Greenpeace - The Detox Catwalk

Since making a commitment to Detox, Benetton has come clean about its supply chain and will work with Greenpeace and the Institute for Environmental Affairs (1) to publish online data from its suppliers in China and the Global South. The fashion conscious Italian company publicly recognises the critical “zero discharge” and “precautionary” principles and is applying the best current technology to identify and eliminate hazardous chemicals.

We call on Benetton to raise the bar for the industry by demanding only the best when it comes to toxic-free fashion and implementing the highest quality chemical screening methodology available (2). Find out more.

Brands owned: United Colours of Benetton, Undercolours of Benetton, Sisley, Playlife

Country of Origin: Italy

Net Profit (2011): USD $95 Million (Est.)

CSR: “We need to assume responsibility with regard to business as well as society, with an ethical approach that embraces the social context, the community and the environment.” Alessandro Benetton, Chairman of Benetton Group

The company is showing all the signs of a Detox pioneer on the elimination of hazardous chemicals, demonstrating a real willingness to phase out per- and polyfluorinated compounds (PFCs) (1) from its supply chain ahead of schedule. Reacting to the wave of global consumer pressure, the company has already upgraded its individual Detox action plan and is instigating a transparency revolution in its supply chain.

While C&A; has shown real initiative, it can still go further to become a true Detox hero. The company should demonstrate its toxic-free credentials by integrating a precautionary approach to chemical use, achieving full supply chain transparency and continuing to work towards the zero discharge of hazardous chemicals by 2020. Find out more.

Brands owned: C&A;, Angelo Litorico, Yessica, Your Sixth Sense, Westbury, Canda, Clockhouse, Baby Club, Palomino, Here & There, Rodeo Sport

Country of Origin: The Netherlands

Net Profit: Not found

CSR: “Protecting the environment is always in vogue at C&A.;” C&A;, Our Responsibility

Since coming out on top in the battle of the Swiss retailers, the company has proven its cooperative spirit, working with Greenpeace and the Institute for Environmental Affairs (1) to implement transparency revolution across its supply chain. It has recognised the urgency of the toxic problem and is actively using its Detox commitment to inform decisions across its clothing supply chain.

Surely not a company to rest on its laurels, we urge Coop lead where others follow by continuing to implement its commitment to apply the best current technology for screening and selecting chemicals in its supply chain. Find out more.

Brands owned: Coop, Naturaline, nulu, feelyou, Sergio

Country of Origin: Switzerland

Net Profit: (2012) USD 500 Million (Est.)

CSR: “Living and breathing credible sustainability has been our aspiration for 20 years now. We have already achieved a good deal and have no intention of letting our efforts flag in the future!” 2012 Sustainability Report

The company has shown it is committed to cleaning up its act and ensuring its supply chain is free of hazardous chemicals. The well-known casual wear company has started a critical process to come clean on its chemical discharge data, agreeing to upload this information to the credible Institute for Environmental Affairs platform (1).

Esprit has also agreed to always apply the best current technology available for setting detection limits and for chemical screening methodology. Meanwhile, Esprit has shown its Detox spirit by using crucial principles to inform its daily decision-making process and is taking progressive steps towards the complete elimination of toxic chemicals.

Esprit is showing the signs of a Detox leader but needs to ensure it meets its commitments and goes all out in the name of toxic-free fashion. Find out more

Brands owned: Esprit, EDC

Country of Origin: Germany / Hong Kong

Net Profit: (2012) USD $151 Million (Est.)

CSR: “Today we are striving to make a difference by adopting an eco-conscious way of thinking – and outing it into action.” ESPRIT, Sustainability in Practice

On toxic transparency G-star is ahead of the game, recognising the critical right of consumers and local communities to know what is being released into our water. Matching its words with credible actions, the company has begun to disclose its supply chain discharges via the Institute for Environmental Affairs platform. (1)

G-Star will also ensure it uses the best current technology to identify toxic chemicals in its discharge and products (for both detection limits and screening methodology), a critical step towards the complete elimination of hazardous chemicals.

