Abercrombie & Fitch
Casual wear for consumers aged 18 to 22.
|Abercrombie & Fitch Co
|Abercrombie & Fitch Co
In 2022, 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 B.
Source: CDP (2022)
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 (2021)
The 2021 Gender Benchmark ranks 35 companies from the apparel sector on their efforts to drive gender equality and women's empowerment across their entire value chain. This company ranked #14/35, with a total score of 40.1/100.
Source: World Benchmarking Alliance (2021)
Female migrants employed in garment factories in Bangalore, India are recruited with false promises about wages and benefits, and are subjected to conditions of modern slavery. They work under high-pressure for low wages, and live in hostels with poor living conditions while their freedom of movement is severely restricted. This company was identified in the 2018 report "Labour Without Liberty" as sourcing garments from these factories.
Source: Clean Clothes Campaign (2018)
The Chinese government has facilitated the mass transfer of Uyghur and other ethnic minority citizens from the far west region of Xinjiang to factories across the country. Under conditions that strongly suggest forced labour, Uyghurs are working in factories that are in the supply chains of at least 83 well-known global brands in the technology, clothing and automotive sectors, including brands owned by this company. The Australian Strategic Policy Institute's 2020 report estimates (somewhat conservatively) that more than 80,000 Uyghurs were transferred out of Xinjiang to work in factories across China between 2017 and 2019, and some of them were sent directly from detention camps.
Source: ASPI (2020)
In 2022 the median pay for a worker at this company was US$3,383. The CEO was paid 3,262 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 (2023)
This company received an S&P Global ESG Score of 18/100 in the Retailing category of the S&P Global Corporate Sustainability Assessment, an annual evaluation of companies' sustainability practices (last updated 7 Feb 2021). The rankings are based on an analysis of corporate economic, environmental and social performance, assessing issues such as corporate governance, risk management, environmental reporting, climate strategy, human rights and labour practices.
Source: S&P Global (2021)
The Green Supply Chain Corporate Information Transparency Index (CITI) evaluates consumer-facing companies that have a sizeable supply chain in China. The evaluation uses government supervision data and public information to assess the environmental management of their supply chains in China. This company received a score of 18.6/100 (retrieved 24 Nov 2023).
Source: IPE (2023)
Baptist World Aid Australia's '2022 Ethical Fashion Report' assessed 120 companies on their efforts to mitigate against the risks of forced labour, child labour and worker exploitation in their supply chains, as well as protect the environment from the harmful impacts of the fashion industry. Assessment criteria fall into five main categories: policy & governance, tracing & risk, auditing and supplier relationships, worker empowerment and environmental sustainability. This company received a score of 23/100.
Source: Baptist World Aid Australia (2022)
The 2022 Nature Benchmark ranks 400 companies across eight industries on their efforts to protect our environment and its biodiversity. The companies were assessed using three measurement areas: governance and strategy; social inclusion and community impact; and ecosystems and biodiversity. This company ranked #259/400, with a total score of 11/100.
Source: World Benchmarking Alliance (2022)
In 2015 the Rainforest Action Network (RAN) released a report documenting the results of decades of irresponsible fabric sourcing including land grabbing, forest destruction and human rights abuse to forest-dependent communities caused by deforestation from tree-based fabric production companies. This company was one of the "Fashion Fifteen" implicated in the report for irresponsibly sourcing tree-based fabrics such as rayon and viscose.
