Between the Green Deal and the Industrial Deal

STT: Dr. Menges, you deal extensively with regulatory details—what distinguishes the “Green Deal” from the “Industrial Deal”?

Dr. Johannes Menges: With the transition from the Green Deal to the Industrial Deal, the focus shifts from defining goals to the question of how to implement them. This is a logical evolution of the existing requirements. Formally, the regulations initially apply only to larger companies. They must comply with a comprehensive list of obligations. At the same time, they bear responsibility for their supply chains, which indirectly involves suppliers and partners as well. Therefore, everyone should prepare for this.

STT: Have the obligations been relaxed with the shift to the Industrial Deal?

Dr. Johannes Menges: You can’t make a blanket statement about that. The Industrial Deal consolidates various existing regulations—including the European Supply Chain Act, reporting obligations, taxonomy requirements, and transparency requirements. Simplifications exist insofar as duplicate requirements—such as due diligence obligations in the supply chain or reporting—have been more closely aligned. Companies should not have to provide certain evidence multiple times for different laws.

STT: What is the current status of the Ecodesign Regulation?

Dr. Johannes Menges: The EU Ecodesign Regulation, the details of which still need to be finalized by the member states, has been put on hold for the footwear sector for the time being; currently, only the ban on the destruction of unsold goods applies to this sector. The reason: Issues such as durability, reparability, and recycling are highly complex in the footwear sector and require more preparation time; clear thresholds or requirements are currently lacking. Textiles are prioritised in the EU’s work plan, with a timeframe of 2025 to 2028 set aside for this. Detailed specifications for footwear are not expected before then. However, the Digital Product Passport (DPP) is emerging as a centralised infrastructure for presenting material data in the footwear sector as well. Therefore, we should not remain inactive. For us as an institute, this means, for example, that we proactively define our own assessment strategies so that we are prepared as soon as binding EU requirements are in place.

STT: What specific requirements are emerging for the footwear industry?

Dr. Johannes Menges: It’s about durability, repairability, and recyclability. Durability is the most obvious starting point. Physical testing methods already exist here, such as for sole adhesion, abrasion resistance, or colorfastness. Test catalogs exist for various product groups, which can be used to define minimum requirements. Repairability is often a given for shoes. In practice, however, cost-effectiveness plays a decisive role. In the future, it will be increasingly important to assess under what conditions a repair is realistically possible. Recyclability poses the greatest challenge.

So far, there are no reliable end-of-life solutions on an industrial scale. Looking ahead, new approaches such as chemical recycling could gain importance, and material expertise will also have to take center stage in design.

STT: Keyword: Green Claims. Many brands have promoted sustainability. What will still be permissible in the future, and what won’t?

Dr. Johannes Menges: The originally planned Green Claims Directive has been put on hold at the EU level. Instead, the so-called “Empowering Consumers” (Empco) Directive applies, which must be implemented this year. The goal is to protect consumers from misleading green advertising claims and enable them to make informed purchasing decisions. This means that sustainability claims must be transparent, verifiable, and auditable in the future. General statements like “environmentally friendly” or “sustainable” are problematic. Companies should specify exactly what has been improved. The design of packaging and marketing materials also needs to be scrutinized. Visual imagery or symbols that suggest environmental benefits can be problematic if they are not backed by facts.

STT: What about proprietary labels or seals?

Dr. Johannes Menges: Company-owned sustainability labels without independent verification will be virtually untenable in the future. Externally verified evidence increases legal certainty in communication.

STT: How can shoe manufacturers best implement EPR (Extended Producer Responsibility)?

Dr. Johannes Menges: EPR also has yet to be transposed into national law—likely by the middle of next year. However, it partially overlaps with the Ecodesign Directive, because under EPR, companies will in the future be required to bear the costs of collecting, sorting, and recycling their products at the end of their life cycle. These costs are based on ecodesign principles—that is, criteria such as recyclability, durability, and the sustainable use of materials. But here, as I said, the issue has been put on hold once again.

STT: Will retailers need to be more closely integrated into EPR systems in the future?

Dr. Johannes Menges: EPR primarily affects manufacturers, but retailers also play a central role, for example in take-back, repair, and collection. Especially when new business models such as take-back services or repair offerings are to be established, retailers must be involved.

STT: Finally, let’s talk about the EUDR, or the Deforestation Regulation. There have been some changes to it. What are they?

Dr. Johannes Menges: The EUDR has long been a highly divisive issue because it originally imposed far-reaching obligations. It has now been postponed for the second time. It concerns the traceability of raw materials. For leather, the origin of the cowhide must be traceable, and other materials such as cork or natural rubber are also covered. On the positive side, packaging materials such as paper or outer packaging are no longer subject to the regulations. This significantly simplifies implementation for shoe manufacturers.

STT: What is the status of the European Supply Chain Act, or the CSDDD (Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive)?

Dr. Johannes Menges: The CSDDD must be transposed into national law by the member states by July 26, 2027. Until the CSDDD is transposed into national law, an “adapted” Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) with reduced reporting obligations will continue to apply in Germany. It remains to be seen how the CSDDD will be implemented in Germany; however, some critical points have already been mitigated in the CSDDD, particularly regarding liability issues and fines.