textile materials are classified based on whether their raw material inputs derive from terrestrial biological or geological systems - and they can certainly be classified in this way - then, with the exception of limited marine-derived and laboratory-cultivated materials listed above, nearly all conventional fibers used in fashion can be understood as soil- or ground-based in origin. Textile fibers that are soil-based or otherwise dependent on soil-linked terrestrial systems can be classified into three principal categories: cellulose-based fibers, protein-based fibers, and oil-based synthetic fibers. Cellulose-based fibers are derived from plant biomass grown in soil-dependent agricultural or forestry systems. This category includes both natural plant fibers and man-made cellulose fibers. Natural cellulose fibers such as cotton, flax, hemp, and jute are harvested directly from cultivated plants, while man-made cellulose fibers are produced by extracting cellulose from plant-based feedstock and transforming it into new fiber forms through industrial processing. The production of cellulose-based fibers is geographically concentrated in regions suited to large-scale agriculture and forestry. Cotton is produced predominantly in China, India, the United States, Brazil, and Pakistan. Flax for linen production is concentrated primarily in France, Belgium, and the Netherlands, while hemp is cultivated extensively in China, France, and Canada. Jute production is centered largely in India and Bangladesh. Man-made cellulose fibers such as viscose, modal, lyocell, and acetate are typically produced from wood pulp derived from forestry operations. Common feedstocks include eucalyptus, beech, pine, and spruce sourced from countries such as Brazil, Sweden, Finland, Indonesia, Canada, and the United States. In the manufacturing process, cellulose is extracted from the wood pulp, dissolved through chemical treatment, and then extruded through industrial spinnerets to form new continuous filaments, which may then be processed directly as filament yarns or cut into staple fibers for textile production. Although man-made cellulose fibers undergo substantial industrial transformation, their raw material basis remains plant-derived. Both natural and regenerated cellulose fibers therefore originate from soil-dependent biological growth systems, whether used directly in their natural form or reconstituted through industrial processing.

Protein-based fibers are animal-derived textile fibers composed primarily of structural proteins produced through biological growth processes. The principal protein-based fibers used in fashion include wool, cashmere, mohair, alpaca, angora, and silk. Wool, cashmere, mohair, alpaca, and angora consist primarily of keratin, while silk consists predominantly of fibroin, a structural protein secreted by silkworms during cocoon formation. These fibers are produced through distinct biological systems. Wool is obtained from sheep, cashmere from cashmere goats, mohair from Angora goats, alpaca fiber from alpacas, and silk from silkworms. Major producing countries for such fibers include Australia, China, New Zealand, South Africa, Mongolia, and Peru. Protein-based fibers remain highly dependent on soil-based terrestrial systems because their production requires substantial land resources and agricultural inputs to sustain the animals from which the fibers are obtained. This includes the pasture, forage, feed crops, and ecological conditions necessary for animal growth and fiber production. In large-scale and mass animal farming systems, the land demands associated with animal agriculture can contribute to soil degradation, nutrient imbalance, compaction, and pollution through overgrazing, manure accumulation, and feed-crop cultivation. Silk is produced through sericulture. Silkworms synthesize fibroin during cocoon formation only when nourished by mulberry leaves, and the cultivation of mulberry plants requires soil-based agricultural production. Global silk production is concentrated primarily in China and India, which together account for the majority of world silk output. Although protein-based soil-dependent fibers are not “grown” directly from soil, obviously, their production remains dependent on soil-supported biological systems.

