|Aveda Pty Ltd||AUS||website|
| Aveda Corporation
owns 100% of Aveda Pty Ltd
| Estee Lauder Companies Inc.
owns 100% of Aveda Corporation
|Aveda Pty Ltd|
|No assessment data currently available for Aveda Pty Ltd|
Seven Aveda products are certified by Cradle to Cradle, a new paradigm in design which attempts to eliminate waste. These products are 95 percent botanical, and packaged in packaging with very high recycled content. Aveda are the first company in the beauty industry to receive this endorsement.
[Source 2010][More on Eco-Certification]
This company owns brands which have been awarded Positive Luxury's Trust Mark. To be accredited brands are assessed in the following areas: philanthropy, environmental, social, innovation, community and governance.
[Source 2015][More on Eco-Certification]
This company has a number of environmental claims on its website including use of wind power, responsible packaging, and use of plant-based ingredients.
[Source 2011][More on Environmental Claims]
As listed on the We Mean Business website, this company has committed to the following climate action initiatives: commit to 100% renewable power.
[Source 2016][More on Climate Change]
|Estee Lauder Companies Inc.|
This company received a score of 9 out of a possible total of 9 in the WWF Palm Oil Buyers' Scorecard 2016, which rates companies on what they are - and aren't - doing to prevent the negative environmental and social impacts of palm oil production.
[Source 2016][More on Palm Oil]
The Forest 500 identifies, ranks, and tracks the governments, companies and financial institutions worldwide that together could virtually eradicate tropical deforestation. Rankings are based on their public policies and commitments and potential impacts on tropical forests in the context of forest risk commodities (palm oil, soya, beef, leather, timber, and pulp and paper). This company received a score of 4/5.
[Source 2016][More on Forests]
Ethical Consumer has ranked companies' practices and policies in relation to their palm oil sourcing for the Rainforest Foundation/Ethical Consumer palm oil campaign. This company received a 'red' rating.
[Source 2016][More on Palm Oil]
In 2016 Greenpeace East Asia ranked the world's 30 biggest personal care companies on their commitment to eliminating microbeads from their personal care products. The scorecard was based on four main criteria: commitment & transparency, definition, deadline and global application. This company was one of the lowest ranked. Microbeads are not retained by wastewater treatment and end up in the ocean where they are a threat to the marine environment.
[Source 2016][More on Oceans]
As You Sow's 2016 report, Mining the Disclosures, is a deep analysis of 230 companies' human rights performance in relation to sourcing conflict minerals from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). This company's score was below 40% (Weak).
[Source 2016][More on Human Rights]
This company appears on PETA's (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, USA) 'Companies That Do Test On Animals' list, signifying that they manufacture products that are tested on animals at some stage of development.
[Source 2015][More on Animal Testing]
This company received a score of 39.8/100 in the Newsweek Green Rankings 2016, which ranks the world's largest publicly traded companies on eight indicators covering energy, greenhouse gases, water, waste, fines and penalties, linking executive pay to sustainability targets, board-level committee oversight of environmental issues and third-party audits. Ranking methodology by Corporate Knights and HIP Investor.
[Source 2016][More on Sustainability Reporting]
Rank a Brand searches the websites of brands for the answers to carefully targeted questions. From this they calculate sustainability scores based on the themes of environment, climate, labor issues, and transparency. Brands owned by this company received an 'E', the lowest possible score.
[Source 2016][More on Sustainability Reporting]
The Union of Concerned Scientists' 2015 Palm Oil Scorecard scores America's top brands on their commitments to use deforestation-free palm oil. This company received a score of 28.3/100, signifying little commitment.
[Source 2015][More on Palm Oil]
Testing commissioned by Friends of the Earth Australia found nanoparticles in foundations and concealers sold by Estee Lauder.
[Source 2009][More on Product Safety]
In Jan 2012 a Paris appeals court upheld a 40 million euro fine imposed in 2006 by the French competition watchdog, which said the companies involved had reached illicit agreements on price fixing, enforced by procedures to monitor prices in outlets and backed up by commercial threats for non-compliance. Thirteen leading perfume and luxury goods companies were fined.
[Source 2012][More on Governance]
This company uses microbeads in some of its personal care products. These particles are not retained by wastewater treatment so end up in the ocean. While microbeads aren't thought to be a health hazard to consumers, they are a threat to the marine environment.
[Source 2014][More on Oceans]
Skin Deep is an online safety guide to cosmetics and personal care products and their potential hazards and health concerns, with over 69,000 products rated from 1 (low hazard) to 10 (high hazard).
[Source 2016][More on Product Safety]
This company does not to test on animals themselves, but they continue to buy, use and benefit financially from chemical ingredients that have recently been tested on animals by their suppliers.
[Source 2012][More on Animal Testing]
In 2005, Estee Lauder and other major cosmetics manufacturers and retailers announced they would give away $175 million in products to settle a class-action lawsuit accusing the companies of price fixing. [Listed under information due to age of court date]
[Source 2005][More on Governance]
This company claims to source less than 10 per cent of its mica from India, but was working with a local community organisation to eliminate child labour. Estee Lauder has partnered with Indian NGO Bachpan Bachao Andolan (BBA) since 2006, to promote access to education as an approach to work towards the elimination of child labour in mica-sourcing communities.
[Source 2014][More on Workers Rights]
This company is a Gold Member of the Sustainable Brands Network, the leading peer to peer, learning and networking group designed to support brands in meeting their sustainability goals and ultimately become those leaders of the next sustainable economy.
[Source 2016][More on Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives]
This company is a member of the Responsible Mica Initiative, a Do-Tank which aims to eradicate child labour and unacceptable working conditions in the Indian mica supply chain by joining forces across industries.
[Source 2017][More on Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives]
The California Transparency in Supply Chains Act of 2010 (SB 657) requires companies operating in California to disclose their efforts to eradicate slavery and human trafficking from their direct supply chains. KnowTheChain.org has examined this company's disclosure statement and concluded that it addresses the majority of SB 657 requirements. Follow the link to see this company's disclosure statement.
[Source 2013][More on Workers Rights]
Call to boycott by BDS due to involvement in Israel. [This assessment has not been used in calculation of ratings].
[Source 2009][More on Politics]
Green America's Responsible Shopper provides details about the corporate responsibility records of well-known companies. Follow the link to see this company's profile. [Last updated 2009]
OpenSecrets.org tracks the influence of money on U.S. politics, and how that money affects policy and citizens' lives. Follow link to see this company's record of political donations, lobbying, outside spending and more.
|Company Structure||Wholly-owned subsidiary|
|Address||Level 1/100 Dorcas St, South Melbourne, VIC, 3205, Australia|
|Phone||03 9948 8300|