New research conducted by WEFT and QSA Partners, in collaboration with the University of Leeds Back to Baselines programme, reveals that UK consumers are in favor of visible Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) charges on clothing to enhance recycling efforts and promote sustainable fashion.
The comprehensive study surveyed over 2,000 UK shoppers and found that introducing a visible charge on clothing items could significantly increase funding for textile recycling and reuse without discouraging consumers. Shoppers expressed a desire for transparency, stating they do not want costs bundled together or for brands to make choices on their behalf.
A nominal charge of £0.50 ($0.68) per clothing item would likely go unnoticed by consumers, while a £1 ($1.35) fee on higher-priced items (over £40) would also be deemed acceptable. Interestingly, while previous discussions suggested charges as low as a penny, consumers indicated they would be willing to tolerate much higher amounts. In fact, they stated that a charge of up to £5 (~$6.76) per item would be necessary before it would significantly impact their purchasing decisions towards more sustainable options.
“Consumers clearly told us that transparency is essential. They want simple, visible information at the point of sale to help them make sustainable choices. It’s encouraging to see such widespread support for practical steps towards greater sustainability in fashion,” said Kristina Bull, co-founder of WEFT.
The need for transparency was highlighted, with over 80% of participants supporting a clearly displayed charge at the point of sale. Shoppers also favored a straightforward, traffic-light style labeling system to indicate the environmental impact of products, as noted on the UKFT website, which collaborates closely with QSA Partners and WEFT.
“This research provides critical insights into consumer tolerance and preferences for EPR charges on clothing,” commented Professor Stephen J. Russell of the University of Leeds. “It clearly demonstrates how small, well-communicated charges can drive meaningful changes towards a more circular economy.”
Key findings from the study underscore the importance of clear and purposeful communication. Consumers preferred the term ‘charge’ over ‘fee,’ with 70% supporting visible charges when transparently explained. While sustainability continues to be less of a priority than price, comfort, and fit in purchasing decisions, clear labeling significantly boosts consumer willingness to opt for sustainable products. Notably, acceptance of an EPR charge was consistent across all income levels, indicating widespread agreement when the rationale is articulated clearly.
Implementing a small charge could generate between £2 billion ($2.70 billion) and £4 billion ($5.41 billion) annually, which would greatly improve textile collection and recycling infrastructure, aid the transition to a circular economy, and stimulate job creation in green sectors. Importantly, if executed properly, this initiative would not impose a financial strain on taxpayers.
WEFT and its partners advocate for further exploration of consumer reactions to EPR charges and effective labeling systems. They also emphasize the need for policies that do not disproportionately impact lower-income groups.
As a leading independent organization promoting fair and balanced textile EPR systems in the UK, WEFT plans to conduct additional research in autumn 2025 to refine these findings, backed by the Back to Baselines programme.
