DAN JOHN

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 DAN JOHN “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It uses few lower-impact materials.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce water use.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce or eliminate hazardous chemicals in manufacturing.
• 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 DAN JOHN “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It doesn't disclose where all of its final production stage occurs.
• It partly traces its final production stage, though not its entire supply chain.
• There’s no evidence it audits its suppliers.
• 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.

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 DAN JOHN “It’s a Start”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• There’s no evidence it has an animal welfare policy.
• It uses leather and wool.
• There’s no evidence it uses down, fur, angora, exotic animal hair, or exotic animal skin.

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