Think about the last pair of sneakers you decided to get rid of.
An old pair of running shoes. A pair of kids’ sneakers outgrown before you finished paying the credit card bill (exaggerating, but barely). Maybe something you bought on Black Friday and the fit was never right.
If you were lucky, perhaps you found someone else to get value out of them. The neighbor’s kids, maybe the neighbor’s dog for a chew toy. Maybe you dropped them in a store take-back bin or donated them to Goodwill.
In the worst case, they probably ended up in the garbage. It is okay, don’t feel bad about it. Want to know why? Because regardless of which route they took, the foam midsole, the cushioned layer that made those shoes worth wearing, is headed to a landfill. It will sit in the ground for hundreds of years. Unchanged.
It is not for lack of trying. Sneaker brands have launched take-back programs, recycling initiatives, and sustainability commitments. Some of it is genuine. Most of it addresses the easy parts of the problem while leaving the hardest part almost entirely untouched.
That gap between what looks responsible and what actually is, is what this publication exists to close.
How We Got Here
The modern sneaker is, by engineering standards, a marvel of complexity. A typical pair contains 65 discrete parts assembled through more than 360 processing steps. Rubber outsoles. Foam midsoles. Polyester uppers. Synthetic adhesives. Dyes, coatings, eyelets, laces. Each material chosen for a specific performance reason. Each one making the shoe better in use and harder to deal with at the end of life.
Two decisions, made decades apart, shaped the problem we have today.
The first was the shift to EVA foam midsoles. Ethylene-vinyl acetate became the industry standard because it does its job exceptionally well: lightweight, responsive, tunable for different performance needs, cheap to manufacture at scale. It also has a chemical structure that makes clean recovery essentially impossible. The cross-linking process that gives EVA its bounce creates molecular bonds that recycling facilities cannot break down cleanly. Most facilities do not even accept it. The ones that do can only produce low-grade material useful for underlay or playground surfacing, not new shoes.
The industry built its entire performance story on a material with no end of life plan. That was fifty years ago. The midsole problem is still unsolved.
The second decision was the globalization of manufacturing in the 1990s, primarily to Vietnam, Indonesia, and China. This created the cost efficiencies that made the modern sneaker accessible to almost everyone. It also created supply chains of extraordinary complexity. A sneaker brand might work with hundreds of contract factories across dozens of countries, with those factories using their own network of material suppliers, subcontractors, and dyehouses. Visibility gets thin fast.
Third-party audit programs emerged as the honest attempt to restore accountability to a system that had grown too large to manage directly. They were a genuine effort. Audits did improve conditions in meaningful ways compared to what existed before them.
They also created a new problem. When audits are periodic and announced in advance, the system learns to perform well for auditors. Think of it like a restaurant that deep-cleans the kitchen before a health inspection and manages differently between visits. The audit score becomes the standard rather than the conditions it was designed to measure. Workers interviewed on factory premises, with supervisors nearby, by auditors who do not speak the local language, produce different results than anonymous surveys conducted offsite. Multiple independent investigations have documented the gap between what audit reports show and what workers experience. The audit model did not solve the accountability problem. It formalized it.
Both decisions created structural problems that voluntary effort has struggled to fix. Neither makes the sneaker industry uniquely villainous. It makes it a clear example of how good intentions, commercial pressures, and system complexity combine to produce outcomes nobody specifically chose.
The Three Ps — Where the Hard Problems Live
People
The audit model improved conditions in footwear manufacturing. That is worth saying clearly before saying anything critical about it. Wages, safety standards, and working conditions are meaningfully better in most factories today than they were before third-party auditing existed. The framework did real work.
What it did not solve is the transparency gap. A published audit result tells you how a factory performed on a specific day under specific conditions. What workers experience on other days, in other conditions, is a different question. The audit was designed to answer one question and cannot fully answer the other.
