Sarvin

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 Sarvin “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’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.

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

• There’s no evidence it has a Code of Conduct.
• It partly traces its supply chain including the final and some of the second production stages.
• There's no evidence it audits its suppliers.
• 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 Sarvin “Good”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It appears to use silk.
• It doesn’t appear to use leather, wool, down, fur, angora, exotic animal skin, or exotic animal hair.

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