Jins

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 Jins “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 takes action to minimise its packaging, which is a driver of plastic waste.
• It’s set an absolute target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in its supply chain but there’s no evidence it’s on track.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce water use. 

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

• It partly traces its supply chain, including all of the final production stage.
• There’s no evidence it provides financial security to its suppliers, which can result in poor working conditions and wages.
• Its Code of Conduct covers ILO principles.
• There’s no evidence it ensures workers are paid living wages in 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. Since Jins makes products that are generally free of animal-derived materials, we have not rated its impact on animals. Its overall rating is based on its combined "Planet" and "People" scores.

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