Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Assesses textile donations from thrift stores in Canada, indicating the need for improved recycling methods.
The expansion of the fast-fashion model has intensified textile waste flows, increasing pressure on domestic thrift organisations that serve as critical sorting hubs. Characterising textile donations is essential for understanding material heterogeneity and establishing an empirical baseline for domestic circular systems. This study assessed 2173 kg of textiles (N = 9333) donated to selected Canadian non-profit thrift stores. Items were characterised by product type, condition, brand, textile construction, colour, and fibre composition using fibre labels and Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (NIRS), enabling assessment of both resale viability and recyclability constraints. Approximately 55% of items were suitable for immediate resale, while 24% required repair or cleaning to become saleable, highlighting the labour-intensive nature and resource burden of thrift operations. Women's clothing made up 50.4% of donations, and knitted structures predominated (64.7%) over wovens. Brand distribution was highly fragmented, with nearly 70% of the 2245 unique brands appearing as single items. Many donations were multi-coloured (27.5%), with black and blue most common. Cotton was the most dominant fibre (50.2%), followed by polyester (29.2%). However, many items were fibre blends, including small proportions of spandex, which can contaminate recycling streams. These findings emphasise the need for distinct management methods and advanced recycling technologies to address the complexity and heterogeneity of feedstocks. This study provides empirical data that is increasingly vital as Canada explores Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) frameworks. By identifying the material constraints and quality variability of post-consumer flows, these results can inform the development of domestic circular systems and highlight where policy support may be needed for diversion, cleaning, and repair costs, which are burdens currently borne by charitable thrift organisations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sterling et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: