FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEXFASHION
TRANSPARENCYINDEXAPRIL 2016

A

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX

02

WHY TRANSPARENCY IS THE BEGINNING OF A FASHION REVOLUTION

05

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

07

THE FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX RESULTS

13

WHAT DO THE RESULTS SHOW?

15

POSITIVE EXAMPLES

16

CONCLUSION17GET INVOLVED

18

REFERENCE & APPENDIX19

ABOUT THIS REPORTThe content of this publication can in no way betaken to reflect the views of any of the funders ofFashion Revolution.
© Fashion Revolution CIC 2016.
All rights reserved. This document is not to becopied or adapted without permission from Fashion
Revolution CIC.

01

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX

02

Three years ago on
24th April, 1,134
people were killedin the Rana Plaza
garment factory collapse
in Bangladesh.

The factories operating in thatbuilding made clothes for over adozen well-known international
clothing brands. It took weeks forsome companies to determine
whether they had contracts withthose factories despite their clothinglabels being found in the rubble.
Fashion Revolution and EthicalConsumer feel passionately thattragedies like Rana Plaza mustnever happen again. Today, bothpeople and the environment suffer
as a result of the way fashion is
made, sourced and purchased. It'stime for a Fashion Revolution, andwe believe that the beginning of thisprocess is transparency.

PHOTOGRAPHY BY JABER AL NAHIAN, ASITIMES AND SHARAT CHOWDHURY

WHY
TRANSPARENCYIS THE BEGINNING
OF A FASHIONREVOLUTIONFASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEXCOMPLEXITY OF SUPPLY CHAINSTHE IMPORTANCE OF TRANSPARENCY

Fashion supply chains are typically long and very
complex. Some brands may work with thousandsof factories at any given time – and that is justthe facilities that cut, sew and assemble ourgarments, but there are also further facilities
down the chain that dye, weave and finish
materials and farms that grow fibres too. During
the manufacturing process our clothes aretouched by a great many pairs of hands before
they reach the rails or shelves of the shop floor.

Lack of transparency costs lives. It is impossible
for companies to make sure human rights arerespected and that environmental practices are
sound without knowing where their products
are made, who is making them and underwhat conditions. If you can’t see it, you don’tknow it’s going on and you can’t fix it.

Many companies do not really know where
their clothes are being made. The vast majority
of today’s fashion brands do not own their
manufacturing facilities, making it difficult tomonitor or control working conditions throughout
the supply chain. A brand might place an orderwith one supplier, who carves up the orderand subcontracts the work to other factories.
This happens regularly across the industry andpresents a great challenge for brands themselves
as well as the people working in the supply
chain who become invisible in this process.

Transparency means companies know who
makes their products – from who stitchedthem right through to who dyed the fabric andwho farmed the cotton. When companies areworking in a transparent way, this also implies
openness, communication and accountability
across the supply chain and with the public too.
At the moment the public do not have enoughinformation about where and how their clothes
are made. Shoppers have the right to knowthat their money is not supporting exploitation,
human rights abuses and environmental
destruction. There is no way to hold companies
and governments to account if we can’t see
what is truly happening behind the scenes.
This is why transparency is essential.
Being transparent creates the opportunity
for collaborative action between companies,
governments, NGOs, unions and the
public to work towards building a fairer,
cleaner and safer fashion industry.

03

We need moretransparency fromthe fashion industry.
Transparency
involves openness,
communication
and accountability.

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX

04

THE FASHION
TRANSPARENCY
INDEX
As a first step, Fashion Revolution
and Ethical Consumer havepartnered up to publish a Fashion
Transparency Index which ranks
companies according to the level oftransparency in their supply chain.
The first edition of the Fashion
Transparency Index includes 40 of
the biggest global fashion brands,
which we have selected basedon annual turnover. We reliedon publicly available financial
information to choose this selectionof brands and their inclusion was
not voluntary. We aimed to choose
brands from a variety of sectors– high street, luxury, sportswear,
accessories, footwear and denim.
For consumers, the Fashion
Transparency Index aims to give
you some insight into just how little
we know about the things we buy
and wear. We hope it encourages
you to want to find out more
about the story of your clothes.

