Formed when German brothers Rudi and Adi Dassler feuded and split their family firm into adidas and PUMA. Today it is the third largest sportswear manufacturer in the world. Majority owned by luxury goods giant Kering from 2007 until 2018, when Kering spun off Puma to its own shareholders to focus on its luxury business.
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 77.76/100 (retrieved 24 Nov 2023).
Source: IPE (2023)
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 A.
Source: CDP (2022)
In 2023 KnowTheChain benchmarked 65 apparel and footwear companies on their efforts to identify and tackle forced labour risks in their supply chains. This company received a score of 58/100. The average score was 21/100 and the highest score was 63/100.
Source: KnowTheChain (2023)
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 66%, signifying that it is publishing detailed supplier lists and the vast majority of policies, procedures and future goals. The average score was 26% and the highest score was 83%.
Source: Fashion Revolution (2023)
This company received an S&P Global ESG Score of 81/100 in the Textiles, Apparel & Luxury Goods category of the S&P Global Corporate Sustainability Assessment, an annual evaluation of companies' sustainability practices (last updated 18 Nov 2022). 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 (2022)
In 2022, 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 (2022)
The 2019 Corporate Human Rights Benchmark assessed 200 of the largest publicly traded companies in the world from the Agricultural Products, Apparel, Extractives and ICT Manufacturing sectors on 100 human rights indicators. This company's score was in the 40-50 band range. The overall average score was a disappointing 24%.
Source: World Benchmarking Alliance (2019)
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 ALL areas of the COVID Fashion Commitments.
Source: Baptist World Aid Australia (2020)
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 58/100.
Source: Baptist World Aid Australia (2022)
In 2022, 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 (2022)
This company is a signatory to the International Accord for Health and Safety in the Textile & Garment Industry. The International Accord was established in 2021 as the successor to the Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh, which was established in 2013 in the wake of the Rana Plaza building collapse that killed more than 1,000 workers and seriously injured thousands more. Company signatories to the International Accord commit to: Disclosing all factories producing for them in countries with International Accord programs; Ensuring all listed factories participate in the inspection, remediation, and safety training programs; Supporting factories to ensure remediation is financially feasible; Contributing to the operational costs of International Accord programs. This company has also signed the Pakistan Accord.
Source: International Accord (2023)
The Material Change Index (MCI) is a voluntary benchmark that tracks the apparel and textiles sector's progress toward more sustainable materials sourcing (cotton, polyester, nylon, manmade cellulosics, wool, down and leather), as well as alignment with global efforts like the Sustainable Development Goals and the transition to a circular economy. This company is identified as one of 36 "Leading" companies.
Source: Textile Exchange (2020)
The 2022 Global 100 Most Sustainable Corporations in the World list is based on a rigorous assessment of nearly 7,000 public companies with revenue over US$1 billion. All companies are scored on environmental, social, governance and economic metrics relative to their peers, with 50% of the weight assigned to Clean Revenue and Clean Investment. This company ranked #77 in the Global 100.
Source: Corporate Knights (2022)
While conditions for garment workers in Cambodia have improved since 2014, rights violations are still rampant in the garment industry and the country as a whole. Despite this Nike, Puma, Adidas, H&M, Gap, and other international brands continue to rely on Cambodia for the manufacture of a significant portion of their products.
Source: news article (2018)
The Clean Clothes Campaign report, Tailored Wages 2019 analyses responses from 32 top clothing brands about their progress in implementing a living wage for the workers who produce their clothes. This company received the lowest possible grade in the report, meaning they produced no evidence that any worker making their clothes was paid a living wage anywhere in the world.
Source: Clean Clothes Campaign (2019)
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 2008 a follow up investigation on Taiway Sports Inc. (a PUMA supplier in China) was performed and discovered much of the poor conditions that were identified three years ago still exist at Taiway. (Listed under information due to age of report)
Source: China Labor Watch (2008)
This 2011 investigative report into the Ocean Sky Apparel Factory in El Salvador reveals how workers are: paid well below living wage, illegally forced to work overtime, given unsafe drinking water, fired for attempting to unionise, and cursed at and humiliated. Their customers include Reebok, Puma, Columbia and GAP. (Listed under information due to age of report)
Source: Institute for Global Labour & Human Rights (2011)
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)
This 2012 report by War on Want presents a detailed picture of the conditions faced by workers in Bangladesh, mostly women, who produce the sportswear sold by leading brands Adidas, Nike and Puma. Abuses include paying workers below the legal minimum wage in Bangladesh, excessive hours, sexual harassment and beatings. On average workers were paid just 16p an hour, with two thirds of the workers working over 60 hours a week, in clear breach of Bangladeshi law. [Listed under Information due to age of report]
Source: War on Want (2012)
This 2014 report by the Workers Rights Consortium investigates workers' rights violations at Yue Yuen, the manufacturing arm of the largest producer of branded athletic shoes in the world, and supplier to many major footwear brands, including brands owned by this company. Violations include illegal underpayment, unpaid overtime, restricting freedom to organise, and failure to provide valid employment contracts. [Listed under Information due to age of report]
Source: Workers Rights Consortium (2014)
Puma was the overall winner of the 2012 Guardian Sustainable Business Awards for its pioneering Environmental Profit & Loss Account, which attempts to put a cost on the impact a business has on the environment, across its entire supply chain.
