Scotta 1985

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 Scotta 1985 “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’s taking meaningful action to reduce its climate impacts.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce or eliminate hazardous chemicals in manufacturing.
• There’s no evidence it minimises textile waste 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 Scotta 1985 “Very Poor”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It traces some of its supply chain.
• There’s no evidence it has a Code of Conduct.
• There’s no evidence it ensures workers are paid living wages in its supply chain.
• There's no evidence it audits its suppliers.

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 Scotta 1985 “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 down.
• It doesn’t appear to use angora, exotic animal hair, fur, or exotic animal skin.

Based on all publicly available information we’ve reviewed, we rate Scotta 1985 “Not Good Enough” overall.