Rank a Brand

How sustainable is Action ?

Action & sustainability


Action
Dont buy Click here for score rapport: 4 out of 36

Sustainability summary

Based on our sustainability criteria, Action has achieved the E-label. This is our lowest possible sustainability score, and Action has earned it by a lack of concrete communication about the policies for environment, carbon emissions or labor conditions in low-wages countries.

Brand owner: Action Nederland B.V.
Head office: Zwaagdijk-Oost, The Netherlands
Sector: Retailers
Categories : Male, Female
Free Tags: Action, Shirts, Pullover

What's your sustainability news about Action?

Action sustainability score report

Last edited: 4 December 2017 by Ype
Last reviewed: 4 December 2017 by Ype

Questions about Climate Change/ Carbon Emissions

1 out of 7
1. Is there a policy for the brand to minimize, reduce or compensate carbon emissions? Action implements several measures to minimize and reduce climate emissions, such as improving energy efficiency in its stores, investing in more distribution centers to reduce long transport distances, and providing electric vehicles in its centers, and utilizing trucks with more capacity (see link, page 24). Source
2. Has the brand (company) disclosed the annual absolute carbon footprint of its 'own operations' (Scope 1 & 2) and has the brand already reduced or compensated 10% of these emissions in the last 5 years? Action does not publish the annual climate footprint of last years. Source
3. Is the efficiency of greenhouse gas emissions below 200 kg CO2-eq per square meter shopping floor per year? Action does not provide concrete information about an energy efficiency lower than 200 kg CO2e per square meter shopping floor per year. Source
4. Is at least 50% of the electricity used by the brand (company) generated from renewable resources, such as wind or solar energy? Action does not provide concrete information on the use of renewable energy for its own operations. Source
5. Does 100% of the electricity that the brand (company) uses for its ‘own operations’ come from renewable resources, such as wind or solar energy? See remark for carbon emissions policy question 4. Source
6. Has the brand (company) set a target to reduce its absolute ‘own operations’ carbon emissions by at least 20% within the next 5 years? Action does not communicate any information on target reductions for its climate emissions. Source
7. Does the brand (company) also have a policy to reduce/compensate carbon emissions generated from the product supply chain that is beyond own operations (Scope 3)? Action does not communicate a policy to reduce the climate emissions in the supply chain that is beyond own operations. Source

Questions about Environmental Policy

0 out of 15
1. Does the brand (company) use environmentally 'preferred' raw materials for more than 5% of its volume? Action does not communicates concrete information with regard to the total use of preferred raw materials such as organic cotton or recycled polyester (see link, page 24). Source
2. Does the brand (company) use environmentally 'preferred' raw materials for more than 10% of its volume? See remark for environmental policy question 1. Source
3. Does the brand (company) use environmentally 'preferred' raw materials for more than 25% of its volume? See remark for environmental policy question 1. Source
4. Does the brand (company) use environmentally 'preferred' raw materials for more than 50% of its volume? See remark for environmental policy question 1. Source
5. Does the brand (company) use environmentally 'preferred' raw materials for more than 75% of its volume? See remark for environmental policy question 1. Source
6. Does the brand (company) use environmentally 'preferred' raw materials for more than 90% of its volume? See remark for environmental policy question 1. Source
7. Is there a policy for the brand (company) to eliminate all hazardous chemicals from the whole lifecycle and all production procedures to make the clothes and footwear? Action has not published any commitment to eliminate all hazardous chemicals from the whole lifecycle of products (see link, page 24). Source
8. Has the brand (company) eliminated at least one suspect chemical group, such as Phthalates or Per fluorinated chemicals from its entire garment production? Action does not report whether at least 1 out of 11 suspect chemical groups, such as Phthalates or BFRs can be considered as fully phased-out in the global supply chain already (see link, page 24). Source
9. Has the brand (company) eliminated at least three suspect chemical groups, such as Phthalates or Per fluorinated chemicals from its entire garment production? See remark for environmental policy question 8. Source
10. Does the brand (company) have a clear and effective policy to minimize environmental pollution of chromium and other harmful substances from leather tanning processes, e.g. by waste water treatment or by vegetable tanning? Action does not openly communicate a policy to limit chromium and other harmful substances pollution caused by leather tanning processes (see link, page 24). Source
11. Does the brand (company) have a clear target to phase out PVC in their products, and has the brand already achieved a PVC phase out level of more than 90%? Action does not report about having a plan to phase out PVC in their products (see link, page 24). Source
12. Has the brand (company) a clear and effective policy to minimize the use of solvents based chemicals in their shoe production, and has the brand already achieved a level of average max. 40 grams of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) emissions per pair of shoes? Action does not openly communicate a policy to reduce solvent based chemicals in their clothing production (see link, page 24). Source
13. Does the brand (company) have clear objectives to minimize the environmental impact of its shipping packaging and carrier bags, by reducing, re-using, recycling and responsible sourcing of packaging materials, and does the brand annually report on these results? Action does not communicate any information about its consumer packaging reduction policies (see link, page 24). Source
14. Does the brand (company) have clear objectives to minimize waste, by reducing, re-using and recycling, and does the brand annually report the results? Action implements measures to minimize waste, such as recycling packaging generated at its stores. However, concrete aggregate results regarding its waste materials footprint are not made public (see link, page 24). Source
15. Does the brand (company) encourage the return or re-use of garments? Action does not report, whether the return or re-use of garments by its customers is stimulated (see link, page 24). Source