Oil-based synthetic fibers are manufactured from petrochemical feedstock derived from fossil hydrocarbon deposits extracted from beneath the earth’s surface. These materials originate from geological resources formed over long geological timescales and subsequently transformed through industrial, chemical processing into synthetic polymers suitable for textile production. The principal oil-based synthetic materials used in fashion include polyester nylon, acrylic, polypropylene, elastane, polyurethane, polyamide, spandex, aramid, polyvinyl chloride, PTFE, EVA foams, neoprene, chloroprene rubbers, TPU, and other petrochemical polymer-based materials used in fibers, coatings, synthetic leathers, and technical textile applications. The production of synthetic fibers begins with the refining of crude oil or natural gas into petrochemical feedstocks such as ethylene, propylene, benzene, and paraxylene. These molecular intermediates are chemically transformed into polymer chains through polymerization reactions, producing solid synthetic polymers. The resulting polymer material is then melted or dissolved and extruded through spinnerets - industrial nozzles with fine openings - to form continuous filaments. These filaments are cooled, stretched, and processed to align the polymer structure, thereby increasing strength, elasticity, and durability before being converted into yarns and textile structures. Unlike cellulose- or protein-based fibers, oil-based synthetic fibers are not generated through biological growth but through industrial synthesis and polymer engineering. Their physical and performance characteristics are therefore determined primarily by polymer chemistry and manufacturing parameters rather than by agricultural or ecological growth conditions. Nevertheless, their raw material basis remains terrestrially derived through geological extraction. The crude oil and natural gas used in synthetic fiber production are sourced predominantly from major fossil fuel-producing countries including the United States, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Canada, China, Iraq, and the United Arab Emirates. Global manufacturing of synthetic textile fibers is concentrated primarily in China, India, Taiwan, South Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand, Turkey, and Bangladesh, where large-scale petrochemical and textile manufacturing infrastructure supports fiber production.

Untreated cellulose fibers such as cotton, flax, hemp, and jute can often decompose comparatively efficiently (© Edie Lou Freisinger)

Decomposition and Environmental Persistence

As we can see, the vast majority of conventional textile fibers used in fashion remain materially rooted in terrestrial soil- and ground-based systems, regardless of the degree of industrial transformation they undergo. So, having established the origins of conventional textile materials, it is equally necessary to examine their behavior after disposal. To evaluate the environmental impact of a textile material, it is not sufficient to know only where it comes from or how it was produced. It is also necessary to understand what happens to that material after it is discarded - specifically, whether it decomposes, persists, or fragments in the environment. A material’s environmental significance depends on both: its origin and production system and its post-use behavior. The origin and production system of a material is characterized by factors such as the amount of land required for its production, the water and energy consumed during its manufacture, the emissions and pollution generated throughout the production process, and whether the material is derived from renewable or fossil-based resources. Its environmental significance is also determined by its post-use behavior. This includes whether the material can biodegrade, how long it persists in the environment, whether it fragments into microplastics or other particulate residues, whether degradation releases toxic substances or contaminants, and whether the material can be reintegrated into ecological systems following disposal. Material origin alone does not determine sustainability; post-use behavior must also be considered.

Decomposition in real ecological systems is influenced by a wide range of interacting environmental and material variables. These include the composition of the substrate or material itself, ambient temperature, moisture and water availability, oxygen concentration and redox conditions, the composition and abundance of microbial and fungal communities, and the availability of nutrients - particularly nitrogen and phosphorus - required for microbial metabolism. Decomposition is further affected by soil pH, soil texture and structure, organic matter content, salinity and ionic conditions, ultraviolet radiation, mechanical abrasion or physical disturbance, burial depth and aeration, and the surrounding waste matrix or disposal environment, such as whether the material is located in compost, open soil, landfill, or aquatic system.

So let us look more closely at how different fibers behave in the final phase of their life cycle. In practice, the highest biodegradability is typically observed among untreated plant-based cellulose fibers, certain protein-based animal fibers, and some minimally processed biologically derived biomaterials. Those materials are composed of naturally occurring organic polymers that microorganisms and fungi can efficiently metabolize. Let’s begin with cellulose-based fibers, which generally exhibit the highest biodegradability among textile materials. Cellulose is a naturally occurring structural polysaccharide that many microorganisms and fungi have evolved to enzymatically degrade within terrestrial ecosystems. Under suitable biological conditions, these organisms produce cellulolytic enzymes capable of breaking the cellulose polymer into smaller molecular components that can be metabolized and reintegrated into ecological nutrient cycles. As a result, untreated cellulose fibers such as cotton, flax, hemp, and jute can often decompose comparatively efficiently when exposed to biological active environments - such as healthy soil. However, the biodegradation behavior of cellulose-based textiles may differ substantially from that of untreated raw cellulose because most textile fibers undergo multiple chemical and mechanical treatments during manufacturing. Dyeing, finishing, coating, bleaching, softening, wrinkle-resistant treatment, water-repellent finishing, antimicrobial treatment, and lamination can alter the chemical composition, surface structure, permeability, and biological accessibility of the fiber. These modifications may reduce the ability of microorganisms and fungi to access or enzymatically degrade the cellulose substrate. In addition, certain chemical additives or finishing agents may introduce compounds that are themselves resistant to degradation or inhibitory to microbial activity. Synthetic coatings, polymer binders, resin finishes, and blended synthetic fiber components can create physical or chemical barriers around cellulose fibers, thereby slowing microbial and fungal colonization and reducing decomposition rates. As a result, the biodegradability of a finished cellulose-based textile may differ significantly from that of the untreated cellulose from which it was originally derived. In its untreated state, plant-derived cellulose can generally be reintegrated into intact circulating ecosystems under suitable biological conditions. However, because most cellulose-based textiles undergo industrial processing, the presence of plant-derived cellulose alone does not guarantee that a finished textile will decompose in the same manner as untreated plant biomass.

