LUNGE

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 LUNGE “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 minimises textile waste in its supply chain.
• There’s no evidence it avoids harmful chemicals in the leather tanning process.
• It manufacturers its products closer to home to reduce the climate impact of long-distance shipping.

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 LUNGE “It's a Start”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• Its products are made in-house by a small team.
• It partly traces its supply chain including the final and some of the second production stages.
• 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 LUNGE “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.
• It doesn’t appear to use wool, down, fur, angora, exotic animal skin, or exotic animal hair.

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