Stakeholder Questionnaire — Delphi Method
A structured, multi-round stakeholder consultation to establish shared, practice-grounded requirements for Digital Product Passports across the textile value chain.
About this consultation
Stakeholders across the textile value chain currently lack a shared understanding of what Digital Product Passports must actually require in order to be both compliant with emerging EU regulations and workable in everyday practice. The M-DPP project uses the Delphi method to bridge that gap — engaging experts systematically across multiple rounds to identify areas of agreement, surface genuine disagreement, and establish a common baseline for the development of the M-DPP system.
The panel brings together four stakeholder groups: the supply chain (brands, retailers, manufacturers, processors, raw material producers), circularity & end-of-life operators, technology & data specialists, and policy, research & civil society. All groups receive the same questions and respond anonymously.
Delphi Method — Study Design & Expert Selection
This document sets out the rationale and design of the M-DPP Delphi consultation. It explains the four principles underpinning the method — expert panel, anonymity, iteration with feedback, and controlled convergence — and describes the five-step process from problem definition through to interpretation.
The document also details the expert selection process, including the target breakdown of stakeholder groups by sector (supply chain, circularity, technology, governance) and the criteria used to balance representation across production tiers. The study aims to produce not a single "correct" answer, but a practice-grounded map of where stakeholders agree, where they differ, and why.
Download study design documentRound 1 Questionnaire — Exploration
The Round 1 questionnaire was sent to the full expert panel in 2026. It covers the five domains corresponding to mandatory ESPR Phase 1 requirements from 2027: composition & chemical safety, supply chain traceability, recyclability, packaging, and environmental footprint.
Questions are open-ended and exploratory. Panellists are asked to share their current experience of compliance in each area, identify what they see as the biggest practical obstacles, and describe what a workable solution would look like from their position in the value chain. Four stakeholder groups participate — each responding from their own perspective.
Responses from this round are treated as strictly confidential and are anonymised before being shared with other panel members. Together with input from Industry Living Lab #3, they form the basis for the statements used in Round 2.
Download Round 1 questionnaireRound 1 Analysis & Round 2 Statement Development
This document presents the synthesis of responses from eight panellists across all four stakeholder groups. It analyses what was said in Round 1 across the five ESPR domains, identifying recurring themes, points of convergence, and areas of persistent disagreement.
Key findings are translated into concrete statements that form the basis for Round 2. In Round 2, the full panel rates each statement (agree / disagree / nuance) and can see how others responded anonymously — allowing for reasoned convergence rather than forced consensus.
The document also describes the panel composition in detail, including the breakdown by stakeholder group and production tier, and notes where consortium-affiliated respondents are included, in the interest of transparency.
Download Round 1 analysis & Round 2 statementsRound 2 Analysis & Results
Round 2 received 11 responses across four stakeholder groups. The analysis examines results across twelve statements covering five compliance themes: composition & chemical safety, supply chain traceability, recyclability, packaging, and environmental footprint.
Three patterns emerged clearly. Several requirements have near-unanimous normative support but serious feasibility doubts — the panel consistently said "this should happen" while doubting it can happen by 2027. One requirement (microfibre and nanoplastic data) is genuinely contested, with no majority in favour and no respondent finding it feasible. Three questions produced no clear answer and required a further round.
The document details results per statement, including vote distributions, governance preferences, and open comments, and sets out the key tensions that shape the Round 3 questions.
Download Round 2 analysis & resultsRound 3 Questionnaire — Focused Resolution
Round 3 is the third and final round of the M-DPP Delphi consultation. It addresses only the four questions that remained genuinely unresolved after Round 2: the microfibre and nanoplastic data requirement, who should oversee independent verification of DPP claims, the recyclability reporting timeline, and packaging data structure.
For each question, participants see the Round 2 results first, then answer one focused follow-up. The aim is not to force consensus, but to allow respondents to reconsider in light of how the full panel responded. The questionnaire takes approximately ten minutes to complete.
The document includes the full question design and methodology notes explaining the rationale for each question format and what was considered and excluded from this round.
Download Round 3 questionnaire