Lilly Pulitzer

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 Lilly Pulitzer “Very Poor”. 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 its climate impacts.
• 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’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 Lilly Pulitzer “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It sources its final stage of production from countries with extreme risk of labour abuse.
• 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 Four Fundamental Freedoms 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. Here we rate Lilly Pulitzer “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, wool, and angora.
• Responsible Down Standard certifies the down it uses.
• It doesn’t appear to use fur, or exotic animal skin.

Based on all publicly available information we’ve reviewed, we rate Lilly Pulitzer “We Avoid” overall.