For brands and retailers, we hope
the Fashion Transparency Index
inspires you to publish more
about your policies, practices,
products and the people making
your clothes – answering thequestion #whomademyclothes.

We want more brands
and retailers to be able
to answer the question#whomademyclothes?

There is no doubt that the goal oftransparent fashion supply chainsis challenging. But we are beginningto see that some companies are
beginning to make a real effort
while others have a long way to go.
With this Index, we hope to track the
fashion industry’s progress towards
greater transparency, ensuring thattogether we are pushing for more
information and better practices.
Photography by @wearezrcl

Together EthicalConsumer and Fashion
Revolution wanted to findout what companies are
doing towards improvingsocial and environmental
standards and how muchof that information theyshare with the public.

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX

05

RESEARCH
METHODOLOGYThe Fashion
Transparency
Index uses a
broad brushstroke
approach.

The research has been designed to give you anillustrative look at how much brands know about
their supply chains, what kind of policies they havein place and importantly, how much information
they share with the public about their practices
and products. As such, the Index does not offer anin-depth analysis of the content of a company’s
policies or performance in any given area.
It uses a ratings methodology, which benchmarks
companies against current and basic best practicein supply chain transparency in five key areas:

POLICY &COMMITMENTTRACKING &TRACEABILITY

AUDITS &REMEDIATIONENGAGEMENT &COLLABORATIONGOVERNANCE

What are the standards
and goals the company
sets itself for the protectionof workers and theenvironment acrossits supply chain? What
information do they makepublic about these policies
and commitments?

How well does the company
know its supply chain,
and what information
do they share publicly
about who and where
products are made?

How does the company go
about checking its supply
chain for compliance with
its policies, international
standards and local laws?
How does the company deal
with its suppliers that failto meet these obligations?
How much information
do they make public
about these activities?

To what extent does thecompany work with multistakeholder initiatives,
NGOs, unions and civilsociety to tackle socialand environmental issues
in its supply chain?
And are these activities
communicated publicly?

What checks and balances
does the company havein place and who is
responsible within its
own organisation for
ensuring initiatives that
address labour standards
are implemented?
And what information
regarding governanceis publicly available?

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX

06

RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
continued
All 40 companies included in theindex were invited to fill out aquestionnaire, which helped us tobetter understand their policies,
activities and communications.
In total we received 10 replies, andthe other 30 were scored based
upon information available on theirwebsite and in their annual reports.
For the companies that did not reply,
it is impossible for our researchers
to know anything beyond what
they are communicating publicly
online. Therefore these companies
may have received lower scores
while companies who did fill out thequestionnaire had the opportunity
to tell us more and thus potentiallyscore higher. Any company wishing tohave their score updated may do so
if new information is made available
for our research team to investigate.
This means that overall thecompanies publishing the mostinformation about their supply chain
practices online or via other public
communication channels will likely
have received the higher scores.

Broadly, under each key area
marks were allocated on a sliding
scale summarised below:
LOW RATING
Little to no evidence that thecompany has more than a Codeof Conduct in place. The company
is making little effort towards beingtransparent about their supply
chain practices.
LOW-MIDDLE /HIGH-MIDDLE RATINGThe company is making somenotable efforts on social andenvironmental issues, but could
be doing much more.
TOP RATINGThe company is making significant
efforts in the given areas, andhas made some or most of thisinformation publicly available.

The top scores do not mean thatthe company has a fully transparent
supply chain or is acting beyond its
policy commitments. Whilst thesecompanies should be congratulated
for providing more information
about their practices and products
than most, there is a long way to
go before any of the companies
included in this Index will be able tofully answer #whomademyclothes.

