ARTICLE22

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 ARTICLE22 “Good”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It uses a high proportion of lower-impact materials including upcycled materials.
• It uses low impact materials that help limit the chemicals, water, and wastewater in its supply chain.
• It manufactures its products by hand to reduce its climate impact.
• 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. Here we rate ARTICLE22 “Great”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It has a mission to improve social conditions in Laos.
• It traces most of its supply chain.
• It ensures workers in the final production stage are paid a living wage.

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 ARTICLE22 “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 silk.
• It doesn’t appear to use wool, down, fur, angora, exotic animal skin, or exotic animal hair.

Based on all publicly available information we’ve reviewed, we rate ARTICLE22 “Good” overall.