The current state of the UK fibre industry.
The headline may have captured your attention because you’re like, “What UK fibre industry?” or otherwise, “Yes, of course, the UK fibre industry, we grow stuff here”. In fact, if you search “UK fibre industry” on your search engine of choice {Ecosia} then it’ll come up with fibre optics, not textile fibres.
There was once a burgeoning textile manufacturing industry on these isles: growing fibre, processing fibre, spinning fibre and weaving fibre — which was then further manufactured into final products.
However, these days, all you’ll find is cottage industries which, in order to achieve a commercially viable fibre, need to ship the fibre overseas to be processed before heading back for the final stages. So, while we do find a good amount of processing and manufacturing infrastructure here, we’re missing crucial skills and facilities that are speedy enough for what consumers require.
In this article I will take you through some of the challenges facing the establishment and sustainability of a UK fibre industry. I do not physically work in this industry so this is not a firsthand account, but rather a pulling together of the considerations required to move forward, along with folk and resources you should head to in order to understand further.
Past British fibre and textile industry.
Textiles and colonialism.
To start with I direct you to Slow Factory Foundation’s Open Edu classes, and in particular Céline Semaan’s lesson on fashion and colonialism. While it focuses on how colonialism is reproduced in today’s fashion system, it will give you a grounding in how Britain had a textile industry in the first place.
There are certain fibres that were in existence on the British Isles long before globalism was a thing — flax, hemp, wool — with cottage industries and local skill-sharing allowing for the retention of such agricultural practices over tens of thousands of years, and the production of them into finished goods (for domestic use). As Patrick Grant mentions in the BBC Countryfile interview (link below), landowners have to give 1/5 of their land over to growing flax because it was required for clothing and sails.
Industrial Revolution.
However, it was with the formation of the East India Company in 1600 that lifted Britain up as a trading monopoly, plus the invention of the flying shuttle loom in 1733 and of the ‘Spinning Jenny’ in 1764 that allowed for mechanisation of spinning and weaving.
With steam power forged by the Industrial Revolution, along with rail, canal and shipping infrastructure to transport goods (and people), plus migrancy and the enactment of a working class, Britain found quicker production, cheaper labour and additional fibres (silk and cotton) as the building blocks to have produced 8 billion yards of cloth by 1912.
It’s also suggested that engineers with skills specific to textile machinery were not allowed to emigrate. Yet, with exportation as key to Britain’s dominance of the market, it was also the precursor to the demise of the onshore textile industry.
Worker rights.
UK manufacturing is used as a sense of national pride, regardless of any discrepancies to human rights within the supply chain. The Combination Act of 1779 prevented workers in England collectively bargaining in groups or through unions for better pay and improved working conditions, while in the same year a group of Manchester textile workers rebelled against the introduction of machinery which threatened their skilled craft. This was the start of the Luddite movement — the idea that mechanisation would threaten skilled artisans their livelihood and the skills they had spent years acquiring.
Additionally, The Factory Act was passed in 1833 to protect children under the age of nine from working in the textile industry, while children aged thirteen and over could not work longer than sixty nine hours a week. {We think this is abhorrent now — 69 hours! — and yet this Act does nothing to protect workers these days, home or abroad}.
And despite attempting to ensure human rights, The Poor Law was passed in 1834 in order to create workhouses for the destitute where they could work, be fed, be clothed and children would be schooled, but they essentially became ‘Prisons for the Poor’ as conditions inside the workhouse were deliberately harsh, so that only those who desperately needed help would ask for it.
FYI, leather is not being included in this piece on UK fibre as this is technically a non-woven.
I would suggest listening to the Weaving Voices podcast from Whetstone Radio Collective, specifically Episode 1, ‘The Economic Waters We Sit In’, which regards the historic political, social and ecological threads that led to the economic model we now exist within.
Existing UK fibre and textile industry.
Supply chain.
