While wool – natural, renewable, and biodegradable – has a positive environmental story, rating tools score it poorly due to flaws in the way certain impacts are assessed, or in some cases, not assessed.
For example, important impacts such as microplastics pollution are not considered in ratings that rely solely on life cycle assessment (LCA).

Additionally, LCA footprinting should cover a product from cradle to grave. But because it is easier, some ratings use only cradle to gate. As a result, the downsides to other fibers are left out, while what’s negative for wool is left in.

The issue is that of communicating wool’s environmental credentials. Natural, sustainable, and biodegradable, wool is as good as it gets.

Demand for finer wool in active wear and next-to-skin continues to grow, while a low price for broader wools, relative to other fibers, should contribute to an improvement.

Past supercycles, when they have turned down, have always been due to events external to the industry.

As wool prices continue to supercycle, sustainability takes centre stage.

There has been yet another rise in prices for Merino and fine Crossbred wool, in what is described as a supercycle. The last supercycle occurred in the late 1980s. This one has now gone on for more than 112 weeks, taking the wool industry into new territory.

Seasonal conditions in Australia and South Africa may see supply remain at current levels in the short term.