Shiseido Australia

Shiseido Australia

Company Ownership

Company Assessment

Company Details

Contact Details

Company Ownership

Company Assessment

Company Details

Contact Details

Products / Brands

About Us

Get Informed

Get Involved

Connect

OVERALL

OVERALL
Owned	JPN
Rating

Cosmetics wholesaler

Established in 1979 as a subsidiary of Shiseido of Japan.

> About the Ratings

PRAISE

CRITICISM

INFORMATION

Shiseido (Australia) Pty Ltd

No assessment data currently available for Shiseido (Australia) Pty Ltd

Shiseido Company Ltd

CDP Climate Change Score of A-

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)

CDP Forests Score of B-

In 2020, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts towards removing commodity-driven deforestation and forest degradation from its direct operations and supply chains. Responding companies are scored across four key areas: disclosure; awareness; management; and leadership. This company received a CDP Forests Score of B-.
Source: CDP (2020)

Microbeads scorecard

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 ranked joint second. Microbeads are not retained by wastewater treatment and end up in the ocean where they are a threat to the marine environment.
Source: Greenpeace (2016)

CDP Water Security Score of B

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)

76/100 S&P Global ESG Score

This company received an S&P Global ESG Score of 76/100 in the Personal Products 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)

Supply chain practices in China

This company received a score of 8.4/100 (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)

Animal Testing

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: PETA (2020)

27% in Forest 500 Rankings

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 27%.
Source: Forest 500 (2020)

Unsustainable palm oil use

This company scores Ethical Consumer's worst rating for their use of palm oil, signifying they are using no or minimal certified palm products, and with no or minimal positive commitments.
Source: Ethical Consumer (2020)

Workers rights in China

A 2014 report by China Labour Watch found poor working conditions in a Chinese factory that mainly manufactures cosmetic brushes for multinational beauty companies, including this one. Labor abuses include excessive overtime and poor worker safety measures. Also, the factory has not purchased social insurance for workers as required by law. Hundreds of workers went on strike in Jan 2014 after a female team leader was slapped by a male manager.
Source: China Labor Watch (2015)

Palm oil supply chain

This 2010 Greenpeace report documents Sinar Mas repeatedly breaking industry guidelines, Indonesian law and its own public statements, and razing rainforests to the ground in its race to produce palm oil. Some international companies, including Kraft, Nestle and Unilever, have stopped buying palm oil from Sinar Mas following these revelations. However Shiseido, listed as customers of Sinar Mas' palm oil division in June 2009, have not yet made a similar commitment. [Listed under Information due to age of report]
Source: Greenpeace (2010)

Use of plastic microbeads

This company uses microplastics (polyethylene microbeads) in some of its personal care products. These particles are not retained by wastewater treatment so end up in the ocean. While microplastics aren't thought to be a health hazard to consumers, they are a threat to the marine environment.
Source: Beat the Microbead (2014)

Secret ingredients

This company has reported to the state of California that some of their products contain a known carcinogen or reproductive toxin, but they have requested trade secret status for these ingredients so that they are not publicly revealed.
Source: Women's Voices for the Earth (2014)

Price fixing in France

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: news article (2012)

Responsible Mica Initiative member

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: Responsible Mica Initiative (2020)

Modern Slavery statement

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: Modern Slavery Registry (2017)

Skin Deep hazard scores

Skin Deep is an online safety guide to cosmetics and personal care products and their potential hazards and health concerns, with over 75,000 products rated from 1 (low hazard) to 10 (high hazard).
Source: Environmental Working Group (2019)

Skin Deep product scores

> About the Icons

Type	Wholly-owned subsidiary
Revenue	42 million AUD (2008)
Employees	257 (2008)

Address	Locked Bag 3277, Rhodes, NSW, 2138, Australia
Phone	02 8762 8888
Website	www.shiseido.com.au

Shiseido (Australia) Pty Ltd

Shiseido Company Ltd
owns 100% of Shiseido (Australia) Pty Ltd

Cosmetics manufacturer

The world's fourth largest, and Japan's largest, cosmetics manufacturer. Founded in 1872. Shiseido operate factories in Japan, France and United States. Acquired Bare Escentuals for about US$1.8 billion in 2010. Sold its shampoo and affordable skin-care business to CVC Capital Partners in 2021 for US$1.5 billion.