The (natural) fibre supply chain is, in general, something like this list below — though depending on the product could be in a different order:
Fibre grown from seed on a farm > fibre processing i.e. turning the plant stalk into cellulose or bast > fibre spinning into thread and then yarn > fibre dyeing > fibre finishing to ready it for application > fibre weaving or knitting > any embellishments or print (and maybe dyeing) > product manufacture > product packaging and distribution.
The synthetic fibre supply chain is only slightly different in that the fibre is melted from pellets and extruded into a fibre, so removing the initial growing and processing steps.
There is a resurgence of production here in the UK as consumer appetite for “locally-made” comes to the fore, as investment builds into retraining and skills, and as businesses recentre their values in awareness of resource use. Yet there are still missing pieces in the supply chain that allow for truly onshore manufacturing. (“Onshore” or “nearshoring” refers to bringing operations to a domestic setting, where ideally the finished product will also be sold).
As found on the UKFT’s (UK Fashion and Textiles) letsmakeitthere.org directory there are 14 yarn manufacturers and 120 fabric manufacturers, here in the UK, along with 206 garment manufacturing units. But nowhere on this site does it show the farmers growing fibres, nor those highlighted as processing fibres (apart from at the spinning stage), such as The Natural Fibre Company who also scour and card wool.
For a greater overview of the fibre growing and processing found in the UK, we have to look to the Fibershed movement, with affiliate groups across the UK. I’ll come back to this under the header of ‘future UK fibre and textile industry’ below.
Diversity of fibres.
As mentioned above, with colonialism and trade came the ability to import fibres that cannot be cultivated in the British Isles, such as silk and cotton. Included within this is exotic hair fibres such as mohair, alpaca and cashmere — though I’m assuming they were not particularly rife back in pre-Industrial and Industrial times except for in the higher classes.
It could surprise you to know that there is in fact a commercial fibre industry here, though these fibres are not necessarily grown for textiles for fashion. You can still find hemp and flax farms, along with cereal straw (after grain harvest), but are all used more regularly in paper making than textiles fibre, or for medicinal purposes as with CBD and flaxseed or flax oil. Otherwise, the short woody outer core known as ‘shiv’ or ‘hurd’ is harvested and used in insulation materials and as construction biocomposites (strawboard, car door panels, parcel shelves). The UK government also place miscanthus, a perennial ornamental grass, under the heading of the fibre industry, though again it is only really the straw used and only for animal bedding.
What’s ridiculous is how in this guidance from DEFRA dated 2012, on ‘Industrial fibre crops: business opportunities for farmers’, they do not include wool. Perhaps because it was more to do with licensing (for instance with hemp), and guidance was revoked in 2019, however, wool is a consistently lost business opportunity (it is regularly burnt due to cost disparities in the shearing overheads, transportation to the Wool Marketing Board, and fluctuating final market price after grading). This leads on to the next point in why we have a limited fibre industry here in the UK after such a wealth of the 1700–1900s.
Introduction of synthetics.
Countries started establishing more of their own fibre and textile markets due to World War I, and with the onslaught of World War II there was innovations in chemicals for warfare. This also led to the discovery of plastic as a durable, longlasting, mouldable material. Its introduction into clothing led to the demise of natural fibre production, as lead times and processing costs were drastically reduced with synthetics. Fibres were developed that had properties similar enough to what could be found from natural fibres, and often even more functional, for instance with Teflon coatings for stain resistance and other crinkle-resistant finishes.
The ramping up of fibre production during the wars for parachutes, for uniforms, for blankets, for rope… all became redundant as miracle plastic could do the job quicker, cheaper and more vibrantly. Natural fibres became synonymous with hippies, really.
Cost implications.
One thing that became clear with the introduction of synthetic plastic-derived fibres polyester, acrylic, elastane, acetate and nylon, and additionally the semi-synthetic fibre rayon (made from regenerated cellulose transformed into yarn via solvents) is that natural fibre processing was simply too expensive, and consumers didn’t want to pay that cost anymore, and not least wait for their clothing. Or rather was it that before the thought even hit consumers, the retail businesses saw an opportunity for growth and profit by marketing fake affordability.