Source: Guardian (2012)
Greenpeace launched its "Detox My Fashion" campaign in 2011 to expose the direct links between global clothing brands, their suppliers and toxic water pollution around the world. As a result, many companies, including this one, committed to Greenpeace's Detox Program. The 2016 Detox Catwalk report focused on implementation, assessing the steps taken by fashion brands to fulfil their commitments using three criteria: Detox 2020 plan, PFC elimination and Transparency. This company is "committed to Detox and has made progress implementing its plans, but its actions need to evolve faster to achieve the 2020 Detox goal".
Source: Greenpeace (2016)
In 2011, a group of major apparel and footwear brands and retailers, including this company, made a shared commitment to help lead the industry towards zero discharge of hazardous chemicals by 2020. It includes specific commitments and timelines to realize this shared goal.
Source: ZDHC (2023)
As listed on the We Mean Business website, this company has committed to the following climate action initiatives: climate smart agriculture.
Source: We Mean Business (2021)
When joining the Fair Labor Association (FLA) this company committed to promoting and complying with international labor standards throughout their supply chain. The FLA does not accredit the company itself; rather, they accredit the company's labor compliance program. Being granted accreditation implies that their workplace standards program is substantially in compliance with the FLA Code.
Source: Fair Labor Association (2016)
This company has taken angora items off the shelves and promised not to use angora again, following a PETA campaign launched in Dec 2013 which revealed the cruelty inflicted on angora rabbits in Chinese factory farms, where 90% of the world's angora is produced.
Source: PETA (2018)
Brands owned by this company are listed in Human Society International Australia's Better Wool Guide as using 100% non-mulesed wool from a robust certification scheme, or has a time-bound commitment to do so. Mulesing is the controversial practice of removing strips of the skin of a lamb's rear and is often done without pain relief. In Australia, the only country where mulesing still occurs, an estimated 10 million merino lambs are subjected to mulesing each year - equivalent to 19 lambs per minute.
Source: HSI Australia (2023)
Deloitte developed a Zero Impact Growth Monitor that was used in 2012 to assess and rank 65 different companies' attempts to become more sustainable. Six companies reached the "Ecosystem" level: Puma, Nike, Nestle, Natura, Unilever and Ricoh. These pioneering companies have not only set measurable and ambitious mid- to long-term targets (beyond 2020), but have also embedded their sub-policies in a holistic strategic vision of their attempt to minimize their negative environmental and societal impacts.
Source: Deloitte (2012)
This company is a partner of I:Collect (aka I:CO), a global collection network to keep discarded clothing and shoes out of landfills. Customers deposit used textiles into recycling dropoff boxes at this company's stores, and I:CO arranges their environmentally-friendly removal, sorting and reuse.
Source: I:Collect (2014)
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 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 some supplier factory information, but falls short of the Pledge standard.
Source: Transparency Pledge (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 signatory to the Fashion Industry Charter for Climate Action, a United Nations initiative which contains the vision to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.
Source: UNFCCC (2023)
This company is a founding 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)
The bluesign Standard sets "best practices" for the use of chemicals and resources - including water and energy - in the textile industry. Textile manufacturers who are bluesign system partners agree to establish management systems to improve environmental performance in five key areas of the production process: resource productivity, consumer safety, water emissions, air emissions, and occupational health and safety. They regularly report their progress, are subject to on-site audits, and must meet improvement goals to maintain their status.
Source: bluesign (2021)
This company is a member of the Leather Working Group, a multi-stakeholder group who's objective is to develop and maintain a protocol that assesses the compliance and environmental performance of tanners and promotes sustainable and appropriate environmental business practices within the leather industry.
Source: Leather Working Group (2022)
This company is a member of The Fashion Pact, a global initiative of companies in the fashion and textile industry (ready-to-wear, sport, lifestyle and luxury) including their suppliers and distributors, all committed to a common core of key environmental goals in three areas: stopping global warming, restoring biodiversity and protecting the oceans.
Source: The Fashion Pact (2022)
This company is a member of the Better Cotton Initiative, a voluntary program 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)
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 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 #49/400, with a total score of 28.1/100.
Source: World Benchmarking Alliance (2022)
|4.1 billion EUR (2017)
|Puma Australia Pty Ltd