|Danisco Australia Pty Ltd||AUS||website|
| Danisco A/S
owns 100% of Danisco Australia Pty Ltd
| DuPont de Nemours Inc
owns 100% of Danisco A/S
|Danisco Australia Pty Ltd|
|No assessment data currently available for Danisco Australia Pty Ltd|
|No assessment data currently available for Danisco A/S|
|DuPont de Nemours Inc|
In 2020, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate change risk. Responding companies are scored across four key areas: disclosure; awareness; management; and leadership. This company received a CDP Climate Change Score of A-.
Source: CDP (2020)
The WWF Palm Oil Buyers Scorecard 2019 assesses 173 companies on the commitments they have made, and the actions they have taken, to ensure that there is no destruction of nature including no deforestation along their supply chains; and support a responsible and sustainable palm oil industry beyond their own supply chain. This company is rated 'well on the path' with a score of 15.1 out of a possible total of 22.
Source: WWF Palm Oil Buyers Scorecard 2019 (2019)
In 2020, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts to manage and govern freshwater resources. Responding companies are scored on six key metrics: transparency; governance & strategy; measuring & monitoring; risk assessment; targets & goals; and value chain engagement. This company received a CDP Water Security Score of B.
Source: CDP (2020)
This company is listed as having best practice on a report card on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equality in corporate America.
Source: Human Rights Campaign (2020)
The Talking Trash 2020 report by Changing Markets investigates the corporate playbook of false solutions to the plastic crisis. It found that the industry is actively delaying and derailing ambitious action on plastic pollution in its fight to maintain business as usual for as long as possible. For example, this plastic producing company is signed up to one nice-sounding voluntary initiative to address plastic waste, while also participating in 5 industry associations which lobby against legislation that could restrict plastic, or make corporations responsible for managing the waste they create, financially or otherwise.
Source: Changing Markets (2020)
This company received a score of 8/100 (retrieved 10-Oct-2020) in the Corporate Information Transparency Index (CITI), a system for evaluating supply chain practices in China, particularly in regards to environmental management and water pollution. Scores are calculated using government compliance data, online monitoring data, and third-party environmental audits, as well as trends in the environmental performance of factories in the company's supply chains.
Source: IPE (2020)
This company received a score of 16.8/100 in the Newsweek Green Ranking 2017, 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: Newsweek (2017)
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, soy, beef, leather, timber and paper). This company received a score of 30%.
Source: Forest 500 (2020)
JUST Capital polls Americans every year to identify the issues that matter most in defining just business behaviour. For their 2021 rankings the public identified 19 issues, which are organised under the headings Workers, Communities, Customers, Shareholders and Environment. JUST Capital then define metrics that map to those issues and track and analyse the largest, publicly traded U.S. companies. This analysis powers their rankings, in which this company ranked 588th of 928 companies, and 19th of 28 Chemicals companies.
Source: JUST Capital (2020)
Named one of Multinational Monitor's '10 Worst Corporations' in 2005. [Listed under Information due to age of report]
Source: Multinational Monitor (2005)
This company has signed a letter of intent (https://bit.ly/2rdBlwn) to participate in the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, which claims will lift 50 million people in Africa out of poverty by 2022. But according to a 2015 report by ActionAid, the scheme will benefit multinational companies at the expense of small-scale farmers and is likely to increase poverty and inequality in Africa. Launched in 2012, the New Alliance provides aid money from rich countries like the US and the UK, and helps big business invest in the African agricultural sector. But in return, African countries are required to change their land, seed and trade rules in favour of big business. The New Alliance will: Make it easier for big corporations to grab land in Africa: Prevent farmers from breeding, saving and exchanging seeds: Heavily promote chemical fertilisers and pesticides, which increase farmers risk of debt as well as damaging the environment and farmers' health: Replace family farms with low paid, insecure jobs; and Prevent countries from restricting crop exports, even at times of domestic shortage.
Source: Action Aid (2015)
In 2019 the median pay for a worker at this company was US$86,294. The CEO was paid 135 times this amount. Exorbitant CEO pay is a major contributor to rising inequality. CEOs are getting more because of their power to set pay, not because they are increasing productivity or possess specific, high-demand skills. The economy would suffer no harm if CEOs were paid less (or taxed more). In contrast, the CEO-to-typical-worker compensation ratio was 20-to-1 in 1965 and 58-to-1 in 1989.
Source: AFL-CIO (2020)
As listed on the We Mean Business website, this company has committed to the following climate action initiatives: develop low carbon action plan.