Today, there is no change to the comparatively higher cost of natural fibres to synthetic fibres. An amalgamation of the complexities of the supply chain, the driving demand by retailers on factories to bring prices down, and the longer processing time of natural fibres into yarn and fabric, simply doesn’t add up to make natural fibres feel a stronger proposition.
There is simply no value towards natural fibres because synthetics seem to hold the key for people and business. It even further exacerbates the cost of fibres grown here in the UK where labour costs are higher, there are less “native” skilled workers, and there are gaps in the processing supply chain. Labour, processing and transportation all drive the final production costs up no matter the fibre, and therefore the retail price, but there’s one thing you don’t really need to pay for with synthetics…
Land use.
The other consideration for a UK fibre industry, is land access and land use. Despite the fact that fibres are most usually food too (flaxseed and oil, hempseed and oil, lamb and wool), there are barriers to implementing a secure food-fibre system. There simply isn’t the incentive to operate the land regeneratively to provide higher output opportunities, or it is seen as too “against the grain” to even try.
The markets are blocked, for instance as with wool mentioned above — in 2021 it was reported that farmers were receiving 5 pence per raw wool fleece (I also heard this directly from a sheep farmer on two occasions, once in 2020 and once in 2021). However, there is a lack of knowledge or wisdom in intuitive farming practices too, for example in breeding sheep to provide both a fine hair and a tender meat, or utilising land on a rotation so you have flax and cereals/vegetables. It takes conversations and open minds. {However, to contextualise this, both supply and demand were reduced due to the pandemic, so affecting cotton prices too}.
Disparity in value.
What is bizarre though, due to fast fashion (and arguably the history of colonialism and slavery), is that the cost of a synthetic fibre garment and the cost of a cotton fibre garment are often the same. Ultimately there is more cost involved with natural fibres, not least because they have more processing steps so requiring more energy, but in lead times too.
Cotton is not exempt from this — it requires land, it is thirsty in growing needs (and organic is only 0.1% of the total cotton production), it’s mostly grown with chemical inputs, it has a lot of processing steps and it doesn’t absorb dyes well. So how is it as cheap as polyester?
I’d say we need to go back to the historic UK mills and the devaluation of skill and of people; linen is a luxury cloth, silk is a luxury cloth, wool is arguably a luxury cloth but no one wears it as much, hemp is non-existent really so it can’t be included. The only rationale for cotton being so low value is that it is accessible — we see it everywhere, it’s made on cheap labour, it is monopolised.
You can read an article on my visit to Brickpits organic farm in East Sussex here where they are regeneratively and organically farming sheep for wool, plus plants for dyestuffs.
Future UK fibre and textile industry.
Fibresheds.
I mentioned above about the Fibershed movement. This is a group of growers, processors and makers who operate in a bioregional production model. Originating in the USA, there are now established affiliate groups in the UK who are supporting a move to these local, regenerative systems that benefit us environmentally and socially, building resilience and sharing wisdom.
As defined by the Earth Logic Action Plan, “localism” is:
“A reorganising of power distribution, specifically citing this locally and away from global brands. Such practices may not always lead to conclusions and strategies that are easy to understand or which best represent the long term, but they are based on local empowerment and are a community’s joint responsibility.”
- the loss of spinning and weaving mills for cellulose fibres
- a shortage of small-scale wool processing and organic processing facilities
- the lack of commercial scale botanical plant dyes
- the breakdown of supply networks
The implementation of bioregional textile hubs may not feel as if it makes sense commercially, yet decentralisation can hold the key to ensuring each step of the chain is sustainable — and I don’t mean environmentally, per se, but that it is long-lasting and durable.
The UK Fibreshed affiliates see these bullet points below as the key reasons why we do not and presently cannot have fully onshore textile manufacturing:
The future then seems as if it relies upon a few factors intertwining: knowledge exchange and upskilling to make the industry viable (which involves interdisciplinary collaboration), funding and investment into infrastructure, and consumer desire for such local, natural fibre systems.
