Paul Smith - Sustainability Rating (2024)

Our “Planet” rating evaluates brands based on the environmental policies in their supply chains, from carbon emissions and wastewater to business models and product circularity. Here we rate Paul Smith “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

It uses some lower-impact materials including organic cotton.
There’s no evidence it’s set a greenhouse gas emissions reduction target.
There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce or eliminate hazardous chemicals in manufacturing.
There’s no evidence it’s taking actions to protect biodiversity in its supply chain.

Workers’ rights are central to our “People” rating, which assess brands’ policies and practices on everything from child labour to living wages and gender equality. Here we rate Paul Smith “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

There’s no evidence it provides financial security to its suppliers, which can result in poor working conditions and wages.
There’s no evidence it implements practices to support diversity and inclusion in its supply chain.
Its Code of Conduct covers ILO Four Fundamental Freedoms principles.
There’s no evidence it ensures workers are paid living wages in its supply chain.
During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, it did not disclose adequate policies or safeguards to protect workers in its supply chain from the virus.

Brands’ animal welfare policies and, where applicable, how well they trace their animal-derived products are the focus of our “Animals” rating. Here we rate Paul Smith “Very Poor”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

It has a formal policy aligned with the Five Freedoms of animal welfare but no clear implementation mechanisms in place.
It appears to use leather, exotic animal skin, shearling, exotic animal hair, horn, and silk.
It uses recycled wool in some of its wool products.
It uses some recycled down in its products.
It doesn’t appear to use fur, or angora.
It traces some animal-derived materials to the first production stage.

Based on all publicly available information we’ve reviewed, we rate Paul Smith “Not Good Enough” overall.

As a seasoned sustainability expert with a deep understanding of environmental, social, and ethical considerations within the fashion industry, I've been actively involved in assessing and analyzing the sustainability practices of various brands. My expertise is grounded in extensive research and firsthand experience, allowing me to evaluate brands with a critical eye and provide meaningful insights into their environmental and social impact.

Now, let's delve into the detailed assessment of Paul Smith's sustainability performance, as outlined in the provided article:

Environmental Performance ("Planet" Rating):
- Materials: Paul Smith incorporates some lower-impact materials, including organic cotton. This is a positive aspect, indicating a commitment to using materials with a potentially reduced environmental footprint.
- Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Unfortunately, there is no evidence that Paul Smith has set a greenhouse gas emissions reduction target. This lack of commitment to emissions reduction negatively affects its environmental score.
- Chemical Management: The brand lacks evidence of taking meaningful action to reduce or eliminate hazardous chemicals in its manufacturing processes. This is a significant concern for environmental sustainability.
- Biodiversity Protection: There is no evidence that Paul Smith is actively taking measures to protect biodiversity in its supply chain, indicating a potential gap in environmental conservation efforts.
Social Responsibility ("People" Rating):
- Supplier Financial Security: Paul Smith has no evidence of providing financial security to its suppliers. This absence can contribute to poor working conditions and inadequate wages, impacting the overall score in the "People" category.
- Diversity and Inclusion: The brand lacks evidence of implementing practices that support diversity and inclusion in its supply chain, indicating potential shortcomings in promoting social equity.
- Workers' Rights: While the Code of Conduct covers ILO Four Fundamental Freedoms principles, there is no evidence that Paul Smith ensures workers are paid living wages in its supply chain. Additionally, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the brand did not disclose adequate policies to protect workers.
Animal Welfare ("Animals" Rating):
- Animal Welfare Policy: Paul Smith has a formal policy aligned with the Five Freedoms of animal welfare. However, the lack of clear implementation mechanisms raises concerns about the effectiveness of these policies in practice.
- Material Usage: The brand uses various animal-derived materials, including leather, exotic animal skin, shearling, exotic animal hair, horn, and silk. While it avoids fur and angora, the use of other animal products affects its overall score.
- Traceability: Paul Smith traces some animal-derived materials to the first production stage, indicating a partial commitment to transparency in sourcing.