And what about man-made cellulose fibers such as viscose or Tencel? Although man-made cellulose fibers originate from plant-derived cellulose, their industrial dissolution and reconstitution alter the structural organization of the original plant material, which may influence their physical properties and decomposition behavior relative to natural cellulose fibers depending on processing, structure, and finishing. The cellulose in man-made fibers has been industrially dissolved, chemically processed, and reconstituted into a new fiber structure before becoming textile material. This changes several aspects of the material, including its molecular ordering, porosity, and structural morphology, which may affect properties such as moisture absorption, tensile strength, softness, and decomposition behavior. In addition, the manufacture of regenerated cellulose fibers may introduce residual chemicals, additives, solvents, or finishing agents that remain associated with the final fiber depending on the production process. Because regenerated cellulose fibers undergo more extensive chemical and mechanical processing than untreated natural plant fibers, their biodegradation behavior may differ from that of raw cellulose-based plant materials despite sharing the same underlying cellulose origin. But even though cellulose man-made fibers are industrially processed they are typically considered more biodegradable and more biologically compatible with natural decomposition systems than oil-based synthetic fibers.

The fate of oil-based synthetic fibers is determined largely outside of biological processes (© Edie Lou Freisinger)

Protein-based fibers are biodegradable because they consist of naturally occurring structural proteins that many microorganisms and fungi can enzymatically decompose under suitable biological conditions. These organisms produce proteolytic enzymes capable of breaking down the protein structures within the fiber into smaller amino acid-based compounds, which can then be metabolized and reintegrated into ecological nutrient cycles. As a result, fibers such as wool, cashmere, silk, and alpaca possess the capacity to decompose biologically over time when exposed to environments that support active microbial and fungal communities. However, as with cellulose-based materials, the decomposition of protein fibers is not determined by composition alone. The rate and extent of degradation depend strongly on environmental conditions and may be significantly altered by chemical treatment, finishing, coating, dyeing, or blending applied during textile production. Consequently, the presence of a naturally occurring protein fiber does not guarantee that a finished textile will decompose in the same manner as untreated biological protein matter. Although protein-based fibers are biodegradable under suitable biological conditions, they do not typically decompose as readily or as rapidly as untreated cellulose-based fibers under comparable conditions. This difference is primarily structural. Cellulose is a widespread plant polymer that many soil microorganisms and fungi are highly adapted to degrade efficiently, owing to the abundance of plant matter within terrestrial ecosystems. Protein fibers, by contrast, often possess more complex and tightly organized structural architectures, may be more chemically cross-linked or physically protected, and can therefore be less readily accessible to decomposer organisms than simpler plant-derived substrates. Keratin, the principal structural protein in wool and cashmere, is particularly durable due to its highly organized fibrous structure and stabilizing molecular bonds, while silk fibroin, though generally more biodegradable than keratin, still differs in decomposition behavior from cellulose.

Indicative decomposition timeframes vary substantially depending on environmental conditions and textile treatment, but untreated cotton may decompose within a period of a few weeks under biologically active soil conditions, whereas chemically treated or finished cotton garments may persist significantly longer. Untreated wool may require several months to multiple years depending on fiber density and environmental context, while treated wool garments may decompose more slowly. Regenerated cellulose materials such as viscose may exhibit decomposition behavior broadly comparable to other cellulose-based fibers, though rates may differ according to processing method, finishing, and structural modification. These timeframes should be understood only as approximate tendencies rather than fixed values. The decomposition of all textile materials remains highly dependent on environmental context, including soil quality, microbial and fungal abundance, nutrient availability, moisture, temperature, aeration, and the broader biological condition of the receiving ecosystem.

