Inditex ignores all criticism and increases climate damaging transport emissions
You have to delve deep into the small print of the fast fashion giant’s 514-page annual report to find the figures for Inditex’s transport emissions in 2024. But they’re there for all to see. While emission reductions are reported in other areas, those generated by the transport and distribution of goods increased by a whopping 10 percent in 2024, now amounting to 2.6 million tonnes of CO2 equivalents (compared to 2.3 million tonnes in the previous year or 2.0 million according to the old Inditex calculation method). On average, transport and distribution now account for around 20 percent of the climate footprint produced by Zara clothing.
A cover-up instead of transparency
Inditex is trying to sweep the enormous climate impact exerted by its transport logistics, especially its blatant dependence on air freight, under the carpet. Air freight is mentioned only once in the entire annual report – in the context of an agreement on the use of sustainable aviation fuel. The company intends to add 5 percent of this fuel to its cargo flights from Madrid. Given the scale of the problem, this is just a drop in the ocean.
Presenting an isolated, tiny measure as a solution while concealing the actual extent of the emissions produced by air freight is nothing more than greenwashing.
Inditex has also changed its method for calculating greenhouse gas emissions in the current annual report. This “innovation” reduces the total volume of reported emissions, but only mathematically. The actual rise in emissions from transport and distribution is therefore all the more worrying.
Data from Zaragoza and Bangladesh highlight Inditex’s airborne fashion boom
The freight statistics for Zaragoza Airport, the main transfer site for Inditex, show a significant increase in cargo volumes, the majority of which can be attributed to the fashion group. In particular, there has been an increase in flights transporting goods from the factories in Asia to the logistics centres in Europe. This trend is confirmed by our assessment of the customs data from Bangladesh, which is the subject of a video documentary from Context, powered by Thomson Reuters Foundation.
H&M shows that it can be done differently
That the fast-fashion business model does not depend on air freight is highlighted by Inditex’s competitor H&M, where air freight accounts for a mere 1 percent of all transports. Not to mention that its emissions from transport and distribution of 448 kilotons CO2 equivalents in 2023, corresponding to just 5.2 percent of total emissions.
But Inditex is not impressed by any of this. Instead of using every possible means to mitigate the climate crisis, the company prefers to hope for technical miracle solutions. It told Bloomberg that the reductions were not being made at the same pace in the different parts of the value chain, e.g. due to the lack of availability of new technologies, such as clean aviation fuels.
Meanwhile, Inditex is once again trying to downplay the problem using cheap gimmicks: “Sea and road transport are by far the most significant methods used to ship our garments,” Inditex said in response to questions from Bloomberg. That may be the case if you just look at the distances covered. However, the emissions tell quite a different story. Per kilometre, they are many times higher for air freight. H&M’s figures show the impact this has: their remaining one per cent of air freight accounts for 18 percent of its transport emissions. Inditex should demonstrate a similar transparent approach instead of throwing sand in people’s eyes.
Inditex must take responsibility
The latest figures are alarming. Inditex is continuing to rely on a logistics model where speed remains the top priority, regardless oft he climate crisis. This deliberate decision undermines the credibility of the company’s climate promises. So, let us repeat our demand to Inditex and other fashion companies: Put an end to airborne fashion once and for all. Clothes won’t be ruined from being on the road a few weeks longer.