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX

07

THE RESULTS

0-25%

26-50%

51-75%

76-100%ChanelRalph Lauren

American Eagle

H&M

HermesPolo Ralph Lauren

Gildan Activewear

InditexClaire's Accessories

URBN

UniqloLevi Strauss & Co

Forever 21

New Look

Converse

Fendi

Gucci

Nike

LVMH

Victoria's Secret

PVH

Monsoon Accessorize

Hugo Boss

Gap

Prada

J CrewPrimark

Michael Kors

ASOS

AdidasAeropostale

Burberry

Under Armour

Coach

LOW RATING

LOW-MIDDLE

Lululemon
Next
Abercrombie & Fitch
Arcadia GroupTopshopMango

HIGH-MIDDLE RATINGTOP RATINGFASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEXSOCIAL &ENVIRONMENTAL
AUDITS &REMEDIATION %ENGAGEMENT &COLLABORATION%GOVERNANCE
%

0

0

29

0

0

10

Hermes

43

0

21

0

14

17

Claire's Accessories

29

0

29

0

14

17

Forever 21

14

0

43

0

14

19

Fendi

14

0

43

0

14

19

14

0

43

0

14

19

Monsoon Accessorize

29

11

29

10

14

20

Prada

43

22

7

20

29

21

Michael Kors

29

0

50

0

0

21

Aeropostale

29

11

43

0

14

24

Under Armour

29

0

43

10

29

25

57

0

57

0

29

33

57

0

57

0

29

33

LVMH

*Berluti, Céline, Dior, Donna Karan, EDUN, Emilio Pucci, Fendi, Givenchy, Kenzo, Marc Jacobs,
Moynat, Loewe, Loro Piano, Louis Vuitton, Nicholas Kirkwood, Thomas Pink, R.M. Williams*Prada, Miu Miu, Church’s, Car Shoe, Marchesi 1824

Ralph Lauren*Including Club Monaco

Polo Ralph Lauren

TOTAL SCORE%

TRACKING &TRACEABILITY%

ChanelQUESTIONNAIRE%

POLICY &COMMITMENTS%

THE RESULTS
continued

08

ENGAGEMENT &COLLABORATION%GOVERNANCE
%

33

43

0

43

33

New Look

57

33

21

50

43

37

Gucci

64

33

29

10

43

38

Victoria's Secret

64

0

64

10

43

40

Hugo Boss

50

11

71

0

43

42

J Crew

57

22

57

10

43

42

ASOS

64

28

43

20

57

43

Burberry

64

6

50

20

71

43

Coach

57

11

64

0

57

43

Lululemon

71

39

50

20

29

44

Next

71

28

43

50

43

45

Abercrombie & Fitch

71

11

64

20

43

45

64

50

50

10

57

49

64

50

50

10

57

49

URBN

*Urban Outfitters, Anthropologie, Free People, BHLDN, Terrain, Vetri Family*part of the Kering group

Arcadia GroupTopshop*Topshop, Burton Menswear, Dorothy Perkins, Evans,
Miss Selfridge, Outfit, Topman, Wallis

TOTAL SCORE%SOCIAL &ENVIRONMENTAL
AUDITS &REMEDIATION %29

THE RESULTS
continued

QUESTIONNAIRE%

TRACKING &TRACEABILITY%

09

POLICY &COMMITMENTS%

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEXFASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEXSOCIAL &ENVIRONMENTAL
AUDITS &REMEDIATION %ENGAGEMENT &COLLABORATION%GOVERNANCE
%

57

33

64

40

43

50

American Eagle

57

28

79

30

43

52

Gildan Activewear

57

22

71

40

71

55

Uniqlo

79

11

71

40

71

56

Converse

79

39

57

20

86

57

Nike

*Nike, Nike+, Jordan, Converse, Hurley

79

39

57

20

86

57

PVH

*Calvin Klein, Tommy Hilfiger, Van Heusen, IZOD, ARROW, Speedo, Warner's, Olga

64

44

79

40

43

58

Gap

*Gap, Banana Republic, Old Navy, Athleta, Intermix

100

44

71

50

57

65

Primark

86

56

64

60

71

67

Adidas

79

72

71

80

57

69

79

83

71

80

71

76

79

61

93

80

100

76

86

61

86

60

86

77

H&M
Inditex*H&M, COS, Weekday, Monki, Cheap Monday, & Other Stories*Zara, Bershka, Pull&Bear, Massimo Dutti, Stradivarius, Oysho, Zara Home,Uterqüe