Oil-based synthetic fibers exhibit substantially greater environmental persistence than biologically derived textile materials. Unlike cellulose and protein-based fibers, which correspond to naturally occurring biological substrates, synthetic polymers such as polyester, nylon, acrylic, and elastane consist of chemically engineered molecular structures that many decomposer organisms have not evolutionarily adapted to break down efficiently. Most microorganisms and fungi decompose substances by means of enzymes that evolved to recognize and cleave the specific molecular structures commonly found in natural organic matter. Cellulose, proteins, lignin, starch, and other biological polymers have been present in terrestrial ecosystems for millions of years, and decomposer organisms have accordingly evolved enzymatic systems specialized to break their chemical bonds efficiently. Synthetic textile polymers, by contrast, possess molecular structures that differ substantially from those of naturally occurring biopolymers. Many petrochemical fibers contain highly stable carbon - carbon backbones, aromatic ring structures, ester linkages, amide linkages, or other engineered chemical configurations arranged in ways that are less accessible to naturally occurring degradative enzymes. In addition, synthetic polymers are often manufactured with high molecular weight, high crystallinity, hydrophobic surfaces, and tightly packed chain structures, all of which reduce enzymatic access and chemical reactivity.

As a result, most microorganisms and fungi lack the enzymatic machinery required to efficiently bind to, cleave, and metabolize these synthetic polymer structures. Rather than being rapidly mineralized through biological decomposition, synthetic fibers therefore tend to persist and degrade primarily through abiotic physical and chemical weathering processes, such as ultraviolet radiation, oxidation, hydrolysis, thermal stress, and mechanical fragmentation. Under environmental disposal conditions, polyester and nylon may persist for several decades to over two centuries, while acrylic and elastane may remain environmentally persistent for similarly extended or longer periods depending on polymer type and exposure conditions. Rather than fully decomposing, synthetic textile fibers commonly fragment into progressively smaller particles, including microfibers and microplastics, while remaining chemically persistent within the environment. Their degradation therefore often results not in biological reintegration, but in long-term environmental fragmentation and accumulation. Consequently, the fate of oil-based synthetic fibers is determined largely outside of biological processes, raising distinct environmental concerns relative to biologically derived textile materials. In essence, the resistance of oil-based synthetic fibers to biodegradation arises from the mismatch between engineered polymer chemistry and the enzymatic capabilities of naturally evolved decomposer systems.

Vast majority of textie materials used in fashion originate directly or indirectly from soil- and ground-based terrestrial systems (© Edie Lou Freisinger)

What Fashion Owes the Soil

As we can see, the vast majority of textie materials used in fashion originate directly or indirectly from soil- and ground-based terrestrial systems and, in one form or another, ultimately return to, persist within, or interact with soil at the end of their material life. The capacity of a textile material to biodegrade does not automatically establish sustainability. Biodegradability describes only one aspect of material behavior: the potential for decomposition under suitable conditions. It does not account for the environmental burdens associated with production, including land use, water consumption, chemical processing, emissions, energy demand, or labor conditions. A material may be biodegradable and yet remain environmentally burdensome across other phases of its life cycle. Biodegradability must therefore be understood as one variable within sustainability assessments rather than as a sufficient indicator of sustainability itself.

Whether derived from plant biomass, animal agriculture, fossil hydrocarbons, or biologically cultivated substrates, most fashion materials remain materially linked to the ecological systems of the earth from which they are extracted or grown. To discuss fashion without accounting for soil is therefore to omit the foundational substrate upon which most material production and post-use reintegration depend. Soil is not peripheral to fashion’s material system; it is one of its foundational conditions. Despite of this, soil remains largely absent from mainstream fashion discourse. This omission becomes particularly striking in relation to circularity - today one of the industry’s dominant sustainability buzzwords. Within contemporary fashion discourse, circularity is frequently presented as a solution to the environmental failures of linear production systems. It is used to describe models in which garments and materials remain in circulation through reuse, repair, recycling, or biological reintegration. In this framework, circularity is often treated as a design or systems objective: something that can be achieved through improved logistics, material innovation, or product strategy. However, this understanding remains incomplete if it treats circularity primarily as a matter of industrial design while excluding the ecological systems required for material reintegration. Circularity does not occur through “intention” alone. A material does not become circular simply because it is labeled biodegradable, designed for compostability, or positioned within a close-loop framework. Biological circularity depends upon the existence of environmental systems capable of receiving, decomposing, and reintegrating that material after use.