There is also a materials question that rarely comes up in the people conversation. The chemicals used in sneaker manufacturing — adhesives, dyes, synthetic coatings — involve worker exposure that is inconsistently monitored and rarely disclosed on the product itself. A customer holding a shoe has no way to know what the workers who made it were breathing. That information does not travel with the product.
Supply chain complexity makes both problems harder. A brand might know its Tier 1 factories well. What happens at Tier 2 and Tier 3 — the material suppliers, the component manufacturers, the dyehouses — is frequently invisible even to the brands themselves. Closing that visibility gap, at any meaningful scale, remains one of the genuinely unsolved challenges in the category.
Planet
Take-back programs were a genuine step forward and deserve credit for moving the industry toward recovery thinking. The gap they revealed by existing is instructive.
The programs addressed the upper: the visible, marketable, easiest-to-recover fabric sections of the shoe. The midsole, which represents the majority of the shoe’s material volume and the majority of its environmental footprint, remained outside the loop. Downcycling foam into playground surfacing or carpet underlay is not circularity. It is a one-time deferral of the landfill.
Around 95% of used footwear globally goes to landfill or incineration. That number exists alongside decades of take-back programs and recycling initiatives. The programs are real. The scale of what they address is not.
Consider the parent donating their child’s outgrown sneakers: shoes in perfect structural condition, worn six months and still fully functional. The shoes did not fail. The child grew. There is no system designed to recover them. The materials are in perfect condition and have no viable path that is not a landfill.
Bio-based and mechanically recyclable foam alternatives are in active development. A small number of materials startups are working on midsoles that can be cleanly recovered at end of life. None have yet demonstrated the combination of performance, price, and manufacturing scalability that would make them viable at industry volume. Getting the chemistry right in a lab and getting it right at 23 billion pairs a year are different problems entirely.
Profit
The economics of responsible sneaker production surface a challenge that does not get discussed honestly very often: the consumer is part of the problem.
Take-back programs depend on people actually returning shoes. Subscription models depend on people completing the return cycle. Repair programs depend on people choosing repair over replacement. Each of these models is structurally sound on paper. Each one runs into the same friction in practice: the moment the product leaves the customer’s hands, the brand loses control of what happens next.
Getting a customer to buy a shoe is a solved problem. Getting that customer to return it, on schedule, in a condition that allows material recovery, at a scale that makes the economics work, is a different challenge. Sneaker brands operate on thin margins in a price-sensitive category. The economics of building reverse logistics into the product price, at scale, without raising the retail price to a point that loses the customer entirely, have not been convincingly solved.
Children’s footwear is a specific case worth examining. Outgrown shoes in near-perfect condition are the norm, not the exception. The product did not fail. The child simply grew. The conditions for a viable return model arguably exist here more than anywhere else in the category. It has not been meaningfully explored at commercial scale, which raises its own question about why.
The Question Worth Sitting With
Take-back programs exist. Factory audit frameworks have been adopted industry-wide. Circular subscription models have been piloted. The structural problems all three were designed to address are still largely intact.
For the parent looking at a perfectly good pair of outgrown sneakers: the system was not designed with that moment in mind. That is not an accident. It is the product of a set of decisions that made economic sense when they were made and have not yet been meaningfully revised.
For the entrepreneur or sourcing director: is the incentive structure governing a global industry that produces nearly 24 billion pairs of shoes per year capable of producing the right outcomes through voluntary effort and pilot programs alone? Or does something structural have to change first?
There is no clean answer. But the companies genuinely working toward one deserve to be recognized for it, not because they have solved the problem, but because they are trying in ways that are specific, evidenced, and honest about how far they still have to go.
That is what the Infinite Awards exist to find.
Three ways to be part of what comes next:
Have a perspective, a counterargument, or an idea on how to tackle one of these challenges? We want to hear it. The best responses may appear in a future issue. Share your thinking.
If you have worked on any of these problems, in manufacturing, materials, logistics, or design, we want to go deeper with you. Future issues feature practitioners who know where the real friction is. Get in touch.
Want the next piece when it lands? Subscribe to Material Progress. No spam. Just the next piece when it is ready.