Levi Strauss & Co

*Levi’s, Dockers, Signature, Denizen

TOTAL SCORE%

TRACKING &TRACEABILITY
%

Mango

QUESTIONNAIRE%

POLICY &COMMITMENTS%

THE RESULTS
continued

10

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX

11

THE RESULTS
continued

42%

77%

10%

AVERAGE SCORETOP SCORE

BOTTOM SCORE

for the 40 brands
we surveyed

Levis Strauss & Co

ChanelFASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX

12A ROUGH GUIDETO THE SCORING
0-25%

26-50%

51-75%

76-100%

These companies have little to no
information about their supply chain
practices available to the public.
Many of these companies seem to
do little more than have a Code of
Conduct in place – whilst this might
have been best practice in the 1990s,
Corporate Responsibility has moved
on a great deal in the last twenty years.
These companies appear to be thoseat the beginning of the road towards
best practice and transparency.

These companies seem to be making
some efforts to manage and improvetheir supply chains but make little
supply chain information publicly
available. These companies still havea long way to go towards supply
chain transparency.

These companies seem to be doing a
bit more than the others when it comesto having policies and commitments
in place and auditing and reporting
activities. Despite making some goodefforts to monitor standards, thesecompanies seem to be lacking in many
areas and offer some public supply
chain transparency but not enough.

Only three companies have scoredin this range. Levi Strauss & Co
scored highest with 77. They are
doing more than most other brands
to communicate publicly about their
supply chain practices. They seem tohave many robust systems in place
for tracking, tracing, monitoring andimproving labour and environmental
practices across the supply chain.
The other two companies to score a top
rating are H&M and Inditex both come injust one percentage point behind Levi's
at 76%. However all the companies inthis section still have a long way to
go towards being fully transparent.

POSITIVE STEPS TAKEN:
MinimalROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT:All areas

POSITIVE STEPS TAKEN:
Policies and commitments in placeand some steps taken in other areas
ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT:
Auditing & reporting; tracking& traceability; engagement &collaboration & governance; andmore transparent communications.

POSITIVE STEPS TAKEN:
Policy & commitment;
auditing & reporting
ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT:
Tracking & traceability; engagement& collaboration; governance; andmore transparent communications.

POSITIVE STEPS TAKEN:
All areas
ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT:
More stakeholder engagement; better
tracing of products down to sourcesof raw material; and even moretransparent communications withthe public.

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX

13

WHAT DO THE
RESULTS SHOW?
Strongest areas:

POLICY & COMMITMENT

AUDITING & REMEDIATIONIn this area, the majority of the companiesscore well on having policies onenvironmental and labour standards in placeand communicating them publicly. But there
is a noticeable absence of long-term thinking
in their sustainability strategies.

Most companies provide information on audit
procedures and schedules publicly, alongwith some limited disclosure of audit results.
Levi Strauss & Co appears to publish the mostinformation about their monitoring practices
and corrective action plans.

Only three of the companies (Gap, Primark,Levi Strauss & Co.) appear to be looking to the
future with clear long-range (2020 or beyond)aims, which include defined end-goals andquantified targets along the way – as well as
an explicit commitment to transparency.

Roughly 28% of companies do notcommunicate about taking any special
measures to monitor the more difficult issues
in the supply chain (eg. improving conditions
for homeworkers, eliminating forced labour,or eradicating Sumangali practices, a formof child labour), nor disclose in detail how
they work with factories that show noncompliances in order to ensure they improve
working conditions.

H&M, Inditex and Nike (which includes
Converse) are the only other companies
to publish quantifiable targets towards
improving standards and performanceacross the supply chain over time. However,they do not appear to communicate any
specific targets on transparency.
Additionally, only a few companies
show evidence of policies that target theengagement of suppliers further down
the supply chain, eg. engaging directlywith fabric mills.

