Clothing repair ranges from sewing on a button to replacing a zipper, altering fit, patching, or darning worn fabric. The statistics below separate those activities from repurposing, recycling and landfill flows, while identifying the country, population and measurement period for each result.
Key Clothing Repair Statistics
The most quotable findings span household behavior, specific repair tasks, enabling conditions and textile-waste context:
- In Norway in 2017, 62% of 1,001 adults completed at least one listed clothing mending or making activity during the previous year.
- In Norway in 2011, 70% of 1,124 adults completed at least one listed clothing mending or making activity during the previous year.
- In a UK citizen survey, 40.1% reported repairing or repurposing clothes about once every six months before COVID-19.
- During the UK COVID-19 period from March 2020 to June 2021, 32.7% reported repairing or repurposing clothes about once every six months.
- In the UK study, 66.7% expected their future repair and repurpose frequency to remain about the same as before COVID-19.
- In a 2010 Norwegian sample, 35% repaired damaged clothing often, 51% sometimes and 14% never.
- In a Norwegian Ipsos result reported in January 2020, about 60% repaired damaged clothing themselves or had someone else repair it during the preceding year.
- In the 2011 five-country survey, 57% of Chinese respondents had sewn on a button during the previous year.
- In the same survey, 48% of U.S. respondents had sewn on a button during the previous year.
- In the same survey, 37% of Chinese respondents had fixed an unravelled seam during the previous year.
- In the same survey, 32% of German respondents had patched clothing during the previous year.
- In the same survey, 34% of Japanese respondents had darned clothing during the previous year.
- In the same survey, 29% of Chinese respondents had changed a zipper during the previous year.
- In the same survey, 18% of Chinese respondents had adjusted clothing size during the previous year.
- In a 2017 UK survey, 62% owned clothing that could be used if it were repaired.
- In the same UK survey, 38% were interested in learning more about clothing repair.
- In the UK study of 297 final participants, 72.7% said they were extremely likely to sew on a button.
- U.S. textile generation was estimated at 17.03 million tons in 2018.
- Textiles represented 5.8% of total U.S. municipal-solid-waste generation in 2018.
- U.S. landfills received 11.3 million tons of municipal-solid-waste textiles in 2018.
Contents
- How often people mend garments
- Repair data by task
- Clothing repair trends across countries
- Repair skills, access and service choices
- Repair, reuse and textile-waste outcomes
How Often People Mend Garments: Clothing Repair Statistics
Survey results show that repair participation depends heavily on the activity definition. The Norwegian 2011 and 2017 measures include six listed mending or making activities, so they should not be read as pure repair rates.
- In 2017, 62% of 1,001 Norwegian adults reported at least one listed mending or making activity during the previous year.
- In 2011, 70% of 1,124 Norwegian adults reported at least one listed mending or making activity during the previous year.
- The reported Norwegian share therefore declined by 8 percentage points between 2011 and 2017, but this is a derived comparison between separate cross-sectional surveys with different activity wording and samples. Professional and private clothing repair in Norway and Care and Production of Clothing in Norwegian Homes
A separate UK citizen survey measured frequency categories rather than whether anyone had completed a particular task. About once every six months was the most common response in both comparison periods.
| UK repair or repurpose frequency | Period | Share | Population |
|---|---|---|---|
| About once every six months | Before COVID-19 | 40.1% | Final sample of 297 |
| About once every six months | March 2020–June 2021 | 32.7% | Final sample of 297 |
| Expected frequency about the same as before COVID-19 | Post-comparison survey question | 66.7% | Final sample of 297 |
These UK figures are self-reported frequency or intention measures, not observed future behavior. The study recruited 300 citizens and analyzed 297 after exclusions. Extending the Lifetime of Clothing through Repair and Repurpose
The smaller Norwegian 2010 sample provides a different frequency picture, but it is not representative: 35% said they repaired damaged clothing often, 51% sometimes and 14% never. The sample had 268 people and was 83% women, so it should not be compared directly with the representative or larger surveys. Care and Production of Clothing in Norwegian Homes
Clothing Repair Data by Task: Buttons, Seams and Holes
The 2011 five-country wardrobe survey reports whether respondents had performed particular tasks during the previous year. The table makes the country and task definitions explicit.
| Repair task | China | Germany | Japan | UK | United States |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sewed on a button | 57% | 53% | 52% | 49% | 48% |
| Fixed an unravelled seam | 37% | 17% | 25% | 18% | 26% |
| Patched clothing | 9% | 32% | 10% | 17% | 23% |
| Darned clothing | 16% | 22% | 34% | 14% | 11% |
Across all five countries, sewing on a button was more commonly reported than the other listed tasks: the country percentages ranged from 48% in the United States to 57% in China. Patching was highest in Germany at 32%, while darning was highest in Japan at 34%.
