Wool has a reputation as a product with poor environmental credentials. Significant land use is required to farm sheep.

But the IWTO (International Wool Textile Organisation) disputes this view. It intends to combat the perceived negative qualities of its product versus other fibers.

Industry LCAs (Life Cycle Assessments) have frequently ranked wool as lagging behind its competitors. But those in the wool business believe this is wholly inaccurate as the assessments don’t take into account a range of factors or the longevity of the product once it leaves the farm.

IWTO feels wool is often unfairly classified by powerful organisations promoting petroleum based fibers that do not measure performance on a cradle to grave basis. According to the IWTO, around 80 per cent of wool’s environmental impacts occur up to the farm gate and so LCAs which disregard a textile’s longevity after that point provide a skewed rating.

It has also been highlighted by the IWTO that microplastic pollution – one of the largest environmental issues faced by the textile industry – is not included in the calculations, and even ignoring the shedding of micro plastics, woolen garments tend to be domestically laundered far less than other materials.

Wool producers say many areas of land where sheep are farmed are often unsuitable for any other kind of agriculture or lucrative crop cultivation and that there are several bi-products from sheep farming which are not taken into account when calculating a fiber’s score.