Many companies surveyed have legal
obligations to monitor and disclose supply
chain issues via the California Transparency
in Supply Chains Act of 2010, which means
a company must disclose on its website its
initiatives to eradicate slavery and humantrafficking from its direct supply chain for
the goods offered for sale. A company
must disclose to what extent it: (1) engages
in verification of product supply chainsto evaluate and address risks of humantrafficking and slavery; (2) conducts auditsof suppliers; (3) requires direct suppliersto certify that materials incorporated into
the product comply with the laws regarding
slavery and human trafficking of thecountries in which they are doing business;(4) maintains accountability standards andprocedures for employees or contractors thatfail to meet company standards regarding
slavery and human trafficking; and (5)provides employees and management
training on slavery and human trafficking.
A similar law has just come into effect in theUK, the Modern Slavery Act 2015 and applies
to companies with an annual turnover of £36
million or more. However, most luxury brands
surveyed offer little to no public information
about how they monitor working conditions,with the exception of Burberry, Hugo Boss andMichael Kors.

GOVERNANCE
60% of companies surveyed appear to have asystem in place to monitor compliance withlabour standards, and to continually improvestandards, with responsibility at the executive
board level.

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX

14

WHAT DO THE
RESULTS SHOW?
Weakest areas:

TRACKING & TRACEABILITYENGAGEMENT & COLLABORATION

Just over half the companies (60%) surveyed
seem to be making some efforts in thisarea, such as holding internal databasesof their cut-make-trim (CMT) suppliers– the 'first tier' of the supply chain.

Only 11 of the companies in the Index show
evidence of working with trade unions, civilsociety or NGOs on the ground in suppliercountries to improve working conditions.
Trade unions in particular are vital in providing
garment workers with the means to demand
better working conditions and pay fromtheir employers.

Only five brands (Adidas, H&M, Levi Strauss& Co, Nike – which includes Converse)reflect best practice in holding a publicly
available list of all or the vast majority of
their CMT suppliers. 24 companies statethat they track their suppliers and/or theirlocations, but do not publish this information
publicly. 12 companies appear not to track
the first tier of their supply chain, or at least
this information is not publicly available.
Only two companies (Adidas and H&M) publish
details of their second-tier suppliers (fabricand yarn mills or subcontractors). However,
the majority of the 40 companies surveyed
appear to have little (30% of companies
surveyed) or nothing (53%) in place todemonstrate that they monitor where raw
materials and other resources (such as zips
and other component parts) come from.
The ‘second tier’ of the supply chain(and third, fourth, etc.) seems to remain
largely unknown territory for mostcompanies surveyed.

The Engagement & Collaboration part of theIndex also looks at membership of MultiStakeholder Initiatives (MSIs). MSIs bring
together lots of different stakeholders in order
to find common solutions to problems, suchas the Ethical Trading Initiative, Sustainable
Apparel Coalition, Textile Exchange and others.
Our list of MSIs includes the Bangladesh
Accord, an initiative set up in the wake of
the Rana Plaza factory collapse, working toensure improved health and safety standards
in Bangladesh's garment factories. Given that
Bangladesh is the world's second largest
garment exporter, many of the companies
included in the Index are likely to be sourcing
from the country. In this Index we consideredparticipation in the Accord important.
However, not every company in this Index will
be sourcing from Bangladesh but because
most do not publish their factory lists we do
not know which companies are sourcing
from this country.

A majority of companies (26) are involved withat least a few of the eight MSIs that we lookedfor engagement with. But no company is amember of all eight initiatives. 14 companies
surveyed, mostly luxury brands, do notappear to engage with any of them at all,showing a lack of industry collaboration onsocial and environmental issues.

GOVERNANCE
19 of the companies surveyed (40%) do notappear to have a system in place to monitor
compliance with labour standards and tocontinually improve standards, both at Board
level (eg. an executive corporate responsibility
committee) and at departmental level(eg. a Social Responsibility team). Human rights
and environmental protection should be theresponsibility of company executives as well as
at department level. In addition 15 companies(38%) show no evidence of incorporating labour
standards into buying practices.
We are also surprised by the large number ofcompanies (30%) that do not appear to havewhistleblowing or confidential complaint
mechanisms in place for workers in their
supply chain, or at least none that theymention publicly. This means that workers
may have little chance to speak up aboutpoor conditions or abuse, or may not be able
to do so without fear of repercussion.

