The Commission's Joint Research Centre published a preparatory study in May 2026 on what a textile digital passport should contain. Two of its proposals stand out because they are not descriptions, they are scores: a robustness score and a recyclability score.
Neither is law. The textile delegated act has not been adopted, and the field list can still change. But both scores are built from data you already need for other reasons, which makes them worth understanding now rather than after the act lands.
Why scores rather than thresholds
The preparatory work treats these as disclosures, not minimum performance requirements. A garment is not banned for scoring low. The score goes on the passport, and the market does what it does with it.
That matters for how you should react. You do not need to redesign a product to clear a bar. You need to be able to state a number and show where it came from.
What the robustness score measures
Robustness in this context is about whether a garment survives being worn and washed: does it twist, does it shrink, does it look worn out after a few cycles.
In practice it is assembled from test results you may already commission:
- Spirality, the twisting of a knitted garment after washing, measured as a percentage.
- Dimensional change, shrinkage or growth after washing, also a percentage, with different thresholds for woven and knitted construction.
- Appearance after washing, graded on the standard grey scale for colour change, colour staining, pilling and surface appearance.
Each contributes points and the points sum to the score. The construction matters: the same dimensional change is treated differently for a woven shirt and a knitted jersey, because the two behave differently in the first place.
If you already send samples for testing, you have most of this. If you do not, the conversation to have with your factory is which tests they already run and whether they can share the numbers rather than a pass or fail.
What the recyclability score measures
Recyclability is about whether the garment can realistically be turned back into fibre. The factors are structural, not aspirational:
- Elastane content. A small percentage of elastane is tolerable for mechanical recycling; a large one is not.
- One composition or several. A garment whose outer fabric and lining are the same fibre is far easier to recycle than one that mixes.
- Prints and coatings. Both interfere with recycling processes.
- Sequins and hard trims. Anything that must be removed first counts against the score.
- Dyeing. Dyed fabric is harder to recycle into a light colour than undyed.
- Fibre count. Two or three fibres is manageable; a long blend list is not.
- Fibre-rich blends. A garment that is overwhelmingly one fibre scores better than an even mix.
- Mechanical recycling. A low enough elastane share keeps the garment suitable for mechanical recycling, the most established route.
- An advanced fibre route. Pure cotton, a cotton-rich blend, Nylon 6, or polyester or acrylic at a high share can each go to a fibre-to-fibre process.
Notice that all of these come from the composition you record anyway. You do not need a new data collection exercise to know whether a garment has prints, sequins or four different fibres. You need that information structured so it can be read.
What this means for the data you keep
Both scores share a property: they are calculated, not typed. If someone hands you a spreadsheet with a recyclability score in a column, ask how it was derived, because the number is only as good as the composition behind it.
Practically, that means three things are worth doing now.
Record composition by weight, per layer. Not "97 percent cotton, 3 percent elastane" for the garment, but the composition of the outer fabric, the lining and the rib separately, with the weight of each. The recyclability factors care about the relationship between layers, and the same figures are what textile EPR fees will rest on.
Keep test results as numbers. A pass or fail tells you nothing when the score wants a percentage. Ask for the measured value.
Let the score follow the record. If someone changes the fabric next season, the score should change with it. A number stored as a number goes stale the moment the product does.
Seamdex computes both scores from the product record, robustness out of 10 and recyclability out of 11, and shows the reasoning behind each one, so you can see which factor cost you a point. If the delegated act changes the method, the calculation changes; the underlying data does not.
The honest caveat
This is a preparatory study, not an adopted act; the Digital Product Passport guide tracks the dates. The scores may be renamed, reweighted or dropped. What will not change is that a passport asks you to describe a garment's construction precisely, and that a brand who can already do that will not be scrambling when the act applies.