Source: We Mean Business (2017)
This company appears on the 2021 Bloomberg Gender-Equality Index, signifying a commitment to supporting gender equality through policy development, representation, and transparency.
Source: Bloomberg (2021)
This company is a member of the Circular Economy 100 (CE100) Network, a multi-stakeholder platform run by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation. The CE100 is the world's leading circular economy network, and facilitates market making by providing collaborative and pre-competitive opportunities which bring together business, innovators, cities and governments, universities, and thought leaders.
Source: Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2019)
This company is a participant of Make Fashion Circular, a multi-stakeholder platform run by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, which drives collaboration between industry leaders and other key stakeholders to create a textiles economy fit for the 21st century. Its ambition is to ensure clothes are made from safe and renewable materials, new business models increase their use, and old clothes are turned into new. This new textiles economy would benefit business, society, and the environment.
Source: Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2019)
This company is a member of the Responsible Minerals Initiative (formerly the Conflict-Free Sourcing Initiative), which helps companies address conflict minerals issues in their supply chains. The RMI provides information on conflict-free smelters and refiners, common tools to gather sourcing information, and forums for exchanging best practices on addressing conflict minerals. Membership is open to companies that use or transact in tantalum, tin, tungsten or gold (3TG). Founded in 2008 by members of the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition and the Global e-Sustainability Initiative.
Source: RMI (2019)
This company is a member of the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI) Platform, the main food industry initiative supporting the development of sustainable agriculture worldwide. Created by Nestle, Unilever and Danone in 2002, the SAI Platform is a non-profit organization to facilitate sharing, at precompetitive level, of knowledge and initiatives to support the development and implementation of sustainable agriculture practices involving the different stakeholders of the food chain.
Source: SAI Platform (2019)
This company is a member of the Supplier Ethical Data Exchange (Sedex), a not-for-profit, membership organisation that leads work with buyers and suppliers to deliver improvements in responsible and ethical business practices in global supply chains. Tens of thousands of companies use Sedex to manage their performance around labour rights, health & safety, the environment and business ethics.
Source: Sedex (2018)
This company is a member of the Sustainable Apparel Coalition, a multi-stakeholder initiative launched in March 2011 by a group of global apparel and footwear companies and non-profit organizations (representing nearly one third of the global market share for apparel and footwear). The Coalition's goals are to reduce the apparel industry's environmental and social impact, and to develop a universal index to measure environmental and social performance of apparel products.
Source: Sustainable Apparel Coalition (2020)
This company is a Silver 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: Sustainable Brands (2018)
This company is a member of the Textile Exchange, a global non-profit that works closely with its members to drive textile industry transformation in preferred fibres, integrity and standards and responsible supply networks. They identify and share best practices regarding farming, materials, processing, traceability and product end-of-life in order to reduce the textile industry's impact on the world's water, soil and air, and the human population.
Source: Textile Exchange (2019)
The United Nations Global Compact asks companies to embrace, support and enact, within their sphere of influence, a set of 10 values in the areas of human rights, labour standards, the environment, and anti-corruption. However it's non-binding nature has been widely criticised, and many signatory corporations continue to violate the Compact's values.
Source: UN Global Compact (2020)
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: company website (2013)
Friends of the Earth's 2014 report "Tiny Ingredients, Big Risks" names this company as one of over 200 transnational food companies engaged in nanotechnology research and development, and on their way to commercializing products. New studies are adding to a growing body of scientific evidence indicating nanomaterials may be toxic to humans and the environment.
Source: FOE (2014)
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.
Source: Open Secrets (2014)
The Corporate Research Project's Corporate Rap Sheets are dossiers summarising the most significant crimes, violations and other questionable activities of the world's largest and most controversial companies. Follow link to see this company's Corporate Rap Sheet. DuPont's "chemistry brought with it serious environmental hazards such as depletion of the atmosphere's ozone layer; fungicides that killed plants as well as fungi; carcinogenic chemicals related to the production of non-stick coatings; and serious pollution problems at many of the company's plants, including those in Delaware, a state that DuPont long controlled as a virtual fiefdom. DuPont also has an abysmal labor record, both in its decades of resistance to unionization drives and in allowing conditions in its workplaces that resulted in elevated levels of injury and disease."
Source: Corporate Research Project (2018)
|Employees||56 in 2008 in Australia|
|Address||45-47 Green St, Botany, NSW, 2019, Australia|
|Phone||02 9384 5000|
|Fax||02 9384 5046|