ECCO

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

• It uses few lower-impact materials.
• It uses tanneries that are Leather Working Group Gold certified.
• There’s no evidence it has set a greenhouse gas emissions reduction target.
• 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 ECCO “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It traces most of its supply chain.
• There’s no evidence it provides financial security to its suppliers, which can result in poor working conditions and wages.
• It sources its final stage of production from countries with extreme risk of labour abuse.
• There’s no evidence it ensures workers are paid living wages in its supply chain.
• During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, it disclosed some policies 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 ECCO “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It has basic policy on animal welfare with no clear implementation mechanisms in place.
• It appears to use leather, wool, exotic animal skin, shearling, and exotic animal hair.
• It doesn’t appear to use down, fur, or angora.
• There’s no evidence it traces any animal-derived materials to the first production stage.

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