A biodegradable garment is not circular simply because it is biodegradable in “theory”. It becomes biologically circular only if it enters an environment capable of actually breaking it down and reintegrating it into ecological cycles. Circularity is not automatically sustainable simply because materials remain in circulation within commercial systems (resale, refurbishment, rental, redistribution, recycling). Circularity cannot be assumed to be environmentally beneficial merely because garments remain in industrial circulation for longer. Refurbishment, repair, resale, reverse logistics, and material reprocessing all require additional energy, labor, transport, infrastructure, and technological inputs. These interventions may delay disposal and extend product use within the economic system, but they also generate environmental burdens of their own. The sustainability of such models therefore depends not simply on prolonging circulation within the industry, but on whether the environmental costs associated with maintaining that circulation remain lower than those of producing new materials or products. Industrial recirculation, in itself, does not guarantee environmental sustainability. Circularity, in this sense, is not inherently sustainable; its environmental value must be evaluated in relation to the total material and energy inputs required to maintain the loop. If fashion seeks to engage seriously with circularity, soil cannot be excluded from the discussion. Circular fashion depends not only on the design of garments for reuse, recycling, or biodegradation, but also the existence of functioning ecological systems capable of reintegrating biological materials after use.

And if fashion depends so extensively on soil for the cultivation, extraction, and reintegration of its materials, then the question is no longer whether soil matters to fashion, or not, but what fashion owes in return! At minimum, it owes to acknowledge that the industry draws the majority of its material resources from the same terrestrial systems upon which all plant growth, food production, and ultimately human life depend. Not to mention that fashion is materially dependent on soil not only as a source of raw materials, but also as the environmental system that ultimately receives much of its waste and material afterlife. To treat soil as invisible to fashion is therefore to overlook one of the foundational ecological conditions of both the industry itself and the broader human systems within which it operates. True circularity is possible only where materials are compatible with biological reintegration and where the soils receiving them retain the ecological integrity necessary to decompose and process them, and where the quantity of material returned remains within the absorptive and regenerative capacity of the receiving ecosystem. Circularity is not determined only by compatibility, but also by scale/load relative to ecosystem carrying capacity. Even biologically compatible materials may disrupt ecological balance when introduced in volumes exceeding the rate at which natural systems can safely decompose and reintegrate them. Circularity therefore depends not only on material composition and soil health, but also on maintaining balance between material throughput and ecological processing capacity.

And let’s face this, any serious vision of sustainable or circular fashion requires a broader cultural reorientation in which soil stewardship is understood as part of fashion’s value chain rather than external to it. The agricultural and ecological labor that sustains fiber cultivation must be recognized alongside design and manufacturing as foundational to the industry itself. If fashion is to become truly circular, it must restore awareness of the living systems from which its materials emerge and to which they ultimately return. Given the scale of the global fashion industry and the universality of clothing as a human necessity, fashion must be recognized not as a peripheral cultural sector but as a materially significant system with substantial environmental consequence. Like food, clothing constitutes a fundamental and continuous component of human life; its ecological implications therefore extend far beyond aesthetics or consumer preference. A “healthier” fashion system requires acknowledging that fashion does not operate in isolation. The industry is structurally interconnected with agricultural systems, petrochemical extraction, manufacturing infrastructure, transport and logistics networks, waste management systems, and the ecological processes responsible for decomposition and reintegration. Its environmental impact cannot be understood independently of these broader relationships. To treat fashion as separate from the systems that sustain and absorb it is to misunderstand its true material footprint. If fashion is to become genuinely circular, both industry and consumers must recognize that textile production participates in a wider ecological and industrial network in which extraction, cultivation, processing, consumption, and decomposition remain fundamentally interdependent.

https://dn790000.ca.archive.org/0/items/CUbiodiversity102127/CUbiodiversity102127_bw.pdf

https://www.academia.edu/72307038/Soil_health_and_carbon_management

https://content.ucpress.edu/pages/10599/10599.ch01.pdf

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature16069

https://fire.biol.wwu.edu/cmoyer/zztemp_fire/biol405_S08/heijden_unseen_soil_ecollett08.pdf

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26871440/

https://www.cpc-skek.ch/fileadmin/Publikationen___Links/Publikationen/Bender-et-al-TREE-in-press.pdf

https://www.merlinsheldrake.com/entangled-life

https://news.cnrs.fr/opinions/the-soil-underfoot-we-take-for-granted

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0045653508008333

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0734975008000141

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007JPEnv..15..259T/abstract