State of Art

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 State of Art “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It uses some lower-impact materials, however it does not publish an aggregate breakdown of materials used.
• There’s no evidence it takes action to minimise its packaging, which is a driver of plastic waste.
• It uses renewable energy in its direct operations (such as stores or offices) but not in its supply chain.
• There’s no evidence it’s taking meaningful action to reduce water use. 

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

• Some of its final stage is located in low-risk countries or certified facilities; however it does not publish an aggregate breakdown of suppliers.
• It audits some of its supply chain, including all of the final production stage.
• Its Code of Conduct covers some ILO 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 State of Art “Not Good Enough”. These are a few factors influencing its score:

• It appears to use leather, wool, cashmere, and alpaca.
• It doesn’t appear to use shearling, mohair, down, fur, angora, or exotic animal skin
• There’s no evidence it has an animal welfare policy.

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