Guide claims designers' ethical concerns are only 'skin deep'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Two of the biggest names in British fashion are accused of failing to live up to their fine words on animal rights and the environment.
Stella McCartney is a vocal supporter of anti-fur campaigns, while Vivienne Westwood crusades against climate change. But while they may score highly on Paris's catwalks, they are criticised in a guide showing that luxury fashion brands fail to take corporate social responsibility seriously.
There's no doubt that McCartney shuns fur in her designs. But the same cannot be said for the company that owns her label. For Gucci (part of the PPR group) allows and promotes the use of fur. And it is accused by Ethical Consumer magazine of being unable to demonstrate that it has an environmental or supply-chain policy to guard against damaging the environment or exploiting workers. And Westwood's environmental credentials are dented by her company not appearing to have a formal policy to reduce its carbon footprint.
Bryony Moore, the guide's author, said: "McCartney and Westwood are held up as ethical heroes. While they might be talking the talk, they're failing to walk the walk. Fans will be severely disappointed to learn their ethics are only skin deep. They are far from the only brands performing badly. Most make no mention of their environmental and social impacts."
The 30 luxury brands in the guide are scored against 15 indicators on human rights, political lobbying, the environment and animal welfare. Paul Smith, Moschino and Jean Paul Gaultier fare best, coming joint top with seven out of 20. But Vivienne Westwood, owned by Latimo SA, lags behind with five-and-a-half and Stella McCartney is given two out of 20 – only beaten to the bottom by brands owned by LVMH/Christian Dior SA – which get just one-and-a-half.
A Vivienne Westwood spokeswoman said: "We are committed to changing the way we do business to minimise our impact on the environment," but added that "not all our products are produced with the environment in mind".
A spokesman for PPR, which launched a drive earlier this year to "implement more sustainable business practices", accused the guide of containing inaccuracies.
Additional reporting by Paul Bignell
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments