Interdisciplinary analysis reveals structural sustainability and recycling barriers in intelligent textiles, highlighting the necessity of legal and socio-economic governance reform.
Functional and intelligent textiles are becoming key enabling platforms for wearable electronics, flexible sensing, and electromagnetic-enabled human–machine interaction, while simultaneously introducing unprecedented challenges for sustainable manufacturing and end-of-life management. Focusing on these emerging engineering materials, this study examines the sustainability of functional and smart textiles through an integrated analytical framework combining Marxist political economy with legal analysis. The research argues that the current production paradigm, characterized by planned obsolescence and cost externalization, systematically amplifies labor exploitation, resource depletion, and environmental burdens throughout the lifecycle of advanced textile products. Particular attention is given to hybrid electronic textiles, where conductive fibers, embedded sensors, and composite material architectures substantially complicate recycling and circular utilization. Existing regulatory instruments, including Extended Producer Responsibility and environmental governance mechanisms, are critically evaluated in terms of their effectiveness in addressing the material complexity and transnational supply chains associated with intelligent textiles. The analysis further demonstrates that technological innovation alone cannot resolve structural sustainability constraints without corresponding transformations in production relations and governance frameworks. By integrating material lifecycle considerations with socio-economic analysis, this study provides a complementary perspective for the sustainable development of next-generation functional textiles and offers conceptual insights into the responsible design and lifecycle management of textile platforms supporting wearable sensing and electromagnetic applications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Song et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: