Animal-free fashion's shifting landscape: 2025 milestones, 2026 expectations

2025 was a milestone year for animal welfare. From prohibiting animal-based materials on major global platforms to all round production bans, the period proved to be a promising inflection point for the industry. What was once seen as a niche concern has rapidly evolved into a commercial expectation, driven by consumer scrutiny, regulatory pressure, and the growing commercialisation of animal-free materials.

Yet, while many can hail the period as progress, there is still a lot more work to be done in both securing and expanding the future of animal-friendly practices across the industry. Representatives from animal welfare groups agree that while 2025 marked a tipping point, the most challenging work still lies ahead.

What changed in 2025: Structural pressures and increased visibility

1. Social media forces accountability

Across the industry, several forces merged to help accelerate change. Animal rights organisations largely point to social media as a driving influence in enabling wider visibility, leaving brands exposed to reputational risks and ensuring accountability. As a result, animal welfare issues that once remained abstract are now widely documented and shared.

“It is easier than ever to access information about how animal-derived materials are produced – the rampant animal abuse and egregious cruelty of these industries are on public display thanks to social media,” PETA’s VP of corporate projects, Yvonne Taylor, said.

2. A broader reframing of animal welfare

Such visibility, as well as increased ties to the climate crisis, has helped to reframe animal welfare as an environmental issue, pushing concerns beyond the niche to a wider audience. Transparency has only further been bolstered by long-term campaigning by animal rights advocates. Four Paws, for example, heightened pressure on Hearst Magazines through on-the-ground protesting, leading to a ban of fur across its publications.

“Activists have successfully forced the conversation. The sustained pressure from advocacy campaigns to disruptions at stores and high-profile events has made it increasingly untenable to cling to a practice the public largely rejects due to the inherent cruelty involved,” CAFT USA’s executive director, Suzie Stork, noted.

Unlike short-lived consumer trends, animal welfare campaigns are sustained over decades. Stork goes on to note that once influential designers, publications and runways move away from practices like fur, they set a precedent that makes it difficult to ignore for others.

“No brand wants to be left behind or positioned as the outlier, so momentum builds quickly. As a result, companies are more willing to drop fur and evolve, especially as more and more consumers clearly recognise that farming animals for fur in intensive confinement under such extreme conditions is just cruel and entirely unnecessary,” she added.

3. Innovation removes traditional barriers

Innovation has further removed traditional barriers, making alternative materials more accessible. As such, brands are less able to argue that alternatives have lacked quality, durability or aesthetic appeal. Organisations’ representatives point to vegan feathers, plant- and grain-based leathers, and plant-based wool as materials gaining traction.

“Shoppers are demanding transparency, ethical sourcing and cruelty-free alternatives,”

PJ Smith, principal of fashion policy at Humane World for Animals, said: “Consumer values have shifted, and shoppers are demanding transparency, ethical sourcing and cruelty-free alternatives. Brands can no longer ignore that pressure and advances in innovative materials have also made high-quality fibres more accessible, reducing costs and performance barriers.”

Trailblazers and laggards: Fragmented transitions

While many brands have already adopted animal-free policies, progress remains uneven. Some are well ahead in terms of policy and material investment.

Where leadership is emerging

• Stella McCartney is consistently cited for backing next-generation materials, including her use of vegan feathers developed with UK innovator Fevvers for the SS26 collection. Other luxury labels “proving that modern fashion can be responsible and kind toward wildlife” include Celine and Patou, CAFT’s Stork said.

• Ganni also remains a prominent leader in animal-friendly practices, retaining exposure this year for its use of olive-based leather.

• In the realm of the high street, H&M set a precedent this year for fulfilling a goal to make its wool fully certified LLC-free.

• There are of course brands that have championed animal-free policies from their inception. Among them, Save the Duck and MioMojo were highlighted by Four Paws.

• Fashion weeks are also leading the way. With London, Australia and other locations hopping on the bandwagon, there is a more widespread adoption of fur free policies.

Where change is lagging

Luxury remains a problem child

Luxury was repeatedly identified as a weak point in positive change. In Four Paws’ Behind the Wool report, the organisation found continuity with past research that showed luxury is still performing poorly when it comes to animal welfare overall. Michael Kors emerged as the worst performing major brand when it came to the treatment of animals – just one of what was a majority of brands that did not adequately disclose the status of key welfare issues of lamb cutting at the consumer level.

It is LVMH, however, that stands out as the largest instigator for animal welfare organisations. CAFT’s Stork accused the luxury giant of corporate tactics like “promoting bogus traceability programmes”; lobbying against a “general public that overwhelmingly no longer supports the fur trade”; and using "arm twisting” strategies to force brands like Givenchy to not take a public stand against the fur trade.

“There is a growing sense of irrelevance surrounding the remaining fur-selling stores under LVMH,"

“When anti-fur activists protest outside these locations, the lack of interest by customers feels palpable. Anecdotally, we can nearly always count the picket-line crossers on one hand, and very few of those individuals even make a purchase. Many we observe are teen clientele whose primary interest is filming TikTok videos of the protesters rather than the products themselves. Bernard Arnault’s dream of creating a notorious persona is clearly coming at the expense of his brands’ long held air of luxury,” Stork said.

Tackling specific industries

Some organisations have taken to tackling specific divisions of the production industry head on. In November, PETA launched its inaugural Plant Wool Month in a bid to raise awareness for natural, biodegradable, animal-free material yarns. Its introduction came on the back of undercover investigations that exposed animal abuse among wool-producing factories, as well as increasing awareness of the material’s environmental impact.

“Our climate needs us to embrace animal-free and plastic-free textiles that advance the fashion and functional fabrics industries while reducing greenhouse gas emissions and protecting the animals with whom we share the planet,” PETA’s VP of Corporate Projects, Yvonne Taylor said.

PJ Smith of Humane World also underlined the urgency for regulation over fur farming, as highlighted in a report by the European Food Safety Authority, which confirmed welfare harms towards animals in the process.

“Designers and companies that continue to resist change should seriously consider adopting fur-free policies, or risk significant reputational damage. [The report] underscores the ethical urgency to eliminate fur from fashion, a shift that consumers are increasingly demanding,” Smith added.

An institutional need for change

So where does change really need to happen?

Transparency remains one of the biggest gaps in widespread change. According to Four Paws, brands often fail to clearly disclose animal welfare practices, especially around wool sourcing and live lamb cutting, leaving consumers uninformed. Certification and traceability schemes are also frequently insufficient or misleading, and have allowed some brands to escape the clutches of accountability.

For CAFT, a “more urgent shift needs to happen at the institutional level”. “Fashion weeks are where trends are born and legitimised, and for decades these platforms have normalised animal cruelty by promoting fur,” Stork said. “Ending fur for good will require a coordinated effort across every moving part of the fashion ecosystem, and removing fur from the runway is a critical step. When fur is excluded from these stages, it sends a clear message to emerging designers and industry veterans alike that it is no longer acceptable.”

“Ending fur for good will require a coordinated effort across every moving part of the fashion ecosystem,”

She is thus calling on Milan and Paris to follow in the footsteps of New York, London and other international fashion weeks to enact similar bans on animal-derived materials. “And if they don’t, well they will be hearing from the anti-fur movement soon enough,” Stork warned.

Expectations for the year ahead

Fur’s decline will continue, structurally

In March 2026, the EU Commission is expected to issue a proposal on the future of fur farming throughout the region as political pressure mounts. Organisation’s are naturally hoping for a region-wide ban on the production method, particularly as rapid innovation in next-generation materials gains traction, providing viable alternatives.

Four Paws’ Jessica Medcalf said: “Anything less would sit uneasily with the intent of the European Citizens Initiative, particularly given it follows one of the most successful ECIs to date: Poland’s decision to ban fur farming, Switzerland’s move to ban imports of fur 'produced under cruel conditions', and the recent decision by New York Fashion Week to ban real fur from the runway.”

CAFT’s Suzie Stork said: “Together, these developments, combined with the accelerating decline of the fur industry, are forcing fashion to evolve. Fur is increasingly viewed as a relic of the past and an out-of-step symbol of excess, particularly as younger generations face economic pressure and criticize these conspicuous displays of wealth. While major luxury conglomerate LVMH continues to cling to fur, that position is becoming harder to defend. They are going to look like the villains. Ultimately, the remaining luxury brands will have to let go of fur or face the consequences of failing to evolve.”

“Fur is increasingly viewed as a relic of the past and an out-of-step symbol of excess,”

Runway and event bans will expand

As more and more brands and events enact bans across their respective businesses, organisations are anticipating wider adoption of such policies, particularly as pressure mounts.

CAFT’s Suzie Stork said: “The real leaders are those who recognise that the future of fashion is unmistakably fur-free. With New York Fashion Week officially banning fur starting in 2026, the industry is finally aligning with the values of the modern consumer.”

PETA’s Yvonne Taylor said: “As we head towards a new era of ethical fashion, we hope to see Milan and Paris Fashion Week follow in the footsteps of London and New York in banning fur from their runways. We are also looking forward to more brands, retailers, and events joining Stella McCartney, Ba&Sh and more in signing our Feather-Free Pledge, promising to never use or sell any feathers again.

“After seeing mohair and angora virtually disappear from the high street, we are looking forward to more brands parting ways with sheep’s wool and cashmere – something we will support with continued promotion of ethical and sustainably made wools crafted from plants, not an animal’s hair or petroleum-derived plastic.”

Transparency as a competitive necessity

Brands that fail to clearly communicate animal welfare practices will also risk losing credibility with a consumer that is becoming increasingly informed.

CAFT’s Suzie Stork said: “Consumer demand for animal friendly fashion will only continue to grow, and brands will need to respond with greater transparency and stronger action to remain credible.

“We also expect increased pressure on the Australian wool industry from brands and supply chain actors calling for live lamb cutting to end. If the industry is truly listening to its markets, pressure should be met with genuine support for growers and clear guidance from peak bodies on the real risks and opportunities, not doubt casting that undermines progress.”