|
Report:
|
Consumer protection
Industrievereinigung Chemiefaser e. V. (IVC) actively supports vocational training facilities and also serves as a contact for questions from the general public in connection with fibres. For example, lately IVC has been receiving inquiries regarding bamboo fibres and bamboo textiles. Research in this matter gives reason for concern, as currently consumers might be widely misinformed due to incorrect textile labelling. In its role as a competent platform for fibre issues, it is one of IVC's tasks to provide consumers with adequate information and to offer advice to fibre and textile manufacturers in cases of doubt.
In concrete terms, many cases are known where product claims for textiles suggest to consumers that these products are manufactured partly from bamboo as an un-treated natural fibre. Some textiles – e.g. socks, complete sets of underwear or home textiles – are marketed with the material specifications "xx % bamboo" or "xx % viscose bamboo". Performed analyses show that – except for a small number of textiles where bamboo fibres were really used - most products claimed to be "bamboo" textiles do not contain bamboo fibres but viscose fibres of various qualities.
In those cases, bamboo merely serves as a raw material for cellulose which is sub-sequently processed into viscose fibre. Not only bamboo but also e.g. beech tree, birch, pine, spruce, stone pine or eucalyptus are suitable as raw materials for cellulose intended for viscose fibre production. If one took up the philosophy of the misleading "bamboo labelling", all textiles containing viscose fibres could be labelled with the respective raw material - i.e. "xx % stone pine", viscose pine, viscose eucalyptus etc. Obviously, this is nonsensical, misleading and, consequently, prohibited by the legislator, because viscose fibres do not have the same properties as natural plants used to obtain cellulose as raw material. In order to protect consumers, the legislator enacted already many years ago the textile labelling law (Textilkennzeichnungsgesetz) which demands – for cases as described above – the clear and correct labelling "viscose". Where it is wished to state raw materials on labels of textile products, relevant details can be given additionally to the fibre designation - but as a clearly separate item of extra information to avoid confusion with products really made of natural fibres.
For bamboo this could be done e.g. in the following way "xx % viscose bamboo", with a sufficiently wide space between the name of the fibre and the raw material so that no confusion arises with the incorrect version "xx % viscose bamboo".
Consumers can be misled not only by labelling but also by product advertising. For example, in "bamboo" textiles wordings are found such as "contains the innovative, breathable natural fibre bamboo" (mit innovativer, atmungsaktiver Naturfaser Bambus) or "with natural, anti-bacterial effect" (mit natürlicher antibakterieller Wirkung). Untreated bamboo fibres might have an anti-bacterial effect which, how-ever, has not been proven so far in textile products made of viscose fibres based on bamboo as raw material.
In some cases such incorrect information is traced back to the People's Republic of China. Here, some man-made fibre manufacturers describe - in their product information - the viscose process leading to viscose fibre and wrongly designate the resulting product as bamboo fibre and not as viscose fibre, even though the latter would be correct. Thus customers even get in writing the wrong information that they purchase a bamboo fibre.
Often in good faith, manufacturers of "bamboo”-textiles use - without further reflection - those incorrect designations by Chinese man-made fibre manufacturers, unknowingly infringing the textile labelling law. Along the downstream value chain, this impacts also the textile trade. Small retailers as well as large trading companies and their branches offer wrongly labelled products to consumers. Major mail order businesses are no exception, so that there might be misleading statements in their catalogues and incorrectly labelled textiles in their product ranges, clearly not com-plying with the textile labelling law as far as "bamboo" is concerned.
IVC contacted almost all parties concerned, drawing their attention to the present situation. Many of these stakeholders are already now meeting their responsibility toward consumers: They have either corrected their labelling information or with-drawn goods, catalogues and internet offers. Other stakeholders have just started to initiate suitable measures in order to avoid any future deception of consumers.
IVC recommends all stakeholders to take a highly critical attitude when reading product information from Chinese man-made fibre manufacturers. Only transparency, frankness and truthfulness in conformity attestations can create a basis of trust between business partners – to the benefit of everyone involved, including consumers. IVC and our member companies in Germany and Austria have achieved such a sound basis of trust over many years. We hope that the same will be possible with Chinese man-made fibre manufacturers.
|