Questions about Labour Conditions/ Fair Trade

3 out of 14
1. Does the brand (company) have a supplier Code of Conduct (CoC) which includes the following standards: No forced or slave labor, no child labor, no discrimination of any kind and a safe and hygienic workplace? Action refers to the membership of BSCI. The BSCI Code of Conduct (CoC) acknowledges all of these labour rights. Note: Action also mentions its 'Ethical Sourcing Policy' conforms with ILO conventions, the CoC of Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) and the UNGPs too, but this is not specified any further (see link, page 21). Source
2. Does this CoC include at least two of the following workers rights: 1. to have a formally registered employment relationship 2. to have a maximum working week of 48 hours with voluntary and paid overtime of 12 hours maximum 3. to have a sufficient living wage? In BSCI CoC: 1. Yes, legally-binding employment relationships; 2. No, maximum workweek of 48 hours, but hours of overtime is not specified; 3. No, suppliers are encouraged but have no obligation to pay adequate compensation when minimum wages are not sufficient (see link, pages 4-8). Source
3. Does this Code of Conduct include the right for workers to form and join trade unions and bargain collectively; and in those situations where these rights are restricted under law, the right to facilitate parallel means of independent and free association and bargaining? In BSCI CoC: This right is mentioned, with reference to parallel means for the situation of law restrictions (see page 4). Source
4. Does the brand (company) have a clear and effective health and safety policy for the workers in the finishing process of jeans, at least covering the ban on sandblasting? Action has not publicly issued that sandblasting is banned from the brand's supply chains (see link, page 21). Source
5. Does the brand (company) have a published list of direct suppliers, that have collectively contributed to more than 90% of the purchase volume? Action does not provide a significant list of direct suppliers (see link, page 21). Source
6. Is the brand (company) a member of a collective initiative that aims to improve labor conditions, or does the brand (company) purchase its supplies from accredited factories with improved labor conditions? Action mentions membership of the Business Social Compliance Initiative (BSCI) (see link, page 21). Source
7. Do independent civil society organizations like NGO's and labor unions have a decisive voice in this collective initiative or in these certification schemes? Independent civil society organizations do not have a decisive voice in BSCI. Source
8. Is there a policy for the brand (company) for capacity building at the apparel manufacturers for improved labour practices? Action does not provide concrete information on capacity building measures at its supplying production facilities for improved labour practices (see link, page 21). Source
9. Does the brand (company) annually report on the results of its labor conditions policy? Is at least 90% of the brands production volume from apparel manufacturers monitored for labour conditions? Action does not publicly report outcomes or results of its policies to improve labor conditions at its direct suppliers (see link, page 21). Source
10. Is at least 25% of the production volume from apparel manufacturers approved as socially compliant by independent third parties, such as FWF, GOTS or SA8000? See remark for labor conditions policy question 9. Source
11. Is at least 50% of the production volume from apparel manufacturers approved as socially compliant by independent third parties, such as FWF, GOTS or SA8000? See remark for labor conditions policy question 9. Source
12. Does the brand (company) implement a policy to establish the payment of living wages at its apparel manufacturers? Are at least first living wage payments realised? Action does not provide concrete information about policy measures to establish the payment of living wages at its direct suppliers (see link, page 21). Source
13. Does the brand (company) annually report on the results of its labor conditions policy for the fabric manufacturing phases, including a reasonable overview of the number and region of workplaces covered by the policy in relation to the total production volume? Action does not report on results of its labour conditions policy for the fabric manufacturing phases from spinning to final fabric (see link, page 21). Source
14. Are at least 50% of the fabric manufacturing phases - from spinning to final fabric - approved as socially compliant by independent third parties, such as FLO-Cert, GOTS or SA8000? See remark for labor conditions policy question 13. Source