Giorgio Armani

Rated: Not good enough

price: $$$$

location: United States

Giorgio Armani is not taking adequate steps to manage water use in its supply chain.

Giorgio Armani sustainability rating

Planet

2 out of 5

People

2 out of 5

Animals

2 out of 5

Overall rating: Not good enough

Our ratings are based on a scale from 1 (We avoid) to 5 (Great) How we rate


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 Giorgio Armani “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 actions to protect biodiversity in its supply chain.
  • It’s set a science based target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in both its direct operations and supply chain but there’s no evidence it is on track.

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

  • None of its supply chain is certified by crucial labour standards that help ensure worker health and safety, living wages, and other rights.
  • It received a score of 31-40% in the 2023 Fashion Transparency Index.
  • There’s no evidence it supports diversity and inclusion in its supply chain.
  • It claims to have a program to improve wages but there’s no evidence it ensures its workers are paid living wages in most of its supply chain.
  • During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, it did not disclose adequate policies or safeguards 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 Giorgio Armani “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

  • It has a formal policy aligned with the Five Freedoms of animal welfare but no clear implementation mechanisms in place.
  • It appears to use leather, wool, down, shearling, exotic animal hair, and silk.
  • It doesn’t appear to use fur, angora, or exotic animal skin.
  • 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 Giorgio Armani “Not Good Enough” overall.

Last updated August 2023