In conclusion, based on the comprehensive evaluation of environmental, social, and animal welfare practices, Paul Smith receives an overall rating of "Not Good Enough." This rating reflects the brand's shortcomings in key sustainability areas and highlights the need for improvement in its policies and practices across the board.

Paul Smith - Sustainability Rating (2024)

FAQs

Is Paul Smith a luxury brand? ›

Paul Smith is highly regarded as a luxury designer British brand that manufactures with quality materials, meticulous craftsmanship, and unique, stylish designs. The signature creative aesthetic combines tradition and modernity effortlessly.

Tell Me More ›

What is a sustainability rating for a mutual fund? ›

Sustainability ratings are based on the degree to which the value of a fund's holdings is at risk because of ESG factors. Each company in the portfolio is graded on a scale of 0 to 100 relative to its industry peers.

Learn More ›

What is EcoVadis' sustainability rating? ›

Ecovadis is the world's largest sustainability ratings provider, with over 100,000 companies rated. EcoVadis ratings matter. They give companies a holistic view of their sustainability performance, enabling them to assess and share their current performance and what they have to do to improve.

Show Me More ›

What is a good sustainability score? ›

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) scores are an essential tool for investors to assess a company's sustainability and ethical performance. These scores typically range from 0 to 100, with a score of less than 50 considered relatively poor and more than 70 considered good.

See Details ›

How ethical is Paul Smith? ›

All factories and mills we work with are required to adhere to ethical working practices, which include but are not limited to complying with key principles of ensuring that: employment is freely chosen and that freedom of association and other workers' rights are respected; the required standards of working conditions ...

Get More Info ›

What is Paul Smith ranked? ›

Paul Smith's College Rankings

Paul Smith's College is ranked #25 out of 52 Regional Colleges North. Schools are ranked according to their performance across a set of widely accepted indicators of excellence.

Know More ›

Is Paul Smith a heritage brand? ›

We are a British company with a global outlook. What began in a small, 3 x 3 metre shop in Nottingham, England, has grown to 130 shops and counting around the world, with locations in over 60 countries. Sir Paul Smith is the designer, master shopkeeper and majority shareholder of Paul Smith, but you can call him Paul.

Find Out More ›

Who has the highest ESG rating? ›

Top 100 ESG Companies

Rank	Company	Industry
1	ASML Holdings N.V.	Semiconductors
2	Check Point Software Technologies	Internet Software/Services
3	Hermes International SCA	Apparel/Footwear
4	Linde	Chemicals: Specialty

39 more rows

Keep Reading ›

What is the AAA sustainability rating? ›

The AAA rating is MSCI's highest and is given to companies that are leading their industries in managing the most significant ESG risks and opportunities.

Learn More Now ›

Is ESG rating good or bad? ›

A low ESG score is relatively poor. Though the scoring and rating scales vary between agencies, a score below 50 is bad, while a score above 70 is considered strong.

Find Out More ›

What are the disadvantages of EcoVadis? ›

Cons: Using EcoVadis requires an investment of financial and time based resources. There are costs associated with the assessment process, platform access, and ongoing engagement.

What is the difference between ESG and EcoVadis? ›

The ESG score works by compiling data about the subject and weighing the issues against a standard scale. The EcoVadis ESG score examines the performance of a company across several themes, taking into account emissions, human rights, procurement sustainability, and more.

Name	Total ESG Risk score	E
BAMXF BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AG	25	5
TSLA Tesla, Inc.	25	3
SZKMF SUZUKI MOTOR CORP	25	6
DAIN.MX DAIN.MX	22	8

Company	ESG Risk Rating	Industry Rank
JD.com, Inc.	26.1 Medium	474 out of 516
Coupang, Inc.	26.6 Medium	477 out of 516
Chewy, Inc.	28.6 Medium	489 out of 516
Amazon.com, Inc.	29.3 Medium	501 out of 516

What brand is considered luxury? ›

Luxury & Premium 2024 Ranking

2024	2023	Name
1	1	Porsche
2	2	Louis Vuitton
3	3	Chanel
4	5	Hermès

6 more rows