We call on G-Star to stay on top and continue to demonstrate its raw talent as a Detox champion. Find out more.

Brands owned: G STAR RAW

Country of Origin: The Netherlands

Net Profit: Not found

CSR: “Only when taking our responsibility towards society and the environment are we able to maintain our position as a forward looking company that anticipates the future.” RAW Responsibility

H&M; proved that its commitment wasn’t just a fast-fashion fad, agreeing to phase out 11 priority groups of hazardous chemicals and already making progress in this critical direction. The company has shown itself to be a true believer in the ‘right-to-know’ principle, laying out ambitious plans to disclose toxic discharge data from all of its strategic suppliers on the global Institute for Environmental Affairs platform (1).

To keep on trend, we encourage this Detox champion to implement the best current technology available in order to reveal the presence of hazardous chemicals and continue on its current path towards achieving zero discharges by 1st January 2020. Find out more.

Brands owned: H&M;, COS, Monki, Weekday, Cheap Monday, Other Stories

Country of Origin: Sweden

Net Profit (2012): USD $2.398 Million (Est.)

CSR: “At H&M;, we think of sustainability as a word of action. It’s an ongoing journey full of heart, drive and passion with sincere direction, constantly pushing the boundaries.” H&M;’s Conscious Actions 2012

Following its commitment to Detox, the name behind the world’s largest clothing retailer Zara, has shown it is serious about breaking the toxic water cycle, conducting its own tests on the chemical dyes used in its production cycle. This pro-active toxic-free attitude is showing what companies could achieve if they wanted to.

Inditex has taken tangible steps to meet its Detox commitments, agreeing to always apply the best current technology for both detection limits and screening methodology and uploading discharge data from its supply chain on the Institute for Environmental Affairs’ platform (1).

Inditex’s fashion-conscious actions serve as proof to the rest of industry that size doesn’t matter. Retailing giants with global supply chains are proving to their competitors that the toxic-free trend doesn’t have to cost the earth. Find out more.

Brands owned: Zara, Pull & Bear, Massimo Dutti, Bershka, Stradivarious, Oysho, Tempe, Uterique

Country of Origin: Spain

Net Profit: USD $3,119 Million (Est.)

CSR: “We believe that in the course of doing business, Inditex must implement sustainable development standards that promote environmental protection, ensure that resources are properly managed and meet society's needs.” Inditex’s Environmental Policy

The world’s most well-known denim company has embraced the Detox way with fashion fervor, acting with the urgency required on its toxic-free promises. The company is already integrating the precautionary principle into its supply chain, an essential step towards a toxic-free future.

Levi’s counts itself amongst those leading brands willing to recognise the essential right-to-know principle via the Institute for Environmental Affairs platform (1), acting on behalf of the millions affected by toxic pollution by agreeing to publish discharge data from its supply chain facilities online.

We need to ensure Levi’s sticks to its progressive promises and continues down the toxic-free runway, making our clothes a story to be proud of. Find out more.

Brands owned: Levis, Dockers, Signature, Denizen

Country of Origin: USA

Net Profit: USD $144 Million (Est.)

CSR: “Our commitment to sustainability goes far beyond regulatory compliance or minimizing the environmental impact of our business practices. We build sustainability into everything we do, so that our profitable growth helps restore the planet.” Levi Strauss & Co. Planet

Since following the toxic-free trend, the company has started to walk the talk, setting ambitious but achievable Detox goals and laying out a credible programme towards a supply chain free of hazardous chemicals. This includes a commitment to always apply the highest quality available technology for detection limits and screening methodology.

Limited Brands is taking steps to ensure that the presence of toxic chemicals in our clothes should be no secret and making clear progress towards public disclosure of its discharge data via the Institute for Environmental Affairs platform (1).

We urge Limited Brands to show that pollution free fashion knows no limits, following through on its promises and plans with credible, on the ground implementation and encouraging change amongst the industry laggards. Find out more.