The figures are self-reported previous-year activities, and the official SIFO summary notes that country samples and fieldwork details are summarized in the source. They describe task participation, not the number of garments repaired or the quality of the repair. Professional and private clothing repair in Norway
Clothing Repair Trends Across Countries and Consumer Groups
The same five-country table shows that more complex interventions varied substantially by country. Zipper replacement and size adjustment were less frequently reported than button sewing, but their country patterns were not identical.
| Task | China | Germany | Japan | UK | United States |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Changed a zipper | 29% | 8% | 2% | 6% | 14% |
| Adjusted clothing size | 18% | 8% | 6% | 6% | 10% |
China recorded the highest reported zipper-changing share, at 29%, while Japan recorded 2%. For size adjustment, China was also highest at 18%, compared with 6% in both Japan and the UK.
These are 2011 survey percentages for respondents reporting an activity in the previous year. They should not be treated as current country rankings, and the tasks are not interchangeable with professional repair orders or household spending. Professional and private clothing repair in Norway
Norwegian evidence also separates self-repair from repair by another person. An Ipsos omnibus result reported in January 2020 said about 60% of Norwegians had repaired damaged clothing themselves or had someone else repair it during the preceding year; about 40% did it themselves and about 20% used family or acquaintances.
The rounded channels may overlap, and the Ipsos page does not provide the full questionnaire or sample size. Miljø inspirerer til reparasjon av klær
Clothing Repair Skills, Access and Service Choices
Repair behavior is affected by the condition of the wardrobe, confidence, time and equipment. A 2017 UK survey found that 62% owned clothing that could be used if repaired, but that figure measures potential rather than completed repairs or added garment life.
The same UK evidence identifies several stated enablers:
- 30% said repair or alteration skills would make them more likely to wear more previously unworn clothes.
- 27% said spare time to repair or alter would make them more likely to wear more previously unworn clothes.
- 19% said access to a repair kit would help them wear more previously unworn clothing.
- 18% said access to a sewing machine would help them wear more previously unworn clothing.
- 18% said they were unable to do any clothing repair such as sewing on a button.
- 38% were interested in learning more about clothing repair.
The survey also reported that 14% had garments left unworn in the past year because of a broken zip, elastic or lost button, while 16% had garments needing repair for another stated reason. These categories may overlap, and the UK results are secondary reporting within a peer-reviewed article. Care and Production of Clothing in Norwegian Homes
The UK repair-and-repurpose study found that 72.7% of 297 final participants said they were extremely likely to sew on a button. By contrast, 46.8% said they were extremely unlikely to make something new from old clothing, a broader repurposing activity rather than repair. Extending the Lifetime of Clothing through Repair and Repurpose
Clothing Repair, Reuse and Textile-Waste Outcomes
Repair can keep a garment in use, but the supplied U.S. outcome data measures municipal-solid-waste textile flows rather than repair itself. EPA estimated U.S. textile generation at 17.03 million tons in 2018, equal to 5.8% of total municipal-solid-waste generation.
| U.S. textile outcome | 2018 estimate | Definition |
|---|---|---|
| Textile generation | 17.03 million tons | Municipal solid waste textiles |
| Share of total MSW generation | 5.8% | Textiles in U.S. MSW |
| Textile recycling | 14.7%, or 2.51 million tons | All textile materials |
| Clothing and footwear textile recycling | 13% | Clothing and footwear textiles |
| Textile landfill disposal | 11.3 million tons | Municipal solid waste textiles |
The 14.7% recycling rate is not a repair or reuse rate, and the 13% clothing-and-footwear figure is based on American Textile Recycling Service information. EPA also notes that reused textiles are not included in generation until they enter the waste stream, so these estimates do not count every garment that remains in use through repair or reuse. Textiles: Material-Specific Data
These distinctions matter when interpreting clothing repair statistics: a household task survey measures participation, a frequency survey measures reported behavior categories, and EPA data measures waste-system flows. None of the supplied sources provides a direct national count of garments repaired, the cost per repair, or the extra number of wears created by repair.