As we transition toward the Materials Matter Standard system, we’ve released two new policies that will play a key role in ensuring consistent and robust certification:
- Materials Matter Criteria for Certification Bodies
- Materials Matter Risk and Sampling Criteria and Tools
We spoke with Gweneth Langdon, Senior Director of Standards at Textile Exchange, about the transition to Materials Matter and the important role the new policies play in strengthening the assurance framework behind the new standard.
Why is Textile Exchange transitioning from a suite of standards, specifically the Responsible Animal Fiber standards and the Global Recycled Standard and Recycled Claim Standard, to the Materials Matter Standard?
One of the biggest reasons we’ve decided to transition to the Materials Matter Standard is to simplify what has, in many ways, become a complex system. By bringing our standards together into a single, unified framework, we’re creating greater clarity around what our standards system is designed to achieve, that is incentivizing a world in which the materials in our clothing and textiles are produced in a way that respects climate, nature, people, and animals.
Having a unified standard with consistent principles also means we’re setting the same level of expectation for all materials. This consistency better aligns with our strategy to accelerate progress toward a world where materials have lasting value, leading to thriving communities and landscapes.
What part do the Materials Matter Criteria for Certification Bodies and the Materials Matter Risk and Sampling Criteria and Tools policies play in the transition and how do they strengthen the assurance system?
The Materials Matter Criteria for Certification Bodies is essentially the rule book for certification bodies auditing against the Materials Matter Standard. These independent third-party organizations are responsible for carrying out Textile Exchange certification and the policies give them the clear requirements and specific tools they need to evaluate against the standard and ensure certified organizations are evaluated accurately and consistently.
A key part of the Materials Matter Standard system is its risk-based approach. Because it is a comprehensive standard with a wide range of criteria, every organization looking to become certified will have their own risk profile, depending on, for example, their geography, activities, or role within the supply system. That means clear guidance is needed to ensure audits are conducted consistently by all certification bodies, including clarification on how different areas of an organization should be assessed.
Together these two new policies help provide that framework. They help certification bodies take a consistent, systemic approach to auditing under the Materials Matter Standard system.
How does this risk-based approach to certification work in practice and build competency and confidence in the Materials Matter Standard system?
In practice, certification bodies will carry out the risk assessment prior to arriving on site. That means when they arrive to the audit, they have already done the pre-work to better understand what is most likely to be an issue or where is most likely to require closer attention.
This allows auditors to spend their time in the most efficient way, more focused, meaning a more effective audit that considers the specific risks associated with that organization.
How do these policies maintain the integrity to the standard and ensure confidence that certification under Materials Matter represents a trusted and independently verified assessment of performance?
Certification bodies are absolutely vital to our standard system as they provide independent verification. To do that effectively they need clear, consistent requirements which these two new policies set out.
Our General Criteria for Certification Bodies, released in April this year, includes the high-level auditing principles that are based on internationally recognized ISO standards. The Materials Matter Criteria for Certification Bodies builds on that by providing very specific requirements that certification bodies need to implement the Materials Matters Standard effectively. The criteria put in place strong rules for certification bodies to follow and set clear expectations for how certification bodies should assess organizations and apply the standard.
In our system, accreditation bodies oversee the work of the certification bodies, but we also do our own monitoring as well. These policies also serve as a tool in monitoring the work of certification bodies and, together with our mandatory training, help ensure the standard is being interpreted and applied consistently.
Ultimately, these policies provide greater clarity on how we expect certification bodies to implement the new standard. This consistency strengthens the integrity of the assurance system and gives producers, brands, suppliers, and consumers confidence in the Materials Matter certification.
How important is the phased approach to Materials Matter implementation?
The phased approach is very important and has been designed intentionally. We wanted to give everyone involved the time they need so that they feel confident in the process and comfortable as we move forward toward implementation.
This year, our focus is on supporting certification bodies and making information available, so they have the time and resources to build their own systems and be ready for the effective date at the end of the year. We then allow a year of optional uptake of the new standard, giving those who are ready to be champions of the standard to move forward quickly, while allowing others additional time if they need it.
Without this phased roll out, there would be a real risk of everyone wanting to transition at the same time, which would create unnecessary pressure on audit schedules and capacity. By taking this approach, it supports a smoother transition and gives time for things to cycle through.
What is the one key takeaway you would like to share about the new policies?
There is of course the tendency for most stakeholders to really focus on the Materials Matter Standard, but these documents are equally important because they explain how the standard will be implemented and assessed in practice.
They’re essential documents for certification bodies, but they’re also valuable to certified organizations because they provide a clear understanding of what to expect during an audit, and what is expected of their suppliers during their audit.
So I think they’re not just informative for certification bodies, they’re very educational for all stakeholders in terms of increasing that understanding of what Materials Matter certification represents. They provide transparency into how organizations are evaluated to the standard and reinforce what the certification mark stands for.
Both Materials Matter Criteria for Certification Bodies and Materials Matter Risk and Sampling Criteria and Tools were published on August 3 2026, become effective December 31 2026, and become mandatory December 31 2027.
Find out more about the transition to the Materials Matter Standard
The post Q&A: How Certification Bodies Will Apply The Materials Matter Standard appeared first on Textile Exchange.