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX

15

POSITIVE
EXAMPLES'SUPPLIER CLUSTERS'Inditex has 10 supplier clusters in thegeographic areas in which it has alarger and stronger presence: Spain,
Portugal, Morocco and Turkey (thesefour countries comprise about 60%of the company's supply chain);
India, South East Asia, Bangladesh,
China, Brazil and Argentina. Theseclusters covered 91% of Inditex’s
production in 2014 and "areregularly consistently under review".
Through these clusters, Inditex
works with trade unions, NGOs
and civil society on labour rights.
PUBLISHING FACTORY LISTS
Adidas publishes a list of
subcontractors (eg. specialist
printing, mould production, or
embroidery services) as well asa CMT list on its website. H&M has
mapped 99% of its production
volume, publicly publishes 95% of
its first tier CMT list and 35% of its
fabric and yarn suppliers. In this area
both Adidas and H&M demonstrated
the highest levels of transparencyof all 40 companies in this Index.

WORKING WITH NGOS
AND TRADE UNIONS
Gildan works with the Maquila
Solidarity Network - a labour
and women's rights advocacy
organisation that promotes solidarity
with grassroots groups in Mexico,Central America and Asia, andworks to improve conditions inmaquiladora factories and export
processing zones. The company
says: “Through dialogue with MSN,
we have applied their input in thedevelopment of a remediation
plan following the closure of our
El Progreso plant in Honduras.
Since then, Gildan has beenworking collaboratively with the
MSN regarding labour practices
and freedom of association at its
various manufacturing locations.
We continue to remain in dialogue
with MSN regarding our corporatesocial responsibility practices.”

INTEGRATED REPORTING

GOING BEYOND 1ST TIER

Kering Group (the company thatowns Gucci) has developed a tool
to measure and calculate thefinancial value of its environmental
impacts throughout its supply chain– known as Environmental Profit &Loss. Its 2013 report revealed that
93% of the Group’s environmental
impact falls within its supply
chain. In 2015 Kering made the
EP&L methodology open-source.

Gap partnered with 20 strategic
mills in China, India, Pakistan andTaiwan to conduct environmental
assessments using the Sustainable
Apparel Coalition’s Higg Index andhas since expanded the programme
to include 20 more strategic millsin 2015.

PUBLISHING LIFECYCLEANALYSIS RESEARCH
Levi Strauss & Co has set itself thegoal to increase the percentage
of its own products made with
Water<Less™ techniques to 80%
by 2020 - a technique to reducewater used in wet processing ofjeans and other clothes. Levi’s has
also published a lifecycle analysis
of a pair of jeans, which sets out
the impacts at different stagesof manufacture. The company
has made its research publicly
available online so that othercompanies can make use of it.

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX

16

CONCLUSION

Big global brands havea lot of work to do toshow their commitment
to transparency.

Some companies are taking steps
in the right direction, Levi Strauss &Co, H&M and Inditex offer the mostinformation about their policies,
strategies and performance on socialand environmental issues throughout
the supply chain. However, there isa lot they don’t tell the public too,
especially when you look past thefirst-tier.
Publishing supplier lists for the
first-tier is possible; some brands
have done it but not nearly enough.
Inditex says it doesn’t publish its
factory list for commercial reasons,but we have to move beyond thatline of thinking. If H&M, Adidas, Nikeand Levi’s can do it and remain
profitable then other companies
can too. This is an important firststep to ensure that brands areaccountable to their stakeholders
and to their customers - those asking#whomademyclothes now numberin the millions.

Overall, every brand should bedoing more to communicate withthe public about their strategies
and performance on social andenvironmental issues throughout the
supply chain. But the luxury brands
are the biggest laggards; mostpublish nothing more than a Codeof Conduct.
Going forward Fashion Revolution willencourage brands to publish moredetails about the suppliers they workwith, and we will celebrate themwhen they do.
We would also like to see brands
put in place sustainability
strategies, covering both social andenvironmental improvements, withclearer long-term goals that include
timelines, quantifiable targets and an
explicit commitment towards greatertransparency. This shows that brands
are serious about doing more for thepeople who make their products.

Going forward
Fashion Revolution willencourage brands topublish more details
about the suppliers
they work with, andwe will celebratethem when they do.

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX17

GET INVOLVEDSHOW YOUR LABEL__________ASK THE BRAND#WHOMADEMYCLOTHES?