Synthetic ingredients.
Fortunately there is a growing recognition of the harm synthetics cause. Fossil fuel derivation, fossil fuel burning, microplastic shedding, landfill emissions, negative impact on workers and damage to local economies.
Yet, natural fibres are not exempt from this conversation; chemicals are still utilised in the processing, dyeing and finishing of natural materials.
To have a local UK fibre industry then (and I’ve not even mentioned the possibilities with dyestuffs here), there needs to be a significant shift to consumer behaviour, held in part accountable to the retailers, brands and producers calling the shots on what choice is available.
Research and collaborations.
There is research into what steps must be and can be taken to improve the situation. With conversations and action taking place between students, makers, businesses, farmers and some government organisations, there is a willingness to shift other minds into a more decentralised, local, resilient fibre economy.
Here I direct you to:
⇾ Homegrown Homespun, a collaboration between North West England Fibreshed and Community Clothing (Patrick Grant) to create a bioregional pair of jeans. You can watch an interview with them on BBC Countryfile.
⇾ Flaxland are a Gloucestershire-based farm and education facility (of sorts, they have a large shed!) growing flax for fibre and composites. You can find an interview on YouTube between Flaxland and Journeys in Design on their open-source approach to teaching. And just because it’s interesting, Flaxland’s flax processing video.
⇾ Rosie Bristow has completed their MSc Fashion and Textiles Management at Heriott Watt university, with research into the current and future UK flax fibre industry. Collaborating with Essex farmer George Young, to grow flax, and Simon Cooper of Flaxland to update a rotor heckler prototype (that breaks the woody core then combs the fibres), they are showing the possibilities for improving the farm-to-fibre situation. Read an article from Rosie Bristow on SSAW Collective that goes into more context of the straw into gold project, and watch a 1:30 webinar from Land Workers’ Alliance, ‘UK Fibre Industry Unpicked: Could You Grow Your Own Clothes?’ hosted by Robyn Minogue, with guest speakers Emma Hague, Rosie Bristow and Sofi Thanhauser (recorded April 27th 2022).
Moving forward.
The implementation of a UK fibre industry isn’t a system of itself, as I’ve tried to explain, relying heavily on the outward industries of agriculture and chemicals making it massively complex to unpick and figure out where to start.
Quite dramatically it requires a shift in mindset (decentralisation, degrowth, aligned with nature, regenerative, circular), a shift in funding (away from chemical inputs and subsidies for conventional farming methods), and a shift in behaviour (a real evaluation of the vast supply chain required to make even a thread).
The folk are there with skills and readiness to make it come to life, but as with all industries, we’re stamped on by the few in power. Grassroots action, however, can be powerful.
I’ll leave you with some resources of how you can raise awareness and educate yourself on the textiles industry as a whole system.
You’ll end up forging on into areas that ring truly interesting to you due to the threads of this topic, yet I’m optimistic that wherever you end, there’ll be some insight drawn from the folk in the UK fibre movement that’ll shift your perspective. Unless you do have the funds to invest in these projects, or are a research facility working already to introduce infrastructure, then the majority of you readers are more likely to “only” be able to improve your knowledge. Knowledge can make change higher up and wider across so your education and voice can have a deep-rooted impact.
Resources:
Timeline of the Industrial Revolution [Historic UK]
Earth Logic Action Plan [Earth Logic]
Slow Factory Foundation Open Edu series [Slow Factory]
Webinars on the future of farming [Land Workers’ Alliance]
Preferred Fiber and Materials reports [Textile Exchange]
This article has been compiled with general knowledge picked up through years of education and research, with any specific credits noted in the resources above or linked. If you see any discrepancies or have comments on what should be added/contextualised, please do comment or send me a message.
Originally published at https://www.linkedin.com on November 15th, 2022.
