Minimum Fashion

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

• It uses some lower-impact materials including organic cotton.
• There’s no evidence it takes action to minimise its packaging, which is a driver of plastic waste.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce or eliminate hazardous chemicals in manufacturing.
• It uses renewable energy in its direct operations (such as stores or offices) but not 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 Minimum Fashion “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.
• It traces some of its supply chain.
• 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.

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 Minimum Fashion “It’s a Start”. 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 and exotic animal hair.
• It states that it sources wool from non-mulesed sheep.
• It doesn’t appear to use down, fur, angora, or exotic animal skin.

Based on all publicly available information we’ve reviewed, we rate Minimum Fashion “It’s a Start” overall.