Rank a Brand

How sustainable is Laura Ashley ?

Laura Ashley & sustainability


Laura Ashley
Dont buy Click here for score rapport: 3 out of 34

Sustainability summary

Laura Ashley has achieved the E-label. Laura Ashley has earned it by communicating hardly any concrete about the policies for environment, carbon emissions or labor conditions in low-wages countries. For us as consumers, it is unclear whether Laura Ashley is committed to sustainability or not.

Brand owner: MUI Group
Head office: Bristol, UK
Sector: Casual clothing
Categories : Male, Female, Kids
Free Tags: Bags, Shirts, Pullover, Jackets, Jeans, Dress, Shoes

What's your sustainability news about Laura Ashley?

Laura Ashley sustainability score report

Last edited: 21 April 2017 by Mario
Last reviewed: 21 April 2017 by Mario

Questions about Climate Change/ Carbon Emissions

0 out of 6
1. Has the brand (owner) disclosed the annual absolute climate footprint of its 'own operations', and has it accomplished an overall absolute climate footprint reduction compared to the result of the previous reporting year? Laura Ashley publishes its own operations climate footprint. In 2015/16, it had a total footprint of 3,331 metric tons of CO2e. Laura Ashley communicates however, that due to the change in reporting period dates, it is not possible to draw any conclusions from the differences in emission values over the last two periods (see link, page 20). Source
2. Is at least 50% of the electricity used by the brand (company) generated from renewable resources, such as wind or solar energy? Laura Ashley does not clearly communicate its renewable energy policy. Source
3. Is all the electricity used by the brand (company) generated from renewable resources, such as wind or solar energy? See remark for carbon emissions policy question 3. Source
4. Has the brand (owner) disclosed the annual absolute climate footprint of its supply chain that is 'beyond own operations? Laura Ashley does not clearly communicate information on target reductions for its greenhouse gas emissions. Source
5. Has the brand (owner) accomplished a reduction of this annual absolute climate footprint 'beyond own operations' compared to the result of the previous reporting year? Laura Ashley does not communicate a policy to reduce the carbon emissions in the supply chain that is beyond own operations. Source
6. Has the brand (owner) set a target to make at least its own operations fully climate neutral by 2030, and is the brand on track to achieve this target? Score-unknown   Source

Questions about Environmental Policy

0 out of 12
1. Does the brand (company) use environmentally 'preferred' raw materials for more than 5% of its volume? Laura Ashley does not communicate concrete results on the use of environmentally preferred raw materials, such as organic cotton or recycled polyester. 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? Laura Ashley does not communicate concrete information on an environmental policy to eliminate all hazardous chemicals from the whole lifecycle and all production procedures to make the garments. 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? See remark for environmental policy question 7. 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 7. Source
10. Does the brand (owner) report what percentage of its consumer packaging materials are renewable or made from recycled materials, and does the brand implement best practices or concrete policies which have reduced the environmental impact of their packaging materials? Laura Ashley communicates a consumer packaging reduction policy. However, concrete aggregate results regarding its packaging materials footprint are not made public. Source
11. Does the brand (owner) publish its absolute waste materials footprint and implement concrete policies to minimize waste, by reducing, re-using and recycling, thereby decreasing its waste footprint compared to the previous reporting year? Laura Ashley states to implement several measures to reduce its waste footprint. However, concrete aggregate results regarding its waste materials footprint are not made public after 2010 (see link, page 19). Source
12. Does the brand (company) encourage the return or re-use of garments? Laura Ashley doesn't report whether the return or re-use of garments by its customers is encouraged. They do put a link on their site where to find local recycling facilities in the UK. Source

Questions about Labour Conditions/ Fair Trade

3 out of 16
1. Does the brand (owner) have a supplier Code of Conduct (CoC) which includes all standards to ensure workers' rights such as no child labour, no bonded labour, a safe workplace and no excessive overwork? And is there at least a progress report once every two years on implementation of this Code of Conduct? All standards are mentioned in Laura Ashley's Code of Conduct. Source
2. Does the brand (owner) have a policy to make sure there is a proper grievance mechanism in place for factory workers and are at least 25% of workers informed about their rights regarding this mechanism (e.g. through training)? Score-unknown   Source
3. Does the brand (owner) have a published list of direct suppliers, that have collectively contributed to more than 90% of the purchase volume? 1. Yes, legally binding contracts; 2. Yes, maximum workweek of 48 hours, overtime (max 12 hours) is voluntary. 3. Yes, commitment to implement payment of living wages (see link, page 3). Source
4. Is this supplier list specific? Are e.g. the addresses of direct suppliers included, and/or are the specific products mentioned per factory? Score-unknown   Source
5. Is the list of direct suppliers extended with suppliers further down the supply chain, with a minimum of 40% in number compared to the direct suppliers? This right is mentioned, with reference to parallel means for the situation of law restrictions (see link, page 2). Source
6. Is the brand (owner) a member of a collective initiative that aims to improve labor conditions, in which civil society organizations like NGOs and labor unions have a decisive voice, or does the brand purchase at least 50% from certified manufacturers with improved labor conditions? Score-unknown   Source
7. Does this initiative require clear minimum performance levels for member brands? Laura Ashley doesn't provide a significant published list of direct suppliers on its website. Source
8. Is at least 25% of the total production volume at direct suppliers verified under monitoring concerning good labour conditions? Laura Ashley does not communicate any information about being part of a collective initiative or purchasing from an accredited supplier. Source
9. Is at least 50% of the total production volume at direct suppliers verified under monitoring concerning good labour conditions? See remark for labor conditions policy question 5. Source
10. Is at least 75% of the total production volume at direct suppliers verified under monitoring concerning good labour conditions? Laura Ashley does not report whether measures at its supplying production facilities are implemented to achieve improved labour practices with respect to product and / or production process quality. Source
11. Is at least 95% of the total production volume at direct suppliers verified under monitoring concerning good labour conditions? Laura Ashley does not publicly report clear results of its implemented measures to improve labor conditions at its apparel manufacturers. Source
12. Does the brand (company) annually report on the results of its labor conditions policy for the leather, yarn and fabric production phases, including a reasonable overview of the number and region of workplaces covered by the policy in relation to the total production volume? Laura Ashley does not publicly report on results of its policies to improve labour conditions at its suppliers, which are verified by eligible third parties. Source
13. Does the brand (owner) publicly commit to a living wage benchmark with defined wages per production region or factory? See remark for labor conditions policy question 9. Source
14. Does the brand (owner) set a target to establish the payment of living wages at its apparel manufacturers, and is the brand on track to achieve this target? Laura Ashley does not provide concrete information about implemented measures to establish the payment of living wages at its apparel manufacturers. Source
15. Has the brand (owner) realised payment of living wages for at least 10% of its production volume? Laura Ashley does not publicly report clear results of its implemented measures to improve labor conditions at its fabric manufacturers. Source
16. Does the brand (owner) adhere to buying practices that enable living wages and good labour conditions, such as long-term relations with factories, and concentrating production at limited number of factories? See remark for labor conditions policy question 12. Source