This Index is a living
document and is open
to comments andcontributions fromresearchers, NGOs
and unions.
We also invite the 40 companiesscored in this Index to provide
further information in order
to update their score. Where
companies did not respond to
our questionnaire, we were only
able to assign marks based on
the information we could find on
the company’s website or publicly
available elsewhere. As such,the scoring is likely to evolve
over time when new information
becomes available.

We further invite brands andretailers over £36 million annual
turnover to volunteer to be
included in future editions of
the Fashion Transparency Index.
Next year we aim to include
100 brands and retailers in thisIndex.
If you are a consumer andwould like to see another brandon the Fashion Transparency
Index, let them know on social
media or write to them. Don’t
forget to use the hashtag#whomademyclothes.

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX

18

REFERENCE& APPENDIX
To see the full methodology
and research behind thescores, please visit:www.ethicalconsumer.org/
ethicalcampaigns/fashionrevolution

10 brand questionnaires completed
in March 2016.
Business Insider (6 July 2015). The top
10 clothing companies in America.
Retrieved: uk.businessinsider.com/
the-10-biggest-apparel-companiesin-the-us-2015-7?r=US&IR=T
California Transparency in Supply
Chains Act of 2010. Retrieved:www.state.gov/documents/organization/164934.pdf
Chain Store Guide. The Top 100
Apparel Specialty Stores Ranked
by Industry Sales. Retrieved:www.chainstoreguide.com/static_
content/pdf/Apparel_Top_100.pdf
Millward Brown (2015). BrandZ Top
100 Most Valuable Global Brands.
Retrieved: www.millwardbrown.com/
BrandZ/2015/Global/2015_BrandZ_
Top100_Chart.pdf
Modern Slavery Act 2015, United
Kingdom. Retrieved: www.legislation.
gov.uk/ukpga/2015/30/contents/
enactedReuters (9 July 2013). Bangladesh
garment sales soar despite
deadly incidents. Retrieved:www.reuters.com/article/usbangladesh-economy-exportsidUSBRE96806020130709
Statista (2015). Brand value ofthe leading 10 apparel brands
worldwide in 2015. Retrieved:www.statista.com/statistics/267931/
brand-value-of-the-leading-10apparel-brands-worldwide/
The Bangladesh Accord on Fireand Building Safety. Retrieved:
bangladeshaccord.org
The Richest (17 December 2013).
10 Most Powerful Luxury Brands
in the World. Retrieved:
www.therichest.com/expensivelifestyle/fashion/10-most-powerfulluxury-fashion-brands-in-theworld/?view=all
The UK Fashion Spot (1 July 2014).
The 5 Most Valuable Fast Fashion
Brands. Retrieved:
www.theukfashionspot.co.uk/runwaynews/422009-the-most-valuablefast-fashion-brands/

FASHION REVOLUTION | FASHION TRANSPARENCY INDEX

19

ABOUT
THIS REPORTThis research was
designed by EthicalConsumer in partnershipwith Fashion Revolution.

The research was carried out by
Bryony Moore, Ethical Consumer
research associate, with additional
input from Tim Hunt (EthicalConsumer) and Sarah Ditty(Fashion Revolution).

FASHION REVOLUTION is a global movement thatwants to radically change the way fashion is made,sourced and consumed. We believe in an industry thatvalues people, the environment, creativity and profit
in equal measure. We have teams in 89 countries
that want to see fashion become a force for good.
www.fashionrevolution.org@Fash_Rev
Fash_rev
facebook.com/fashionrevolution.org

This report was co-written by Bryony
Moore at Ethical Consumer and Sarah
Ditty; and designed by Heather Knight.
Thanks for further input from Carry
Somers at Fashion Revolution andthe entire Fashion Revolution Global
Coordination Team.

ETHICAL CONSUMER is a research co-operativewith a mission to make business more sustainablethrough consumer action. For over 25 years wehave been the heart of the ethical consumer
movement, helping consumers to shop ethically,
campaigners to challenge corporate power andbusinesses to improve their supply chain.

www.ethicalconsumer.org@ec_magazine

facebook.com/ethicalconsumermagazine