Brands owned: Victoria's Secret, La Senza, Henri Bendel

Country of Origin: USA

Net Profit (2012): USD $850 Million (Est.)

CSR: “We are stewards of the environment. Leaders in our communities. And making positive strides for better business practices.” Limited Brands Responsibility

In the year since it committed, the Spanish retailer has taken credible and ambitious action towards its Detox commitments. It has come clean about its supply chain, giving local communities, consumers, journalists and officials the information they need to monitor the release of toxics into our water.

Mango has delivered on its commitment to eliminate hazardous per- and polyfluorinated compounds (PFCs) (1) from its clothes and to always applying the best technology on the market (including for detection limits and screening methodology). The company is also a leader when it comes to integrating core principles into its processes.

Mango should be congratulated for its progressive and proactive Detox stance and we encourage the company to continue to implement its commitment to people and the environment. Leaders like Mango are setting a new trend for the toxic-addicted industry leaving greenwashers brands like Li-Ning and Nike in their wake. Find out more.

Brands owned: Mango, H.E., MNG by Mango

Country of Origin: Spain

Net Profit (2012): USD $150 Million (Est.)

CSR: “Our desire is to act sustainably in all our spheres of influence.” Mango sustainability report 2013

Marks & Spencer has become an advocate of the right-to-know principle, acting on its commitment to supply-chain transparency by publishing chemical discharge data on the credible Institute for Environmental Affairs platform (1).

M&S; is committed to always applying the best current technology available for detecting and screening chemicals and has agreed to integrate the key precautionary and zero discharges principles across its global supply chain.

The company needs to go further in the name of its customers and those affected by toxic water pollution by taking the necessary steps to ensure the complete elimination of hazardous chemicals from its clothes. Find out more.

Brands owned: Marks & Spencer, Per Una, North Coast, Portfolio, Indiglo, Autograph, Blue Harbour, Ceriso, Ultimate, Brazil’s, Occasions, Collezione, Insola

Country of Origin: UK

Net Profit (2012): USD $1,216 Million (Est.)

CSR: “Implementing new business models will necessitate more resilient and transparent supply chains.” How we do business report 2012

In 2011 Puma leapt ahead of the pack becoming the first ever company to make a Detox commitment, since then the global sportswear giant has stepped up its game and clawed its way to the top of the pile. On transparency, Puma has agreed to report data from its individual suppliers through the global Institute for Environmental Affairs online platform. Meanwhile, it has agreed to integrate the precautionary and zero discharge principles across its global supply chain.

To keep on track, we encourage Puma to continue towards the substitution and elimination of hazardous chemicals such as per- and polyfluorinated compounds (PFCs) (1). Find out more.

Brands owned: Puma, Cobra Gold, Tretorm, Volcom

Country of Origin: Germany

Net Profit (2012): USD $113 Million (Est.)

CSR: “At PUMA, we believe that our position as the creative leader in Sport lifestyle gives us the opportunity and the responsibility to contribute to a better world for the generations to come.” PUMA Handbook of Environmental Standards

Since its New Year’s resolution to Detox its supply chain in January 2013, the fashion-forward name behind the Japanese casual wear giant Uniqlo has gone beyond its commitment and played a leading role in the transparency revolution. Fast Retailing is leading the committed companies by publishing chemical discharge data from the majority of its global supply chain on IPE (1).

On the race to “zero discharges” Fast Retailing is ahead of the pack, integrating key principles across its global supply chain and agreeing to use the best technology available for detection limits and screening methodology.

International companies with global supply chains like Fast Retailing are proving that they can bring about the transformational change we need to Detox our water. Why do greenwashers like Nike and Li-Ning keep holding the industry back? Find out more.

Brands owned: Uniqlo, Compti des Cotonniers, GU, Helmut Lang, J Brand, PLST, Princess Tam Tam, Theory

Country of Origin: Japan

Net Profit (2012): USD $740 Million (Est.)

CSR: “CSR-related aims should be inseparable from a company's business operations. Otherwise, firms run the risk of falling out of public favor.” FR website

Since throwing down the gauntlet to its luxury competitors earlier this year, the Italian high-fashion giant continues to make real progress towards its comprehensive commitment. Valentino is committed to applying the best available technology for chemical screening methodology and detection limits to ensure zero discharges across its supply chain. The company should also be congratulated for being ahead of schedule on its agreement to rid its supply chain of all per- and polyfluorinated compounds (PFCs) (1).

While out of touch luxury brands like Armani refuse to clean up their act, Valentino’s industry-leading commitments prove that beautiful fashion needn’t cost the earth. To ensure it retains its title as a Detox leader, we encourage Valentino to stay on trend towards the implementation of its toxic-free commitment. Find out more.

Brands owned: Valentino, M Missoni

Country of Origin: Italy

Net Profit: Not found

CSR: “In line with the Valentino Fashion Group’s long-term sustainability program, the Valentino Fashion Group recognizes the urgent need for eliminating industrial release of all hazardous chemicals.” Valentino Detox Commitment

Two years after it crossed the line as one of the original Detox pioneers, adidas has failed to credibly follow through on its Detox commitments. The company has yet to eliminate any of the priority chemicals from its supply chain and does not clearly recognise the crucial principle that there are no environmentally acceptable levels of hazardous chemicals. Furthermore, adidas does not consider the importance of the public’s “Right to Know” about the release of these chemicals by any of their supply chain facilities. While trendsetting companies forge a pathway to a toxic-free future, adidas continues to ignore its individual corporate responsibility.

What’s worse, adidas still claims to be a toxic-free hero. Hiding behind the ineffective paper commitments of the Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals (ZDHC) group, adidas presents itself as a fashion-forward leader. In reality, adidas has become an obstacle to progress by lowering the level of Detox ambition, holding back the fashion leaders and using the ZDHC as a greenwash screen to avoid taking the tangible, effective and necessary individual actions needed to Detox their global supply chain.

It is time adidas stopped greenwashing and went all in for Detox, following in the footsteps of the trendsetters by taking real, progressive steps to clean our fashion. Find out more

Brands owned: adidas, Reebok, Taylor Made

Country of Origin: Germany

Net Profit (2012): USD $1,607 Million

CSR: “We actively shape the industry and lead the way by sharing best practice and partnering with others to achieve environmental sustainability.” Adidas Sustainability.

Despite its early promise as a pioneering Chinese brand, LiNing's inadequate Detox programme and refusal to walk the talk continues to undermine the toxic-free progress being made by fashion-forward names like Fast Retailing and Mango.

As China’s leading sports brand, LiNing has a responsibility to implement change, not only on behalf of its customers, but on behalf those impacted by the effects of its toxic trail from its supply chain facilities. LiNing continues to be all word and no action, failing to deliver on its promises and refusing to take individual, corporate responsibility.

However, unlike some of its competitors, it has at least taken the first step to coming clean by admitted its toxic problem. We urge the LiNing to match its paper promises with real on the ground delivery to bring about the toxic-free future we urgently need around the world. Find out more.

Brands owned: LiNing, Z-Do, Aigle, Double Happiness, Lotto, Kason

Country of Origin: China

Net Profit (2012): USD $319 Million (Est.)

CSR: “The Group believes that its commitment to being a responsible corporate citizen helps to bring long-term benefit to not only its employees, but also the community and the environment.”
Li Ning 2012 CSR Report

Despite its fashion-forward claims, Nike has made little progress since its Detox commitment in 2011. The company has no credible plan to eliminate priority hazardous chemicals, it refuses to recognise the critical principle that there are no environmentally acceptable levels of hazardous chemicals and is unwilling to embrace a transparency revolution across its global supply chain. What does Nike have to hide?

