4CCCCEES

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 4CCCCEES “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• There’s no evidence it uses any lower-impact materials.
• There’s no evidence it minimises textile waste in its Supply Chain.
• It uses some vegetable-tanned leather to limit the products manufactured with chemical-heavy tanning processes.
• There’s no evidence it takes action to minimise its packaging, which is a driver of plastic waste.

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. Unfortunately, 4CCCCEES does not publish sufficient information. You have a right to know how the products you buy affect the issues you care about.

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 4CCCCEES “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• There’s no evidence it has an animal welfare policy.
• It appears to use leather, and fur.
• It doesn’t appear to use wool, down, angora, exotic animal skin, or exotic animal hair.

Based on all publicly available information we’ve reviewed, we rate 4CCCCEES “Not Good Enough” overall.