Source: RAN (2015)
Named in the International Labor Rights Forum's "Sweatshop Hall of Shame 2010", which highlights apparel and textile companies that use sweatshops in their global production. [Listed under Information due to age or report]
Source: International Labor Rights Forum (2010)
This 2011 report by the International Textile Garment and Leather Workers' Federation (ITGLWF) examined working conditions in 83 factories in Indonesia, Sri Lanka and the Philippines. Investigations found that widespread violations and abuses of workers' rights continue to be the norm, such as underpaying workers, long hours, forced overtime, and repression of the freedom of association. This company's brands were found to be made in one or more of the 83 factories covered in the research. [Listed under Information due to age of report]
Source: ITGLWF (2011)
Maid in India', a 2012 report by two Dutch NGOs (SOMO and ICN) revealed how workers in the South Indian garment and textile industry continue to suffer exploitative working conditions while making garments for Western brands. While some recent improvements have been made, thousands of girls work under recruitment and employment schemes that amount to bonded labour. This company was shown to be sourcing from one or more of the four garment manufacturers investigated. While they did respond to a review request, it is unclear whether they are taking sufficient actions to address the problems. [Listed under Information due to age of report]
Source: SOMO (2012)
According to a 2015 investigation from Al Jazeera, Chinese garment factories are continuing to use the potentially harmful sandblasting method for 'ageing' denim jeans, including jeans made for this company. Sandblasting is a dangerous and deadly process which involves workers firing sand at jeans under high pressure. It has been known to kill workers within months as the inhalation of large amounts of silica dust generated during sandblasting causes silicosis, a potentially lethal pulmonary disease. [Listed under Information due to age of report]
Source: Clean Clothes Campaign (2015)
This company has been called out by the Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) for not signing the International Accord for Health and Safety in the Textile & Garment Industry. All of the brands that have not yet signed the Accord continue to put workers' lives at risk and CCC urge them to sign on as soon as possible.
Source: Clean Clothes Campaign (2023)
This company has announced that they don't sell animal fur or are phasing in a fur-free policy.
Source: Humane Society (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 partner of Better Work, an initiative of the UN's International Labour Organization and the International Finance Corporation which brings diverse groups together - governments, global brands, factory owners, and unions and workers - to improve working conditions in the garment industry and make the sector more competitive.
Source: Better Work (2020)
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 (2023)
This company is a member of the Better Cotton Initiative, a voluntary initiative which encourages the adoption of better management practices in cotton cultivation to achieve measurable reductions in key environmental impacts, while improving social and economic benefits for cotton farmers, small and large, worldwide.
Source: Better Cotton Initiative (2022)
California, the UK and Australia have all enacted legislation requiring companies operating within their borders to disclose their efforts to eradicate modern slavery from their operations and supply chains. Follow the link to see this company's disclosure statement.
Source: company website (2016)
In 2020 Baptist World Aid Australia released The COVID Fashion Report, a special edition of their Ethical Fashion Report. The report is framed around six COVID Fashion Commitments that ask companies to demonstrate the steps and measures they are taking to protect and support the most vulnerable workers in their supply chains. This company showed evidence of actions that cover SOME areas of the COVID Fashion Commitments.
Source: Baptist World Aid Australia (2020)
Business & Human Rights Resource Centre digital platform presents news and allegations relating to the human rights impact of over 20,000 companies. Their enhanced Company Dashboards also include financial information, key data points based on corporate policies, and scores from prominent civil society benchmarks. Follow the link and use the search function to view this company's dashboard.
Source: BHRRC (2022)
The Apparel and Footwear Supply Chain Transparency Pledge (Transparency Pledge) helps demonstrate apparel and footwear companies' commitment towards greater transparency in their manufacturing supply chain. Transparency of a company's manufacturing supply chain better enables a company to collaborate with civil society in identifying, assessing, and avoiding actual or potential adverse human rights impacts. This is a critical step that strengthens a company's human rights due diligence. This company has published limited supplier factory information, and falls well short of the Pledge standard.
Source: Transparency Pledge (2019)
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 (2020)
The 2023 Fashion Transparency Index reviewed 250 of the world's largest fashion brands and retailers and ranked them according to how much they disclose about their human rights and environmental policies, practices and impacts. Brands owned by this company scored 33%, signifying it is publishing suppliers lists as well as detailed information about their policies, procedures, social and environmental goals, supplier assessment and remediation processes, and is more likely to be addressing issues such as living wages and collective bargaining. The average score was 26% and the highest score was 83%.
Source: Fashion Revolution (2023)
|3.6 billion USD (2020)
|New Albany, Ohio, USA
Products / BrandsAbercrombie & Fitch
Abercrombie & Fitch Youth Fashion
Abercrombie Kids Childrenswear
Gilly Hicks Intimate Apparel
Hollister Youth Fashion