The textile-fashion-footwear industry’s goal of staying below the 1.5°C threshold set to avert the worst impacts of climate breakdown, is almost certainly out of reach by 2030, prognosticates the Stand.Earth 2025 Fossil Free Fashion Scorecard as it urges the industry to urgently correct course.
- This 2025 Scorecard traces the level of progress since 2021 and 2023 made by 42 global apparel and footwear companies to reduce their carbon footprints in line with a 1.5°C emissions pathway. It provides an updated, ambitious benchmark reflecting critical indicators that dominant fast fashion, sportswear, luxury, and mass market companies and retailers need to meet to enable an accelerated pace of supply chain decarbonisation, within a just energy transition framework.
- Among the most concerning findings is that e-retailer Shein, which earned an ‘F’ grade in the report, increased its absolute emissions by over 170% in just two years—now emitting nearly as much pollution every year as the entire country of Lebanon. In particular, the report’s researchers note that Shein’s fast-to-market strategy is “alarming,” primarily because it involves sending individual packages directly to consumers by air freight instead of surface or marine transportation.
- Other brands earning an ‘F’ grade include Boohoo, Aritzia, Columbia, and Under Armour, which were called out for failing to disclose meaningful climate or energy targets, and for failing to report any significant support for decarbonization initiatives in their supply chains.
KEY FINDINGS: Of the 42 brands analysed in the report, 14 (33%) reported sustained emissions reduction of more than 10% against their baseline year, while 19 (45%) reported reduced emissions compared with the previous year. A total of 17 brands actually increased their carbon footprint compared to their baseline.
- Only three (Eileen Fisher, Burberry, Prada) have reduced emissions in line with a 1.5°C pathway.
- As of 2025, 12 of 42 (29%) companies now have supply chain renewable electricity targets to varying degrees, a significant increase from just five in the 2023 Scorecard. In contrast to those encouraging signs of progress, the percentage of brands and retailers with public, time-bound commitments to phase out coal by 2030 failed to grow, remaining at 20 of 42 (47%).
- Just six brands (14%) reported providing any kind of decarbonisation project financing for suppliers, and just one (H&M Group) showed strong evidence of project financing beyond debt, in a serious failure to advance a just energy transition.
- A hopeful sign is that 40 of 42 (95%) of brands offer some form of resale or repair, as brands recognise that circular business models are becoming mainstream.
- Climate adaptation is a dangerous blind spot: Not one brand provided clear evidence of specific training, financing or support for climate adaptation for workers, developed in consultation with local stakeholders. Only one brand provided a specific target related to climate adaptation.
SUBSECTOR FINDINGS
Fast Fashion: Fast fashion included both the lowest and highest performing brands, showing that with dedicated action progress is possible. Once again H&M Group (B+) outperformed its competitors like Inditex with ambitious climate commitments and action and a strong performance across most categories, while Next, Boohoo, SHEIN and Aritzia were among the six F-graded brands.
- Fast fashion brands continue to perform poorly in the ‘Low Carbon Materials and Circularity’ category compared with the other subsectors. The highest score achieved by a fast fashion brand in this low carbon/circularity category was a C (H&M Group, Inditex, Bestseller) for their investments in next generation and recycled fibres.
- This subsector was divided into mass market and retailers, including: Eileen Fisher, Hugo Boss, Levi Strauss & Co, PVH, Ralph Lauren, Target, VF Corp and Walmart.
- The mass market category outperformed the cross-sector average in every category by at least a grade.
- Mass market brands had the best average score in low-carbon materials and circularity, where Eileen Fisher (B-) led the category for strong material commitments and well developed resale and repair initiatives.
- Retailers Walmart (D-) and Target (D) were below average across most categories, with Target slightly leading its competitor with stronger climate targets and greater supply chain engagement.
Sportswear and outdoor luxury sportswear and outdoor companies assessed were: Adidas, Allbirds, Asics, Columbia Clothing, Lululemon, Mammut, MEC, New Balance, Nike, On-Running, Patagonia, PUMA, REI and Under Armour. An impressive seven of the 12 brands with supply chain renewable energy targets are sports or outdoor brands; this subsector on average performed the best in the commitments and transparency category.
- Patagonia (C+), the highest scoring sportswear and outdoor brand, performed strongly on low-carbon materials and governance, but was hindered by a lack of recent disclosure.
- PUMA (C+) had a high level of disclosure and strong supplier engagement programmes, although reported short term emissions growth. The lowest scoring companies in this category were Under Armour (F) and Columbia Clothing (F).
Mass market/Retailers: This subsector was divided into mass market and retailers, including: Eileen Fisher, Hugo Boss, Levi Strauss & Co, PVH, Ralph Lauren, Target, VF Corp and Walmart.
- The mass market category outperformed the cross-sector average in every category by at least a grade. Mass market brands had the best average score in low-carbon materials and circularity, where Eileen Fisher (B-) led the category for strong material commitments and well developed resale and repair initiatives.
- Retailers Walmart (D-) and Target (D) were below average across most categories, with Target slightly leading its competitor with stronger climate targets and greater supply chain engagement.
Luxury companies included in 2025 were: Armani, Burberry, Capri Holdings, Chanel, Kering, LVMH and Prada. Performance across luxury companies has improved since the publication of the 2023 Scorecard.
- Five of seven luxury brands improved their overall score, while two remained the same. Kering (C+) was the frontrunner amongst luxury players for its robust standards on material sourcing and biodiversity, setting a new clear target to reduce strategic suppliers’ energy consumption by 70% by 2035 and having a clear transition plan with interim milestones.
- Luxury companies remain opaque about their supply chains. Only Armani (D) publicly shared its Tier 1 and Tier 2 supplier list, while Capri (D-) shared its Tier 1 list and Prada (D) shared a partial list of raw material and semi-manufacturing suppliers.
