Leather Manifesto for COP31 Doubles Its Backers to 24 — But India Stays Silent

The International Council of Tanners has expanded its Leather Manifesto ahead of COP31, more than doubling the coalition behind a simple but loaded message: leather is a circular, bio-based material that policymakers should recognise and support. The signatory list has grown from 13 organisations to 24, sweeping in bodies from China, the United States, Italy, France, Spain, Mexico, Türkiye and Zimbabwe. Yet one glaring omission remains — no Indian leather industry organisation has put its name to the document.

Titled “A Manifesto for Leather on the occasion of COP31: Leather – the circular choice,” the text calls on governments to treat leather as part of the solution to the environmental footprint of consumer products, not as a problem to be replaced by petrochemical alternatives. It is a lobbying effort with real stakes: as regulators and climate negotiators weigh material choices, the leather sector is racing to frame itself as the sustainable, circular option rather than the target of it.

The newly added signatories are telling. They include the China Leather Industry Association (CLIA), the Leather & Hide Council of America (LHCA), UNIC Concierie Italiane, the Fédération Française des Cuirs et Peaux, Alliance France du Cuir, Spain’s ACEXPIEL, Mexico’s CICUR, Türkiye’s TDSD and the Zimbabwe Leather Development Council, among others. The original 13 ranged from COTANCE and the Global Leather Alliance to Leather Naturally, Leather UK and the Sustainable Leather Foundation. Together they represent a broad industrial consensus — except in one of the world’s largest leather-producing nations.

India’s absence is conspicuous. The Council for Leather Exports has set an ambitious target of 50 billion dollars in sector turnover by FY2029-30, and the country is investing heavily in tanning capacity and exports. Yet when the global industry sits down to shape the sustainability narrative at COP31, the voice of Indian leather is missing. The question being asked in the trade is blunt: if India wants a seat at the table on the future of leather, why is it not at this table?

The strategic risk is real. Material policy is increasingly written in the language of carbon, circularity and bio-based content. If leather’s champions arrive at COP31 without the full weight of the world’s second-most-populous tanning nation, the sector weakens its own case precisely as synthetic and plant-based alternatives court the same regulators. For Indian tanners and exporters, signing on would cost little and could anchor the country’s 50 billion dollar ambition to a globally recognised sustainability framework.

For now, the manifesto stands as a 24-strong statement of intent. It is a genuine step forward for industry coordination — but the unresolved India question is a reminder that the leather sector’s unity is still a work in progress, and that the most consequential conversations about its future cannot happen without everyone in the room.

The manifesto’s core argument is straightforward but commercially vital: leather is a by-product of the meat industry, and diverting hides into durable goods is among the most circular uses of a bio-based material available at scale, whereas synthetic alternatives lean on petrochemical feedstocks. As the EU and other regulators write material policy, the signatories want leather treated as part of the climate solution, not the problem. The missing Indian signature undercuts that unity, yet the expanded coalition still represents a far louder collective voice than the original 13 — and a clearer signal to negotiators that the sector is organised.

Whether COP31 negotiators listen will be the real test, but the expanded manifesto at least ensures the leather sector arrives with a louder, more organised voice than before.

Source: Leather News — “ICT expands COP31 leather manifesto from 13 to 24 signatories but India still remains absent” (26 Oct 2026), https://leathernews.org/ict-expands-cop31-leather-manifesto-from-13-to-24-signatories-but-india-still-remains-absent/