Greenwashers like Nike continue to use the ineffective Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals (ZDHC) industry group as a smokescreen to mask their lack of individual action and ambition to clean up our clothes. These fashion fakes are hiding behind weak commitments whilst portraying themselves to consumers as fashion conscious, industry leaders. What’s more, Nike is standing in the way of progress, lowering the level of Detox via the ZDHC and holding back the true Detox leaders.

Nike refuses to be held accountable for its toxic problem and continues to champion a commitment lacking the credibility, ambition and individual action that we urgently need. Nike, it’s time to come clean, stop greenwashing and, when it comes to Detox, Just Do It. Find out more.

Brands owned: Nike, Converse, Hurley International, Jordan, Nike Golf

Country of Origin: USA

Net Profit (2012): USD $2,200 Million (Est.)

CSR: “As environmental, social and economic challenges in our world proliferate, they demand our best performance. We’re using the power of our brand, the energy and passion of our people and the scale of our business to create meaningful change.” Nike Responsibility, September 2013

Nearly a year after Greenpeace International’s Toxic Threads: The Big Fashion Stitch-Up report revealed Armani’s links to toxic water pollution, aside from some empty promises and unambitious commitments, Armani continues to avoid truly tackling the problem with the seriousness it needs. As its competitors have proven, toxic-free fashion should be the fabric of any respectable fashion house. Armani’s failure to take credible, individual action on this issue shows a lack of responsibility from a company that should know better.

If Armani considers itself to be at the forefront of the fashion world, it should urgently take action to Detox its global supply chain and join the trendsetting leaders by making a credible, individual commitment.

Would Armani’s iconic models be so supportive if they knew their favorite brand had a serious toxic addiction?

Brands owned: Giorgio Armani, Emporio Armani, Armani Exchange, Armani Jeans, Armani Collezioni

Country of Origin: Italy

Net Profit (2012): USD $460 Million (Est.)

CSR: “As a global leader in the fashion industry, Armani Exchange believes that how we work is just as important as the work itself. We strive to ensure that our merchandise is manufactured in a responsible manner, and our standards and systems continue to evolve to reflect those expectations for ethical labor practices and environmental control.” Armani Exchange Corporate Responsibility, September 2013

Last year Greenpeace International uncovered Bestseller’s links to the toxic problem in its Toxic Threads: The Big Fashion Stitch-Up report revealing the presence of hazardous chemicals in its clothes. Greenpeace believes the presence of hazardous chemicals in our clothes is completely unacceptable.

Surely large companies with a global reach like Bestseller are in a perfect position to lead from the front and clean up their global supply chain with a credible, individual Detox solution.

Leading players in the industry have proven that toxic-free fashion doesn’t cost the earth so why can’t companies like Bestseller take credible and ambitious steps to kick their chemical addiction?

Brands owned: Jack & Jones, Junarose, Mamalicious, Name It, Object Collectors Item, Only, Outfitters Nation, Pieces, Vero Moda, Vila Clothes

Country of Origin: Denmark

Net Profit (2012): USD $218 Million (Est.)

CSR: “Sustainability is an integrated part of our business…We believe that responsible products are on the future agenda, and we expect to increase the use of sustainable materials...” Bestseller Sustainability Report 2012

When we tested the company’s products last year Greenpeace International revealed the presence of hazardous chemicals such as nonylphenol ethoxylates (NPEs) which break down in the environment to form hazardous chemicals.

Despite global pressure to clean up its act and catch up with its competitors by agreeing to Detox its clothes, the name behind brands such as Diesel, Viktor & Rolf, has shown itself to be an industry laggard. The company has refused to act on its toxic addiction and is slowing the fashion world’s progress towards fashion without pollution.

We call on Only the Brave to join the trendsetting fashionistas heeding the public’s calls for fashion without hazardous chemicals and make a credible Detox commitment for a toxic-free future.

