Paul Smith Eyewear

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 Paul Smith Eyewear “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 meaningful action to reduce or eliminate hazardous chemicals in manufacturing.
• It uses some recycled packaging.

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 Paul Smith Eyewear “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• Its final production stage happens in Italy, a medium risk country for labour abuse.
• There’s no evidence it has a Code of Conduct.
• There’s no evidence it supports diversity and inclusion in its supply chain.
• It partly traces its supply chain including all of the final production stage.
• 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 Paul Smith Eyewear makes products that are generally free of animal-derived materials, we’ve not rated its impact on animals. Its overall rating is based on its combined environment and labour scores.

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