Rank a Brand

How sustainable is Rimmel London ?

Rimmel London & sustainability


Rimmel London
Dont buy Click here for score rapport: 1 out of 26

Sustainability summary

Rimmel London has achieved the E-label, because only a little information is published about a policy on sustainability. It is hard to see the effort Rimmel London is making on sustainability. Therefore, more policy and transparency is needed.

Brand owner: Coty, Inc.
Head office: New York, NY, United States
Sector: Cosmetics
Categories : 
Free Tags: 

What's your sustainability news about Rimmel London?

Rimmel London sustainability score report

Last edited: 14 July 2016 by Angela
Last reviewed: 14 July 2016 by Mario

Questions about Climate Change/ Carbon Emissions

1 out of 4
1. Is there a policy for the brand to minimize, reduce or compensate carbon emissions? Coty (brand owner of Rimmel London) implements measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, such as improving energy efficiency at its production facilities (see link, page 3). 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? Coty started reporting its own operations climate footprint on 2013. In 2014, it had a total footprint of 10tons of CO2eq/$million. However, an absolute climate footprint of own operations is not made public (see link, page 3). Source
3. Has the brand (company) set a target to reduce its absolute ‘own operations’ carbon emissions by at least 20% within the next 5 years? Coty does not communicate up to date target reductions for its climate footprint of own operations. Source
4. Is at least 25% of the electricity used by the brand (company) generated from renewable resources, such as wind or solar energy? Coty does not communicate its renewable energy policy. Source

Questions about Environmental Policy

0 out of 18
1. Does the brand have a policy to phase out all possible harmful substances? Coty (brand owner of Rimmel London) does not inform on a general policy to phase out all possible harmful substances. Source
2. Does the brand refrain from using the high hazard (red coded) chemicals as listed in the Skin Deep database of the Environmental Working Group, and if still used, does the brand give scientific account for the safe use of it? Rimmel London is listed on the SkinDeep database using an abundance of chemicals coded as ‘red’, and Coty does not give a clarification on the full spectrum of possible hazardous substances used. Source
3. Does the brand strictly apply the precautionary principle (=banning) for all possible harmful substances such as parabens, also when the scientific evidence for possible harm is limited, unclear or debated? Coty does not specify that it strictly applies the precautionary principle (=banning) for all possible harmful substances. Source
4. Does the brand refrain from using any microplastics for all of its products? Neither Coty nor Rimmel London clearly specify whether the use of microplastic is completely banned from all Rimmel London products. Source
5. Does the cosmetics brand completely refrain from animal testing including tests in the supply chain? Rimmel London reports on banning animal testing. However, animal testing is used ("as a last resort") in few countries where the brand is active. Source
6. Does the cosmetics brand refrain from using animal derived ingredients? Rimmel London does not report on the use of animal derived ingredients. Brand owner Coty communicates it does not specialize in products without animal-derived ingredients, but encourages consumers to read package labels closely and see the full extent of ingredients. Source
7. Does the brand have a policy to replace petroleum-based ingredients with renewable, biodegradable ingredients? Both Coty and Rimmel London do not specify to replace petroleum-based ingredients with renewable, biodegradable ingredients. Source
8. Has the brand already achieved an overall ratio of 50% renewable, biodegradable ingredients? See remark for environmental policy question 7. Source
9. Are all the cosmetics of the brand free of organic-synthetic dyes, synthetic fragrances, ethoxylated raw materials, synthetic UV filters, synthetic preservatives, silicones, paraffin and other petroleum derived products? Rimmel London uses several of petroleum derived ingredients. Source
10. Are all cosmetics free of genetically modified materials, nanomaterials and radiated materials? Neither Coty nor Rimmel London clearly specify whether all Rimmel London products are free of genetically modified materials, nanomaterials and radiated materials. Source
11. Are at least 50% of the brand products certified ‘natural’? Neither Coty nor Rimmel London specify which share of its Rimmel London products is certified ‘natural’. Source
12. Does the brand use organic or otherwise environmentally certified renewable ingredients for at least 50% of its total use of ingredients? Neither Coty nor Rimmel London communicate to use any environmentally certified ingredients. Source
13. Are at least 90% of the brand products certified ‘organic’? See remark for environmental policy question 12. Source
14. Does the brand inform users through all products about environmentally responsible use, such as dosage, water use and packaging disposal? Neither Coty nor Rimmel London show any activity in this direction. Source
15. Does the brand (company) publish a water footprint and is there a concrete policy to minimize, reduce or compensate this footprint? Coty does not publish a water footprint.It only mentions some initiatives taken to reduce water consumption such as "wastewater recovery program" (see link, page 3-4). Source
16. Does the brand (company) publish its annual material use footprint, or alternatively material footprints for each sold product, and does the brand have an effective policy in place to reduce the overall environmental impact of material use? Coty implements measures to improve its annual material footprint, but does not publish its annual material footprint, or alternatively material footprints for each sold product. Source
17. Does the brand (company) have clear objectives to minimize waste, by reducing, re-using and recycling, and does the brand annually report the results? Coty implements measures to reduce the waste material footprint, such as recycling of thermoplastics and waste-sorting recycling initiatives in headquarters. However, concrete aggregate results regarding its waste materials footprint are not made public (see link, page 3-4). Source
18. Does the brand have clear objectives to minimize the environmental impact of packaging, by reducing, re-using and recycling, and does the brand annually report on these results? Coty implements measures to reduce the packaging material footprint, such as using 100% FSC or PEFC certified paper. However, it doesn't report on the annual results of its consumer packaging policy (see link, page 4). Source

Questions about Labour Conditions/ Fair Trade

0 out of 4
1. Does the brand (company) purchase tropical ingredients such as palm oil, cocoa butter, coconut oil, carnauba wax from sources (e.g. plantations) that are certified to e.g. have no child labor and no forced labour, and provide a better living standard for the farmers and workers who produce these tropical materials? Coty (brand owner of Rimmel London) does not refer to any social certification for its tropical ingredients sourced. However, Coty generally demand to business partners to not employ forced or child labor, engage in slavery or human traffic, among others (see link, page 28-29). Source
2. Does the brand (company) purchase at least 50% of its tropical ingredients such as palm oil, cocoa butter, coconut oil, carnauba wax from sources (e.g. plantations) that are certified to e.g. have no child labor and no forced labour, and provide a better living standard for the farmers and workers who produce the tropical ingredients? See remark for labor conditions policy question 1. Source
3. Does the brand (company) purchase mined raw materials such as mica and gold from sources (e.g. mines) that are certified to e.g. have no child labor and no forced labour, and provide a better living standard for the farmers and workers who produce the raw materials, and/or is the brand equally involved in significant initiatives to achieve this? Coty does not mention the topic of social risk or certification for its mined ingredients from low wage countries. However, Coty has a "Conflict Mineral" declaration requirement and labor conditions described in their Supplier Code of Conduct (see link, pages 2-3). Source
4. Does the brand (company) purchase at least 50% of its mined raw materials such as mica and gold from sources (e.g. mines) that are certified to e.g. have no child labor and no forced labour, and provide a better living standard for the workers who produce the raw materials, and/or is the brand equally involved in significant initiatives to achieve this? See remark for labor conditions policy question 3. Source