Brands owned: Diesel, Maison Martin Margiela, Viktor & Rolf, Marni

Country of Origin: Italy

Net Profit (2012): Not found

CSR: “Brave actions for a better world” Only The Brave, September 2013

In April 2013 Greenpeace International uncovered further evidence linking Gap Inc. to hazardous chemical pollution. Toxic Threads: Polluting Paradise revealed the company’s ties to a polluting supplier releasing a cocktail of hazardous chemicals into the local water supply in Indonesia. While its competitors like Zara listened to the global calls to clean up the industry with credible Detox action, Gap continues to look the other way.

Though the company claims to be cleaning up its act, hiding behind the ineffective Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals industry group’s paper commitments, there is a gap between its words and its actions. It is time Gap took full individual responsibility for its toxic addiction and caught up with the rest of the industry to become the fashion-forward company its customers expect it to be.

Brands owned: Gap, Banana Republic, Old Navy, Piperlime, Athleta, INTERMIX

Country of Origin: USA

Net Profit (2012): USD $1,135 Million (Est.)

CSR: “For Gap Inc., environmental responsibility means far more than being “green” or selling green products. We view it as connected to every aspect of our business, from the manufacture of our clothes to how they are packaged and shipped to the design of our stores. As a global retailer, we have the potential to make a difference on critical environmental issues.” Gap Inc, Social and Environmental Responsibility, September 2013

Since Greenpeace International's Toxic Threads: The Big Fashion Stitch-Up report uncovered the company’s continued toxic addiction last year, Metersbonwe has yet to take any credible action to come clean about its toxic supply chain and make a credible, individual Detox commitment. Companies like Metersbonwe continue to make their customers unwilling accomplices in the release of hazardous chemicals into our environment.

We need Metersbonwe to act with the urgency the situation calls for, putting a stop to hazardous water pollution across its processes and products. While Detox leaders such as Fast Retailing and G-Star take strides towards a toxic-free future, industry laggards like Metersbonwe have been left in the dust.

Brands owned: Metersbonwe

Country of Origin: China

Net Profit (2012): USD $155 Million (Est.)

CSR: “The company sees environmental protection as an important part of its sustainable development strategy, actively takes the environmental responsibility, increases resource utility rate and strengthens waste management.” Metersbonwe (2011). Metersbonwe 2011 CSR report, p.8.

After being implicated in the toxic scandal in Greenpeace International's Dirty Laundry report, PvH, the company behind fashionable names like Calvin Klein and Tommy Hilfiger, claimed to be committed to a toxic-free future. Its actions since have proved otherwise. Greenpeace’s product testing results also showed that PvH is telling its consumers fairytales when it comes to its clean production techniques and toxic-free clothes.

This toxic addict has failed to act with the individual corporate responsibility its shareholders, consumers and the affected local communities deserve. Under the guise of the Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemical industry group’s weak collective commitments, PvH refuses to reveal its toxic trail and is unwilling to commit to an individual, Detox solution.

Unlike leading companies such as Benetton, implementing real Detox solutions to the toxic problem, PvH has failed to take the credible, individual steps to really tackle its toxic addiction.

Brands owned: Calvin Klein, Tommy Hilfiger, Van Heusen, IZOD, ARROW, Speedo, Olga, Warner's, GH Bass & Co

Country of Origin: USA

Net Profit (2012): USD $486.4 Million (Est.)

CSR: “It is an honor to lead a company that is first and foremost about people — whether it is our own associates, our supply chain partners, our customers, or the broader communities where we live and conduct business.” CSR 2012 - CEO Message, September 2013

Despite Greenpeace International’s report Toxic Threads: The Big Fashion Stitch-Up revealing a link between the Chinese brands products and toxic pollution, the company has so far refused to acknowledge its role in the toxic scandal. As a leading Chinese company, it not only has a responsibility to its consumers but must act on behalf of those suffering directly from the effects of toxic pollution in China.

Vancl and its suppliers cannot continue to treat our public waterways as a toxic waste dump. We urge them to join the Detox leaders forging a path towards a toxic-free future on behalf of consumers and affected local populations around the world.

Brands owned: Vancl

Country of Origin: China

Net Profit (2012): Not found

CSR: Nothing found on their website